In the past decades, globalization has accelerated, and the European Union has opened its internal borders. This has led to a significant rise in migration. In Europe, there is a pattern of East–West migration, with individuals from Central-Eastern post-communist countries (such as Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, and Romania) moving to the more developed Western European countries (Cekalova, 2008; European Commission, 2018; Martin & Radu, 2012). While economic reasons are the primary motivation for migration (Borjas, 1990; Massey et al., 1993), there is also the hope for a better quality and happier life (Balaz & Moravčíková, 2017; Bartram, 2013). The improvement of the financial situation can contribute to a higher sense of autonomy (Srivastava et al., 2001). Another important reason to leave could be political such as corruption, bad governance (Bygnes & Flipo, 2017; Lapshyna, 2014). The motivations for migration include family reasons like reunification of the family, or moving for love (Main, 2016), educational opportunities and professional careers (Cooke et al., 2013; Winchie & Carment, 1989), and exploring other cultures (Inkson & Myers, 2003). The final decision for migration is influenced by one’s memories of the past, present living conditions, and subjective views of the future (Carling & Collins, 2018).

Bartram (2013) found that individuals who are motivated to move from Eastern European countries are happier than those who choose to stay, indicating a positive selection of happier individuals for migration. This finding runs counter to intuition but suggests that those who are motivated and able to move to more developed countries may have a greater sense of control over their lives and a more optimistic outlook, leading to higher levels of happiness.

According to Boneva and Frieze (1998, 2001) individuals who desire to relocate to another country exhibit a greater emphasis on work, higher levels of achievement and power motivation, but lower levels of affiliation motivation and family centrality compared to those who prefer to remain in their country of origin. The theory was tested in post-communist countries (Albania, Czech Republic, Slovenia) but also in the US with college students. In the two US studies, one in 1994 and one in 1996 (Boneva et al., 1998) only the 1994 study found significant difference in the affiliation motivation of those who wanted to stay and those who wanted to leave. In the study with Albanian participants (Boneva et al., 1998) gender differences were found as men who wanted to stay in their country had significantly higher affiliation motivation than those who wanted to leave.

According to Schewel’s (2020) classification, the reasons for staying in one place can be grouped into three main categories: retaining factors that make staying desirable, repelling factors of migration heard from others, and finally internal constraints such as risk aversion.

A major retaining factor is embeddedness, which is a kind of place attachment that deepens over the lifespan (as older people are less likely to migrate), and bonds toward people and the environment become stronger (Fischer & Malmberg, 2001; Lewicka, 2011). It is associated with strong social connections, such as family and friends (De Jong & Fawcett, 1981; Ritchey, 1976), and greater community involvement also reinforces staying, such as membership in religious communities (Myers, 2000), and local business opportunities (Irwin et al., 2004). Repelling forces may arise from what stayers hear about the challenges associated with foreign life. This is especially true when coupled with risk-averse behavior (Jaeger et al., 2010), which Schewel (2020) categorizes as an internal constraint. Such internal constraint that may also explain the high level of immobility within the European Union is what Van Houtum and Van Der Velde (2004) called the “attitude of nationally habituated indifference” meaning that many simply do not see the possibility of living outside of their country to explain the high level of immobility within the European Union.

Before the political regime change in Hungary, emigration opportunities for citizens were restricted, but after 1989 freedom of emigration was guaranteed by the 1989/XXIX law (Zán, 2013). Unlike other post-socialist countries that saw a surge in emigration following their 2004 EU accession, Hungary exhibited a delay in this trend for several years. Emigration intensified after the economic crisis of 2008 when many people left the country due to financial difficulties and rising unemployment. This number increased when Germany and Austria lifted their restrictions on their labor market (Földházi, 2011). The Brexit vote (2016) and the COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2021) slowed down emigration. The number of emigrants decreased from 23,172 in 2019 to 22,583 in 2021. However, by 2022 the number started to increase again with 24,147 people leaving the country. In 2023, a total of 33,700 Hungarian citizens officially emigrated, marking the highest number since 2010 based on the Central Statistical Agency, Hungary (KSH) dataset. Given Hungary’s total population of 9,709,786 (Macrotrends, 2024) in 2023, the 324,179 emigrants in the last 14 years (KSH, 2023) represent a significant loss. It is also possible that the official statistics underestimate the true number of emigrants.

Germany, Austria, and the UK have been the top three destinations for emigrants leaving Hungary (2016b; Gödri & Feleky, 2013; KSH, 2023; KSH Microcensus, 2016a). In terms of their demographic characteristics, while the vast majority of those who migrate have a secondary education, Hungary is the only country in the Central-East-European region where the largest proportion of graduates migrate (Hárs, 2018) indicating a significant brain drain and “brain loss”. At the same time, the phenomenon of brain waste also exists when migrants accept jobs that are below their education level to acquire better financial resources. Up to 40% of Hungarian emigrants are in such positions (Hegedűs & Lados, 2017; Személyi & Csanádi, 2011). Migration affects three principal areas of work: trade services, construction, and unskilled occupations (Horváth, 2015). The majority of emigrants originate from Budapest, which is the capital of Hungary, as well as some other major cities (Hegedűs & Lados, 2017).

