FOR many Scots, voting in the referendum isn't something they would think twice about.

But for those who are new to the country, the decision to take part in the vote has not always been automatic.

Christina Lyropolou is a Greek businesswoman, now living in Glasgow's East End.

She is one of more than 72,000 non UK-born residents in the city, and has called Glasgow her home for more than four years.

The 27-year-old felt so settled that she even started up a business importing Greek food to Scotland.

For Christina, the choice to get involved in the referendum vote was a difficult one.

She said: "I think if Scotland gets independence it will be a very historic moment. At first I wasn't sure if I should be involved in that, as at some point we might leave.

"If we voted yes or no and took the country to a worse situation, I didn't know how I'd feel.

"But after I read and listened to the debates, I found out it was more than a cultural or historic decision - it was economic and political as well.

"I decided to vote because in the end we live here and we're going to live with the consequences."

Her business partner Michael Sofianos, 28, also from Greece, agreed.

He said: "In the beginning I thought maybe I shouldn't vote because maybe in some years I won't be here, but I decided I have to do it because I live here, and I will be living here for some time.

"Every country deserves to be independent but I don't know if Scotland will have strong enough politics to be independent. There are not many countries that can do that.

"The parliament was a good start though."

Christina said: "The whole history of Scotland is under the UK umbrella, so I don't know if they have the stability and organisation to run the country independently - that is one of my concerns."

Ben Farrand, an Australian lecturer who moved to South Glasgow two and a half years ago, has found the level of engagement overwhelming.

"You hear a lot about the increased levels of political apathy, but here you have a level of civic participation in the debate which I really didn't expect.

"There have been meetings where there is standing room only, individual politicians doing almost lecture circuits, and debates in universities and by student unions.

"It's the level of engagement which I have found so impressive, and that's one of the reasons I've found it so exciting being here."

The 31-year-old also thought the nature of the debate had been very inclusive and helped new Scots like himself engage even further with the decision.

He said: "When I arrived in Glasgow I noticed this idea of inclusive Scottish nationalism was based on certain principles and beliefs as opposed to being tied to a place of birth.

"If you compare it to some of the more independence-minded movements in Europe, they tend to be based on exclusive identity - who we are in comparison to everyone else.

"In Scotland it is much more about shared ideas than where you were born."

For Christina and Michael, the larger policies and ideas were of less concern to them than the everyday details, which they felt had not been fully explained.

Christina said: "I feel like most of my questions are not even close to having been answered.

"They haven't explained what is happening with the currency, the deposits in the banks, and what about us who are living here and don't have a British passport - how will we travel if we are out of the EU?

"Also the commercial bonding between England and Scotland...all these things haven't been explained.

"I don't really care about the army or the national teams or things like that, it's more about the daily stuff."

Ben thought the uncertainty on many issues may have been "oversold" and said: "It's not as if September 18 is the vote and if it's a yes, on September 19 Scotland leaves the UK.

"There would be at least two years of transitional changes and negotiations.

"I think people are uncertain, but it's because they don't have the time and resources to focus on it on a daily basis and it's just one of a number of concerns they have."

Michael thought both campaigns had not been good at providing balanced information, which contributed to the uncertainty he had.

He thought while the Better Together campaign had an almost apocalyptic approach to independence, the Yes campaign was overly-optimistic,

He said: "Some people say yes and no but when they explain why, they want to scare people.

"For example, someone came to my house and gave me a leaflet and it was like they wanted to tell me to vote no because if we do not stay in the UK we will have no money, water or food the next day - it would be like mass destruction.

"The other side is like that too, it's over optimistic a lot of the time. Politics is always like that though."