1
LATINX IMMIGRANT PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIPS: AN
INTERGENERATIONAL MODEL OF COHESION, CONFLICT AND MENTAL HEALTH
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Latinx Immigrant Parents and Youth in the United States
The constellation of families in the United States (U.S.) has gradually been changing
since 1990, with a rise in the children being raised by at least one immigrant parent
(Migration Policy Institute, 2018). In 2016, these national rates indicated that a quarter of
children in the U.S. lived with at least one immigrant parent. Further, there are specific states
that reflect even higher rates; for example, in California, 1 in 2 children are raised by at least
one immigrant parent (Migration Policy Institute, 2018). Moreover, nearly half of
immigrants in the U.S. identify as Latinx1 (Zong, Batalova, & Hallock, 2018), and among
immigrant children the majority are from Mexico (Child Trends Data Bank, 2014).
Considering the rise in this ethnic and racial population in the U.S., scholars have
recommended the need to develop a more in-depth understanding of influences contributing
to deleterious mental health outcomes for Latinx immigrant families (Ornelas & Perreira,
2011). Research indicated that children of Latinx immigrants exhibit higher rates of living in
poverty (Macartney, 2011) and are more likely to experience trauma exposure (Bernal &
Saez- Santiago, 2006; Fortuna, Porcheb, & Alegria, 2008; Jaycox et al., 2002) and risk
factors
2
associated with poor mental health outcomes (Gallo, Penedo, Espinosa de los Monteros, &
Arguelles, 2009).
Latinx immigrant adults are also subject to unique challenges associated with poor
mental health outcomes. Specifically, Latinx immigrant adults experience discrimination and
acculturative stress, which are commonly associated with anxiety and depression (Leong,
Park & Kalibatseva, 2013). In the context of facing these various stressors, Latinx immigrant
youth and parents are challenged by family conflict (Laursen, Coy, & Collins, 1998),
intergenerational acculturation gaps (Schofield, Parke, Kim, & Coltrane, 2008) and language
difficulties (Morales & Hanson, 2005) that may strain parent-child relationships.
Given the multitude of risk factors faced by immigrant parents and youth, it is
imperative to better understand parent-child relationships, highlighting the protective role of
family factors, and the experience of parenting in the context of these stressors. Researchers
established the protective role of various family factors, including parent-child relationships
(Schofield et al., 2008), parental support (Bámaca-Colbert, Umaña-Taylor, & Gayles, 2012)
and family cohesion (Leong et al., 2013), that buffer from poor mental health outcomes. Yet
as previously noted, having a more in-depth understanding of the poor mental health
outcomes of Latinx immigrant families is needed (Ornelas &Perreira, 2011). Thus, the
current study aimed to fill this gap by using mixed methods and community-based
approaches. Furthermore, we aimed to gain an in-depth understanding of the nature of
Latinx immigrant parent-child relationships, and examine family risk and protective factors
as associated with youth mental health outcomes.
This review provides an overview of research on Latinx immigrant parenting and
select research on parent-child relationships in immigrant families. Next, we will discuss
3
various risk and protective factors impacting Latinx families, first by presenting the
theoretical framework used and then presenting select family- and community-level factors.
Last, we will discuss mental health outcomes for Latinx immigrant youth.
Parenting and Parent-Child Relationships in Latinx Immigrant Families
There is a dearth of research that studies typical parenting practices among immigrant
populations (Perreira, Chapman, & Stein, 2006), and similarly, research on Latinx parenting
practices is limited (Ceballo, Kennedy, Bregman, & Epstein-Ngo, 2012). Researchers
criticized previous qualitative studies examining acculturation among Latinx immigrant
parents for being limited in scope of the contexts explored (e.g., school or health systems)
(Perreira et al., 2006). Furthermore, existing qualitative research with Latinx immigrant
parents also falls short of considering parenting in the context of simultaneous community-
level stressors (e.g., community violence, work stressors, school discrimination or broader
community context). Researchers have begun to incorporate contextual considerations into
their examinations of Latinx parenting practices. For example, in a study that examined
parenting practices in high-risk neighborhoods (e.g., marked by poverty and community
violence), among 49 low-income Latina mothers, parental monitoring and parent-child
communication were identified as important for effective parenting (Ceballo et al., 2012).