Post-communist countries, after the 1989 change of political regime, experienced increasing social inequality, unemployment, and losses due to the economic transformation, that also resulted in a decline in overall life satisfaction. Despite the subsequent increase in GDP and incomes during the 1990s, satisfaction with life did not correspondingly improve. It failed to keep pace with the positive shifts in economic conditions (Easterlin, 2009; Guriev & Zhuravskaya, 2009). The divergence between economic conditions and life satisfaction in post-socialist countries is evident when considering that, in comparison to this region, countries with comparable GDP but without a political regime change tend to exhibit higher levels of life satisfaction. The term “happiness gap” (Djankov et al., 2016; Guriev & Melnikov, 2018) refers to the difference in average happiness levels between populations of transition economies and non-transition economies with similar GPD. Post-socialist countries consistently exhibit lower levels of life satisfaction. Factors such as macroeconomic instability, decreased access to public goods, and increased inequality have been identified as potential explanations for this gap. The research of Guriev and Melnikov (2018) found that by 2016 the happiness gap closed at least among those younger than 45 years, but it persists among older generations. Additionally, the issue of social inequality, which was exacerbated by the economic transformation in the post-socialist countries, continues to affect life satisfaction and happiness.

Dissatisfaction with the country’s situation and an uncertain vision of the future strongly influence the willingness to migrate. In her research conducted in 2016, Gödri asked respondents how satisfied they were with the situation in the country in the last three years and what they thought of the next three years. Among those who were very dissatisfied with the state of the country, 41% had the raw potential to migrate, while among those who believed that the situation would worsen, 38% were willing to move out of the country (Gödri, 2016). Migration potential studies measure the willingness to migrate among a country’s residents (Golovics, 2019). These studies indicate a weak relationship in Hungary between actual migration and migration ideas, i.e., far more people can imagine going abroad to live or work than those who actually do (Gödri & Feleky, 2013). Research has shown that young people under the age of 40 are particularly likely to emigrate from Hungary, with economic prospects and the desire for a better life being the primary motivations. However, their critical attitude toward the country and its current political situation also plays a significant role in their decision to leave (Siskáné et al., 2017).

Hungary was the only country, besides Russia (former Soviet Union) where the World Value Survey (WVS) was administered during the communist era (Inglehart et al., 2013). The first Hungarian study in 1982 showed that the average life satisfaction score in Hungary, on a 10-point scale, was 6.93. It decreased to 6.03 in 1991 after the collapse of socialism, and further to 5.69 in 1999 (Inglehart et al., 2013). This suggests that the political system change did not bring the expected increase in life satisfaction; in fact, just the opposite took place. Similar to other post-communist countries Hungarians are also characterized by low levels of trust in the legal system and politics (4.33 and 3.75 respectively) on an 11-point scale, KSH, Central Statistical Agency, 2016a, 2016b).

According to the latest measurement by Eurostat (2017), overall life satisfaction in Hungary in 2022 was 6.9 on a scale of 0–10, which is lower than the 1982 score in the WVS. The averages were higher in neighboring countries in 2022: 7.9 points in Austria, 7.4 in post-communist Czech Republic, 7.7 in Romania, and 7.0 points in Slovakia.

Hunyady (2016) used free associations task in a 1000-participant representative sample to reveal spontaneous attitudes toward Hungary and being Hungarian. There were two stimulus words: “Hungary.” and “Hungarian people’s feelings.” For the stimulus word “Hungary” more than half of the associations were related to, “homeland,” “home,” and “place of residence” reflecting belongingness. However, 44% of the associations were related to insecurity, 23% to poverty and deprivation, and 20% to fear and sadness. For the stimulus word “people’s feelings” 47% associated words related to pessimism, 20% to fear of the future, and 16% of the associations referred to financial insecurity.

Tóth and Kovács, (2011) investigated the optimism and pessimism of Hungarian and foreign students studying in Hungary, as well as Hungarian students studying abroad. They found that Hungarian students studying abroad were more optimistic than those studying in Hungary, at the same time, both Hungarian groups were more pessimistic than the foreign students. They concluded that the pessimism of Hungarians (Hunyady, 2018) doesn’t disappear by temporarily moving abroad.

A low level of social well-being is associated with several negative mental health indicators. According to the World Population Review (2024), Hungary has the highest alcohol consumption rate in the world. Based on WHO data from 2016, the number of people with alcohol use disorders is over 20% for the entire population, with a rate of 36.9% for men and 7.2% for women (Balázs, 2023). According to a 2017 survey, the proportion of people treated for depression (10.5%) is the highest in Hungary compared to EU data (Eurostat, 2017).

The Purpose of this Research

The aim of this research is to explore, what subjective meaning Hungarians living in Hungary and Hungarians who have emigrated abroad attribute to the concepts of “Living in Hungary” and “Living abroad”. Previous studies that aimed to understand the motivation behind emigration have been conducted through surveys or semi-structured interviews (e.g., Gödri, 2016; Gödri & Feleki, 2013; Hegedűs & Lados, 2017; Siskáné et al., 2017), which required participants to explain their reasons for leaving in a logical and explicit manner.

