While migration health studies traditionally focused on socioeconomic determinants of health, an emerging body of literature is exploring migration status as a proximate cause of health outcomes. Study 1 is a path analysis of the predictors of mental health amongst 582 documented migrant workers in Singapore, and shows that threat of deportation is one of the most important proximate social determinants of predicted mental illness, and a mediator of the impact of workplace conflict on mental health. Study 2 is a qualitative study of the narratives of 149 migrant workers who were in workplace conflict with their employers, and demonstrates that workers believed threats were used as a negotiating strategy during workplace conflicts. Findings suggest that migration status places workers who come into workplace conflict with their employers at heightened risk of mental illness because migration status can be used as a tool by employers in workplace negotiations.

We propose a framework for citizen social science that brings together three reinforcing elements of a research project – scale, citizen-leadership, and publicness – to improve qualitative research. Our framework was born out of necessity; a desire to involve ordinary citizens, in researching public issues, with limited funding. We illustrate the application of our framework using insights from research we have led, involving first, a series of qualitative studies of state and civil society organizations working on community engagement by three separate years of public policy students; and second, a qualitative study on the system for processing salary and injury disputes for low-waged migrant workers in Singapore conducted by over 100 volunteers and activists. Drawing on a review of the literature and our own experiences, we speak to the advantages and trade-offs of adopting this approach and suggest practical methods for conducting citizen social science.