Although this study integrated contextual considerations in the fabric of Latinx parenting
using qualitative methods, it only minimally discussed the unique aspects of Latinx
immigrant parenting experiences, even though over half of the parents in the study were
immigrants. The current study aimed to address this gap in qualitative research by integrating
unique Latinx parenting experiences as immigrants with a consideration of contextual
stressors.
4
Other researchers found that qualities of parenting practices among Latinx immigrant
families, such as supportive parenting, served a protective role from various familial
stressors and youths’ mental health outcomes. For example, in a sample of Mexican
adolescents, maternal supportive parenting demonstrated both direct and indirect predictive
associations with depression; such that greater supportive parenting was associated with less
depression symptoms for early-adolescents, and the relationship between supportive
parenting and depression symptoms was mediated by conflict for both early-and middle-
adolescents (Bámaca-Colbert et al., 2012).
Similar to parenting practices, the importance of parent-child relationships has been
emphasized as a critical factor in families and child development for decades. The links
between parent-child relationship quality and mental health outcomes are also well
established (Brumariou & Kerns, 2010). Among research examining Latinx immigrant
families (predominately from Mexico with a few families from Colombia, Argentina, and
one from El Salvador), a majority focused on acculturation gaps and family conflict (Perreira
et al., 2006), which will be discussed later. However, in efforts to establish an understanding
of good parent-child relationships, researchers used qualitative approaches to learn from
Latinx immigrant youth and parents (e.g., Crockett, Brown, Russel, & Shen, 2007; Perreira
et al., 2006). First- and second-generation Latinx adolescent perspectives of good parent-
child relationships were examined using focus groups. Specifically, in a study with 19
Mexican teens, themes of support (e.g., emotional and physical), parenting control (e.g.,
monitoring, strictness, lax parenting), open communication, indirect displays of affection,
and values (e.g., trust and respect) emerged, with “open communication as the hallmark of a
good relationship with both parents” (Crockett et al., 2007; p.658). Similarly, in another
qualitative
5
study, Latinx immigrant parents denoted the importance of parent-child communication
(Perreira et al., 2006). The protective role of parent-child relationships have also been
examined using quantitative approaches. For example, parent-child relationship quality
moderated the relationship of intergenerational acculturative gap, father-child conflict and
behavior problems for Latinx youth (Schofield et al., 2008). Overall, these findings highlight
aspects of good parent-child relationships, the importance of communication as an indicator
of a good relationship, and established the protective role of these relationships in the lives of
Latinx immigrant families.
Theoretical Framework
The current study examined unique family processes impacting Latinx immigrant
parents and their youth using a cultural framework of resilience by employing the Cultural-
Ecological- Transactional Perspective (Kuperminc, Wilkins, Roche, & Alvarez-Jimenez,
2009). This perspective builds on Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) Transactional- Ecological Model
by integrating the contribution of cultural factors in developmental processes.
Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) model emphasizes the interactions that influence development
across and between different systems, including: the microsystem (settings in which the
individual lives and interacts; e.g., family and school), the mesosystem (more distant level
that is characterized by interactions between microsystems), the exosystem (norms and
policies related to the communities in which the child and family reside), and the
macrosystem (ideologies, cultures, and social institutions).
Researchers have critiqued Bronfenbrenner’s model as well as other mainstream
developmental models for being “too narrowly defined and applied, without elaborating
those considerations unique to populations of children of color (e.g., the culturally diverse
6
physical and psychological attributes of individual children of color, the contexts specific to
their daily experience, the racial and ethnic values that influence their competencies, and the
societal structures that limit them)” (Garcia Coll et al., 1996, p. 1894). Kuperminc and
colleagues (2009) attempt to integrate these considerations into the Cultural-Ecological-
Transactional Perspective as they apply to a model of resilience by which an individual
child/youth navigates interactions between their heritage culture and mainstream culture
through a vital developmental process. In turn, cultural factors (e.g., values, norms, and
actions) are involved in interactions/transactions with each ecological level and influence
outcomes for the child/youth (Reyes & Elias, 2011).