Our goal is to uncover a subjective layer of attitudes and personal experiences of Hungarians living in Hungary and living abroad toward the life within and outside Hungary in order to gain a more complex psychological understanding of the motivational system of Hungarian emigration decisions.

By exploring two groups of Hungarians, those who left the country and those who stayed, revealing the similarities and differences in their meaning-making, the study contributes to the understanding of the perspectives of those being in the country and those being outside the country on their own and the other group’s life.

The novelty of this research design is that it applies a double perspective, i.e., investigates the same phenomenon from the perspective of groups of the same nationality at birth that made different decisions about their place of living as adults. Applying the Associative Group Analytic technique (Szalay & Brent, 1967) the goal was to provide a wider explanatory framework than traditional surveys or semi-structured interviews.

In addition, previous research concentrated mainly on the differences in perspectives and subjective experiences between those who decide to emigrate and those who live their life in their country of birth without embedding this different life-decision into a shared societal and cultural context. In a recent study (Szilasi et al., 2024) applying the AGA method and a similar double perspective design the goal was to reveal how Hungarians living in Hungary and Hungarians living abroad perceive each other. The study found a robust “national culture effect” (Straus, 2009) namely the subjective meaning attributed to the own group and the other group had substantial similarities, Hungarians living in Hungary were perceived in a very negative way while Hungarians living abroad had more positive evaluations in both groups. However, those who stay in Hungary perceived those who live abroad as “unpatriotic citizens” who “escaped” the difficulties in Hungary for an easier life suggesting that the main dividing line between those Hungarians who emigrate and those who do not is their level of national identity and attachment to their home and homeland.

In the present study, the goal was to investigate the meaning attributed to living in Hungary and abroad by both groups of Hungarians, those who emigrated to a new society and those who have been living in the same.

Sample

Our study involved a total of 204 participants, 148 women and 56 men. Half of the sample, 102 people (78 women and 28 men), were Hungarian respondents living in Hungary, and the other half, also 102 people (78 women and 28 men), were Hungarian respondents living abroad.

Data collection was carried out as follows. Foreign Hungarian respondents were recruited through social media in foreign Hungarian Facebook groups (Foreign Hungarians 20,000 members, English Hungarians 15,000 members). The Hungarian sample was assembled using the snowball method from a larger group of respondents collected in a way that matched the demographic indicators of Hungarian respondents living abroad, in order to create a matched sample. The matched sample considered the following demographic indicators: gender, age, education level, and town size (for Hungarian respondents living abroad, the former place of residence in Hungary).

When providing demographic data, four age groups were distinguished: 18–25, 26–39, 40–60, and 60 + years old. The age distribution of the respondents is as follows: 18–25 years old: 18 people, 26–39 years old: 122 people, 40–60 years old: 58 people, 60 + years old: 6 people, total: 204 people.

Among Hungarian respondents living abroad, the largest number live in England (49), followed by the USA (27), Germany (14), the Czech Republic (11), Austria (8). The other respondents live in various European countries (Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, France, etc.) and Canada (3), and Australia (1).

The average length of time foreign respondents had lived abroad was 6.4 years (longest 25 years, shortest 2 years).

According to the 2016 micro census data, only 18% of the Hungarian population has a university degree and only 28% has a secondary school degree, the rest of the population has a lower level of education. Of the respondents in the sample, 29% had a secondary school while 67% had a higher education degree and a further 4% obtained a PhD. This is in line with previous data showing that a higher proportion of people with higher education levels leave Hungary than from other countries (Hárs, 2018). In terms of place of residence, 18% of the respondents come from small towns and 82% from large cities.

Method

In this study, the Associative Group Analysis Technique (AGA) was applied (Szalay & Brent, 1967; Szalay & Deese, 1978). There have been two main traditions in social and cultural psychology using associations. In France Abric (1994) and Verges (1994) composed a method based on the Social Representation Theory (Moscovici, 1981). They used the association method to reveal the collective understanding of different social phenomena. The other is the Associative Group Analysis Method (AGA) designed and first applied by Szalay and Brent (1967) in the USA which focuses on the subjective meaning attributed to certain social phenomena or psychological constructs or social experiences by a certain group of people. The two methods developed independent from each other (Fülöp, 2014) and they apply different procedures to analyze the associations. In this study the AGA method was chosen, because it corresponds to the aim to reveal implicit subjective meanings and not social representations.

Studying associations with the AGA method is considered to be non-intrusive and indirect, that can capture less conscious, more implicit layers of thoughts and emotions, the so-called subjective meaning of a concept or phenomenon shared by a group that may not be accessible through semi-structured interviews or questionnaires that rely on direct and conscious reflection.

Procedure

During the AGA process, respondents are asked to write down what comes to their mind about a stimulus word. They are given one minute to write as many associations as they can. Associations are relatively stable for a given concept or phenomenon, and their psychological importance depends on their order (Szalay & Deese, 1978). Therefore, the method suggests that not all parts are of equal importance in meaning and do not carry equal weight. Accordingly, the AGA evaluates each response with a given score based on the order of the associations. In the case of the first 10 responses, the scores are as follows: 6, 5, 4, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 1. All further associations receive a score of 1. The same associations are grouped with their scores, and a rank order of associations is generated based on the cumulated weighted scores. For example, if there are four associations of “happy” with scores of 6, 5, 2, and 1, then the weighted score is the sum of all scores and will be 14 for the association “happy,” and the frequency of occurrence will be 4. With this procedure, it is possible to rank the associations based on their weighted scores and learn about the most prominent contents associated with the stimulus concept.

Associations with similar meanings are not only ranked based on their weighted scores but also categorized into main and subcategories based on their content. Two independent researchers performed the categorization, with one researcher developing a category system and the other assigning associations to the existing categories or proposing new ones. Their analyses were compared, and any differences were discussed until a consensus was reached. The weighted scores of each category were calculated, and then taking the sum of all weighted scores as one hundred percent, the percentage distribution shows the most significant and least significant categories. The affective content of each association was also categorized as positive, negative, or neutral by two independent researchers, with a consensus process used to resolve any discrepancies.

This research was conducted online, so the original one-minute time limit was increased to two minutes based on feedback from a preliminary pilot study. From a wider pool of respondents, those who did not have a match were dropped to create a matched sample based on age, gender, educational level, and place of residence. Participation was voluntary and anonymous in all cases. Data was collected between October 2017 and December 2018. We asked respondents to associate to the stimulus words: “Living in Hungary”, “Living abroad”.

Total Weighted Scores, Number of Associations, the Average Number of Associations

For the sake of simplicity, the two groups will hereinafter be referred to as HH (Hungarians living in Hungary) and HA (Hungarians living abroad). Table 1 presents the total weighted scores, the total number of associations, and the average number of associations per individual.

The number of associations and weighted scores were compared using the Mann–Whitney test. The conditions for the Mann–Whitney test were met, so the obtained results can be well interpreted. Based on the results, there was no significant difference in either the number of associations or the weighted scores between the two groups.

Subjective Meaning: Affective Connotation of the Associations

The affective categories used in the study were: positive (e.g., happy, calm, beautiful, development), negative (e.g., horrible, frustration, depression, anxious), and neutral (e.g., place, road, passport, communication). The weighted scores of the words falling into each evaluative category were added.

Both groups provided more negative associations for Living in Hungary than for Living abroad (HH:52.4%/30.4%; HA:56.6%/20.4%) and just the reverse they provided more positive associations for Living abroad than for Living in Hungary (HH: 47.6%/69.5; HA:43.3%/79.6%). A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the relationship between place of residence and the affective content of the associations. In the case of the stimulus word “Living in Hungary,” in spite of the general negative view the associations of the HH group were significantly less negative than the associations of the HA group (X² (1, N = 4660) = 8.9, p = 0.003). Both groups attributed predominantly positive subjective meaning to “Living abroad,”, but the HA group had significantly more positive associations (X² (1, N = 4578) = 60.7, p = 0.00).

Subjective Meaning: Associations with the Highest Weighted Scores and Frequency

The associations were ranked by their combined weight score and frequency. Tables 2 and 3 present the top 10 most frequently occurring and highest weighted associations.

Both stimulus words elicited similar associations in the two Hungarian groups.

Six out of the ten highest weighted associations for “Living in Hungary” were the same in both groups: family, home, homeland, poverty, difficult, and corruption. However, the place of these associations in the rank order of the words was not the same. In the HH group homeland was the 2nd highest weighted association while it was 7th in the HA group (weights 94/43 respectively). In the HH group, the four additional words were challenge, struggle, good, and Lake Balaton. In the HA group, these were friends, politics, hopelessness, and Budapest.

For the “Living abroad” stimulus word, also a high degree of overlap exists, with eight out of the ten top associations being identical for both groups: opportunity, challenge, adventure, alien, freedom, difficult, peaceful, and money. However, their rank order and weight were not the same. Challenge was 2nd in the HH group and 8th in the HA (weights 90/35) and alien 4th, in the HH group, but 10th in the HA group (weights 88/33). Additionally, the HH group associated exciting and hope with a high weighted score, while the HA group associated the words homesickness and travel.

Subjective Meaning: Categories of Meaning

Living in Hungary

Associations were grouped into 11 main and several subcategories (see Table 4).

The differences between the main categories and subcategories of the two groups were examined using the Fisher-exact test. Negative life experience was the main category with the highest percentage of the total weighted scores. There was no significant difference found between the two groups (HH: 24.66%; HA 25.99%). This main category consisted of the following subcategories: “Helplessness-Depression” (HH: 13.25%; HA: 8.36%); “Difficult” (HH: 6.25%; HA: 8.53%); “Anxiety” (HH: 2.03%; HA: 3.62%); “Boredom” (HH: 1.55%; HA: 1.55%); “Longing” (HH: 1.07%; HA: 0.82%); “Grotesque” (HH: 0.52%; HA: 0.47%). In the HA Group, a new subcategory was identified: “Frustration” (2.63%). The HH group had significantly more weighted associations in the “Helplessness-Depression” (p = 0.00), while the HA group in the “Difficult” (p = 0.00) and “Anxiety” (p = 0.00) subcategories.

There was no significant difference between the two groups in the second biggest category Family-home (HH: 20.25% HA: 21.21%), representing the social bonds of both groups related to Hungary.

In the case of Patriotism main category (HH: 12.09%; HA: 8.58%) the HH group provided significantly more weighted associations (p = 0.00). The subcategories are “National identity” (HH: 7.68%; HA: 2.84%), “Hungarian Culture” (HH: 1.75%; HA: 1.03%), “Hungarian Food” (HH:1.55%; HA: 3.15%), and “Hungarian Language” (HH: 1.11%; HA: 1.03%). Homesickness (HA: 0.52%) as a subcategory could be identified only in the HA group. The HH Group had significantly more associations related to National Identity (p = 0.00), while the HA Group had significantly more associations related to Hungarian Food (p = 0.00).

The “Negative Societal Atmosphere” main category (HH: 10.54%; HA:9.91%) contains all words that represent negative social phenomena. Subcategories were “Oppression” (HH: 6.92%; HA: 5.22%) and “Immorality” (HH: 3.62%; HA: 4.70%). The HH Group had significantly more associations related to Oppression (p = 0.01).

No significant difference was found between the groups in the case of the “Standard of Living,” “Places” and “Positive life Experience” main categories. In “Standard of Living” (HH: 7.96%; HA: 7.76%) there are two subcategories “Poverty” (HH: 7.24%; HA: 7.76%) and Wealth (HH: 0.72%), however, the latter one is only present in the HH group. The Places category contains words referring to iconic landmarks of Hungary, e.g., Lake Balaton, Budapest (HH: 7.88%; HA: 7.93%). The “Positive life experience” main category (HH: 5.89%; HA: 4.40%) contains two subcategories: “Inspirational-Motivating” only in HH group (HH: 5.89%), and “Leisure Activities” only in the HA group (HA: 4.40%).

There was a significant difference in the Politics/Policies main category (HH: 5.13%; HA: 7.8%), with the HA group providing significantly more weighted associations (p = 0.00). The three subcategories were: “Current politics” (HH: 3.78%; HA: 4.83%), Healthcare (HH: 0.91%; HA: 1.55%), and Education (HH: 0.44%; HA: 1.42%). The HA group gave significantly more associations related to healthcare (p = 0.04) and Education (p = 0.00).

Among the small categories (under 5% of the weighted scores) the HH group gave significantly more weighted associations in the Negative characteristics (HH: 4.81%; HA: 3.15%) main category (p = 0.00) referring to Hungarian citizens’ negative behaviors. The subcategories are “Stupidity” (HH: 2.31%; HA: 1.34%), “Aggression” (HH: 1.43%; HA: 0.91%), and “Prejudice” (HH: 1.07%; HA: 0.17%). In the HA Group, a fourth subcategory was added: “Negligence” (0.73%). The HH group gave significantly more associations related to Aggression (p = 0.00) and Prejudice (p = 0.00),

Climate (HA: 1.68%), and Transportation (HA: 0.78%) were only found in the HA Group. The category Other contains words that are noncategorizable or not meaningful (HH: 0.8%; HA: 0.82%).

Living Abroad

Associations were grouped into 12 main categories. The Fisher-exact test was used to examine whether there were significant differences in the proportions of categories and subcategories between the two groups. (See Table 5.)

Only two major categories were identified: Positive Life Experiences (HH: 53.96%; HA: 71.62%) and Negative Life Experiences (HH: 24.76%; HA: 16.42%). The “Positive Life Experiences” main category consists of several subcategories: “Challenging-Exciting” (HH: 17.83%; HA: 15.29%), “Wealth” (HH: 9.23%; HA: 7.24%), “Development-Motivation” (HH: 9.07%; HA: 20.00%), “Security-Order” (HH: 7.17%; HA: 11.79%), “Happiness” (HH: 4.75%; HA: 9.19%), and “Freedom-Democracy” (HH: 4.04%; HA: 5.89%). The HH Group has a distinct category, “Success” (1.86%), and the HA Group has “Relaxation” (2.21%). There was a significant difference found in the main category (p = 0.00), with the HA group providing more weighted associations and regarding the subcategories, the HH group providing significantly more weighted associations for Challenging-Exciting experiences (p = 0.01) and Wealth (p = 0.01), while the HA group referred significantly more to Development-Motivation (p = 0.00) Security-Order (p = 0.00), Happiness (p = 0.00), and Freedom-Democracy (p = 0.00).

The “Negative Experience” main category presents negative emotions associated with living abroad. Shared subcategories were “Alien, Loneliness” (HH: 19.49%; HA: 9.58%) and “Depression” (HH: 5.27%; HA: 4.07%), while in the HA Group “Uncertainty, struggle” (2.78%). The HH group provided significantly (p < 0.00) more weighted associations in the main category and also in the Alien/Loneliness (p < 0.00) and the Depression subcategory (p = 0.05).

Others were small categories, each of them contained less than 5% of the weighted scores.

The “Required Skills” category (HH: 4.75%; HA: 3.25%) includes associations related to knowledge, skills, and attributes required for adaptation abroad (e.g., courage, language competence, curiosity, decision-making). The HH group provided significantly more weighted associations (p < 0.00).

The HH group provided significantly more weighted associations (p = 0.00) in the main category “Emigration motivation” (HH: 3.45%; HA: 1.13%) which was divided into two subcategories “Escape” (HH: 1.66%; HA: 1.13%) and in the HH group Oppression (1.78%). The HH group recalled significantly more (p = 0.00) Escape-related associations as motivation to leave than the HA group.

Associations related to “Maintaining contact between homeland and abroad (HH: 2.85%; HA: 0.35) e.g., travel, and visiting the homeland were mentioned significantly more (p = 0.00) by the HH group.

The “Social networks” category (HH: 2.06%; HA 2.51%) includes close individuals who, from the HA perspective represent family members staying with them in the foreign country and from the HH perspective family members living abroad.

The “Climate” category (HH: 2.3%; HA: 1.91%) contains weather-related associations (e.g., cold, rain, bad weather). The “Places” category (HH: 2.22%; HA: 1.39%) includes geographical locations, and foreign places of residencies (e.g., West, England, London, Europe). Both were equally mentioned by the two groups.

Unpatriotism (1.35%) is a small main category that only appears in the HH group refers to leaving the country as being unacceptable (e.g., associations like betrayal). Attachment to Homeland (1.23%) includes words representing the HH Group’s decision to stay in the motherland e.g. tradition or inability to leave.

Words that could not be categorized were placed in the other category (HH: 1.07%; HA: 1.43%).

The present research applied a new perspective on the motivation of emigration and non-emigration decisions. Traditionally, emigration motivation is studied by investigating, for example, the views (Bygnes & Flipo, 2017; Lapshyna, 2014), and explanations (Balaz & Moravčíková, 2017; Bartram, 2013), and values (Schewel, 2020) of those who consider emigration or who already emigrated. The views and explanations of those who do not move from their country of birth to another country are much less studied. No study was found in the literature that takes both groups’ perspectives parallel into consideration both on leaving/living in a new country and on life/staying in the birth country. The present study applies this dual perspective with matched samples of Hungarians who emigrated and Hungarians who did not. By comparing their perspectives this research intends to gain a more complex understanding of the dynamics of such life decisions. In addition, the chosen AGA method is also able to reveal more subtle inner dynamics by aiming to understand the subjective meaning of the investigated concepts in an indirect, non-intrusive manner.

Similarities: The National Cultural Context Effect

The first important result of the present study is that it demonstrated that the two groups, the HH and the HA have a dominantly shared subjective meaning attributed to both living in Hungary and living abroad. Both groups elicited dominantly negative associations for the stimulus word “Living in Hungary” and dominantly positive associations for the stimulus word “Living abroad.” The dominance of the negative affective content (potential push factors for emigration, Lee, 1966) in both groups in the case of Living in Hungary and the dominance of the positive content (the potential pull factors of emigration, Lee, 1966) in both groups in the case of Living abroad indicate that the perceived difference in the quality of life itself does not explain why somebody chooses to leave and somebody chooses to stay. In the case of Living in Hungary family, home, and homeland are among the highest weighted associations indicating embeddedness in close social networks and the nation in both groups. An important result is that “home” and “homeland” are also among the ten highest loading associations for those who chose to leave Hungary and on average, have lived for 6.5 years abroad. In the case of the “Living abroad” stimulus “home” and “homeland” did not emerge as associations in the HA group, indicating that although they left Hungary “home and homeland” are still in Hungary for them, that emigration to a new country has not provided a “home” but “only” a new more comfortable living space.

In the case of Living in Hungary references to negative societal phenomena like poverty, corruption, and difficult life were among the ten highest weighted associations in both groups. In line with the affective content of the associations, the biggest main category of associations was Negative life experiences with the same subcategories of Helplessness/depression, Difficulties, Anxiety, Boredom, Grotesque in both groups. Negative societal atmosphere, oppression and immorality are mentioned by both groups. As opposed to these negative phenomena Positive life experiences had a very low weighted occurrence rate. The HH and HA groups also equally mentioned associations related to Standard of living, primarily poverty. They also share in their associations the importance of some iconic places in Hungary like Lake Balaton or the capital city Budapest.

While living in Hungary is a shared experience of both groups, living abroad is only a lived experience for the HA group. The HH group only imagines what kind of life the HA group lives abroad based on probably relatives’ and friends’ accounts or on media reports. Taking this into consideration it is a meaningful result of this study that there has been an almost complete overlap among the ten highest weighted associations for Living abroad between the two groups, the affective connotation of the associations being dominantly positive. To live abroad is an opportunity, a challenge, an adventure, it provides freedom, peace, and money. However, both groups see the downside of living abroad of being an alien in an alien world and both share the notion that not only living in Hungary is difficult, but living abroad is also difficult, though the degree of difficulty and the nature of difficulty may differ. The biggest category was Positive life experiences in both groups, both considering life abroad challenging and exciting, leading to development and motivation, providing wealth, security and order, happiness and freedom, and democracy. Negative life experiences, i.e., loneliness, being alien, and depression also emerge in both groups in relation to Living abroad. However, the proportion of these associations within the subjective meaning attributed to Living abroad is much lower than the Positive life experiences in both groups. They both consider important Required skills like language knowledge and share the view that one important aspect of the Motivation to emigrate is escape.

The high degree of overlap among the dominant associations, the similarities of the affective evaluation of the two examined living environments (Hungary and abroad), and the similarities of the dominant categories all refer to a shared cultural heritage and personal experiences, to a “national cultural context” effect (Straus, 2009).

Differences as Potential Explanations for a Decision to Leave or not to Leave

If there is so much similarity in the subjective meaning attributed to Living in Hungary and Living abroad and Living in Hungary is seen in a much more negative way while living abroad is in a much more positive light in both groups, the question is: do the data show any explanation to the different decisions based on these views i.e.one group of people making the decision to emigrate and the other group deciding to stay.

First of all, while in both groups the associations related to Living in Hungary were predominantly negative and related to Living abroad predominantly positive, the HH group was somewhat less negative toward life in Hungary and the HA group somewhat more positive toward living abroad. The HA group considers life in Hungary significantly more difficult, more anxiety evoking, more frustrating and hopeless than the HH group, while they associate living abroad with positive life experiences, with happiness and motivating and developmental effects. There are apparently those citizens as well who in fact live a good life in Hungary as a small percentage of the associations related to Living in Hungary was positive, indicating that for a number of those who stayed in Hungary the life there is inspiring and motivating.

Living abroad is considered more “alien” for the HH group than for the HA group (4th and 10th respectively among the associations) and they provided significantly more weighted associations related to being lonely abroad and depression. This shows that altogether those who live in Hungary are somewhat more positive toward life in Hungary and also less attracted by the better life abroad as they perceive it a bit less positively.

According to the results, there is a difference between the two groups in terms of the significance of Hungary as a homeland, patriotic feelings, and national identity. Although “homeland” was in both groups among the ten highest weighted associations in relation to living in Hungary, in the HH group this was the second most weighted association while in the HA group the 7th with approximately half weighted scores. Patriotism as a main category and National Identity as a subcategory was significantly bigger in the HH group than in the HA group. Also, only the HH group considered it Unpatriotic and a betrayal to live abroad and emphasized the significance of Attachment to the homeland.

There was a difference in the significance of the political life in Hungary. Corruption, oppression, immorality are present in both groups’ associations, but politics has a more prominent role in the HA group. They mention politics among the ten most weighted associations and within the Politics/Policies main category refer to the shortcomings of Education and Healthcare in Hungary significantly more. They also consider life abroad providing more freedom and democracy.

Although generally, the HA group that left Hungary attributed a more positive meaning to Living abroad they also expressed some longing, homesickness, missing Hungarian food, suffering from a different climate (cold and rain), lots of travel due to the visits and vacation in Hungary as a way of trying to maintain contact between homeland and their life abroad.

The goal of this study was to reveal a more complex explanation for emigration and non-emigration than traditional methodologies are able to uncover. Analysis of the associations via the AGA method made it possible to identify some crucial and more subtle elements of this life decision and a complex dynamic of the push and pull factors: level of belongingness to family and home as a place, level of belongingness to the nation/national identity, quality of life, economic opportunities and political environment.

The results are partly counterintuitive. One could expect that those who are really dissatisfied with the societal context are prone to leave the country, however the general dissatisfaction with the life in Hungary does not make the respondents who live in Hungary leave the country in spite of the fact that within the European Union there is a free movement and many countries can offer better quality of life. This study aimed at revealing the potential explanations.

Schewel (2020) identified “embedding factors” that influence people’s decision to stay in their home country. These factors include strong family connections, as noted by previous research (De Jong & Fawcett, 1981; Fischer & Malmberg, 2001; Lewicka, 2011; Ritchey, 1976). Strong affiliation motivation and family-orientation, as Boneva and Frieze (2001) described are indicators to choose staying in one’s homeland. In the present study, belongingness and attachment to the home and family in Hungary was equally important to both groups. Counter to expectations the HA group did not demonstrate attachment to living abroad, being and alien and homesickness appears in their meaning making and family and home are emerging in the context of Living in Hungary and not in the context of Living abroad. Based on the subjective meaning of the HA group it seems that there is a certain kind of “trade-off”, living a more satisfying and better quality life, with more opportunity to grow and develop, with more political freedom and democracy and better financial circumstances but this does not lead to a change of “home” as a psychological place (Dúll, 1996; Proshansky et al., 1983) and “homeland” because longing for family members left behind, for Hungarian food and places in Hungary emerge in the associations of the HA group.

Another type of belongingness however was different, namely patriotism, national identity, attachment to the homeland and to the nation. This was more salient for the HH group and less salient for the HA group. There are no studies available that directly investigate the level of national identity as a decisive factor in the decision to emigrate. Several studies connect reactions to immigration and to migrants to the level of national identity of the citizens of the host society (Janmaat, 2006; Kurthen, 1995; Lindstam et al., 2021), but it is a blind spot what kind of role national identity, patriotic feelings play in the decision to emigrate. This is however especially relevant in the present research because the subjective meaning attributed to living in Hungary is overwhelmingly negative not only in case of those who emigrated, but also among those who live in Hungary, while patriotism and national identity is also a sizable component of the subjective meaning attributed to Living in Hungary among the respondents who live in Hungary and this also contributes to their subjective meaning making of Living abroad because in spite of perceiving that as a life offering much more high quality opportunities, it is also considered to be an unpatriotic decision, a betrayal of the Hungarian nation. Hungarians living in Hungary see moving abroad as an escape from hardship, as a refusal to accept the bitter Hungarian “fate”, while Hungarians living abroad see their departure not as an escape but as a breakout, a liberation that offers positive benefits.

The overwhelmingly negative subjective meaning attributed to living in Hungary in both groups is in harmony with the low level of life satisfaction of Hungarians found in many different studies over the last almost four decades (e.g., Gödri, 2016; Hunyady, 2016; Inglehart et al., 2013). Negative life experiences and emotions, negative societal phenomena (helplessness, depression, anxiety, boredom, frustration, oppression, immorality, aggression, prejudice, and stupidity) characterize dominantly the life in Hungary. This negativity may partly reflect reality but can also be a cultural construction of a negative Hungarian auto-stereotype (Csepeli et al., 2002) and can be related to elevated level of pessimism and a Hungarian “complaining culture” (Hunyady, 2018; Tóth & Kovács, 2011). As life abroad is seen by both the HH and HA group offering a much more enjoyable and better-quality life those who emigrated decided to leave this negative context behind and change it to a more positive one.

The political views of the respondents were not investigated in this study, but one differentiating factor found was the level of political dissatisfaction and level of trust in institutions (Skoglund, 2017). The HA Group has a stronger negative association with Hungarian politics compared to the HH Group and less trust in education and healthcare. This suggests that dissatisfaction with the political climate might be a motivating factor for emigration from Hungary (Bygnes & Flipo, 2017; Lapshyna, 2014; Siskáné et al., 2017).

Although those who live in Hungary have a negative view of the life there, they stay. Another retaining factor can be what Van Houtum and Van der Velde (2004) described as “attitude of nationally habituated indifference”, meaning that even if the life context is seen negative and life abroad is seen positive, this does not evoke motivation and pro-activity to move.

Helplessness and depression as characteristics of life in Hungary emerge in both investigated groups and in the HH group it is even more pronounced. This corresponds to previous studies (e.g., Eurostat, 2017) indicating that depression proneness was the highest among Hungarians in the EU. This psychological condition may contribute to immobility, to a kind of inability to act, to make changes, to be proactive if life circumstances are difficult. This can be also called “learned helplessness” (Seligman, 1972). Those Hungarians who emigrate are seen as more proactive, open, and brave and those who stay as more depressed and helpless according to Szilasi et al.’ (2024) study as well.

The double perspective design made it possible to reveal the complex psychological realm of those who leave and those who stay in Hungary. Those who decided to leave Hungary managed to find a kind of harmony. They perceive life abroad as offering positive opportunities in many distinct aspects of life and they live there, while those who live in Hungary are in a kind of conflicting state of mind. They perceive their Hungarian societal context as difficult, that requires everyday struggles partly due to poverty and in contrast to this living abroad is seen exciting, linked to “money,” and “wealth” symbolizing the promise of financial security and a brighter future, still they live in Hungary. This may create both cognitive dissonance and psychological tension. Living in such a tension and reducing the dissonance, in other words seeing better options but an inability to make a change can in itself cause depression (Sloman, 2000). It seems that those who plan to leave or leave are able to resolve this tension (Bartram, 2013) while those who stay tend to accept this situation as a kind of Hungarian “fate”. The lyrics of the famous Hungarian poet Mihály Vörösmarty (Vörösmarty, 1836) that is recited in each Hungarian national celebration and in each school in Hungary at the beginning and end of the school year assembly can be applied to them: ‘Bless or be struck by the hand of fate, here (i.e. in Hungary) you must live or die’.

Limitation

Our sample is not representative of the age, education, and place of residence of the Hungarian population and is not representative of those Hungarians who emigrated over the last decades to different parts of the world, which limits the generalizability of our findings. This is true despite the fact that it would be impossible to carry out a study that is representative of Hungarian emigration since there are no reliable statistics about the exact demographic distribution of those Hungarians who left Hungary after the system change in 1989 or after 2004 when Hungary entered the European Union. The present sample is overrepresented by women, people with higher education, young adults, and people living in big cities. This is due to the random sampling via social media in the case of the Hungarians living abroad. They created the basic sample and the Hungarians living in Hungary were recruited to match this group along the required criteria.

Future Directions

Focusing on Hungary, our study provides valuable insights that can be applied to the broader field of research on well-being and migration in post-communist societies. Future research opportunities lie in replicating this study across other Central and Eastern European countries experiencing emigration. This would allow us to assess whether the observed pattern of more positive views toward emigrating and more negative meaning attributed to life in the homeland even by those who stay holds true in other post-socialist countries as well and if the potential explanations are the same or they are specific to the Hungarian society and culture. Furthermore, it would be valuable to explore if the robust national context effect identified in this study, characterized by a strong similarity in subjective meaning-making between the two groups, generalizes to other countries. This study also calls attention to the gap in the literature investigating the relationship between national identity and emigration decisions.