Risk and Protective Factors for Latinx Immigrant Parents and Youth
Unique Stressors and Risk Factors
Immigrant parents and their youth may encounter various stressors or be exposed to
traumatic experiences (Kia-Keating, Capous, Juang, & Bacio, 2016). Foster (2005) posits
that immigrants may experience peri-migration trauma, known as distress that occurs
during various parts of the migration process as immigrants encounter various stressors. Pre-
migration stressors may include living in impoverished and crime-ridden communities
(Partida, 1996). While migrating, individuals may be subject to harsh living conditions,
witness death, loss or separation from family members. Immigrants may encounter stressors
of rejection as they seek asylum, and lastly may experience ongoing stressors while trying to
survive as immigrants in a new country (Foster, 2005). In post-migration, immigrant and
ethnic/racial minority parents and youth are subject to continuous stressors. These stressors
could include loss of social support or extended family, documentation status, financial
7
struggles and lack of parental supervision due to parent’s working longer hours (Smokowski
& Kurtines, 2011).
Research exclusively studying the experience of Latinx immigrant families in the
U.S. established the pervasiveness of various unique challenges or stressors faced by this
ethnic minority group. For example, acculturation gaps are a common experience among
high risk Latinx parent-adolescent dyads (Lau et al, 2005), and were described by
adolescents as leading to clashes and a stressful family context (Cordova, Ciofu, &
Cervantes, 2014). Even in the context of migrating for hopes of a better future for their
children, parents and youth are faced with challenges traversing two cultures, with parents
playing an important role in providing access to these cultures (Leyendecker et al., 2018).
Navigating two cultures for Latinx immigrant families may be especially difficult
given challenges with language proficiency, adjusting to a new environment and perceived
discrimination (Gudiño, Nadeem, Kataoka, & Lau, 2011). Discrimination is another
identified stressor confronted by Latinx youth, who report daily experiences of this stressor
(Edwards & Romero, 2008; Kulis, Marsiglia, & Niegri, 2009), and a challenge immigrant
parents describe as impacting their parenting (Leidy, Guerra, & Toro, 2010). Stressors in
neighborhood contexts were also found to be disproportionally higher for Latinx youth in the
U.S. For example, Latinx youth report being three times more likely to witness community
violence compared to youth of other ethnic/racial groups (National Child Traumatic Stress
Network, 2005). Additionally, Latinx immigrant youth who recently immigrated report being
exposed to higher rates of violence in the U.S. compared to pre-migration or during the
migration process (Gudiño et al., 2011). These pervasive challenges will be discussed next in
8
context of community-level and intra-familial stressors with implications for Latinx
immigrant mental health.
Community-level stressors: Community Violence. A prominent community-level
stressor is community violence exposure. Community violence has been defined as exposure
to violent acts that take place in public by people that are not related to the victim or witness
of violence (National Child Traumatic Stress Network, 2005). Latinx youth are exposed to
high rates of community violence and consequently experience the deleterious psychosocial
effects that witnessing or victimization is associated with.
Latinx youth are exposed to disproportionate rates of violence compared to
Caucasians (Ford, Hartman, Hawke, & Chapman, 2008) and other ethnic/racial groups
(Aisenberg, Ayón, & Orozco-Figueroa, 2008; National Child Traumatic Stress Network,
2005). Consistently, high rates of violence exposure were cited among middle school-aged
youth (e.g., n =164; 59% reported direct victimization and 87.2% reported witnessing
violence) (Aisenberg et al., 2008) and high school students (e.g., N = 1,601; 63% were
victims of violent threats or assaults and 88% were witnesses to such violence) (Kataoka et
al., 2008). Reports of Latina mothers were similarly high, with 77% of mothers reporting
community violence exposure (Aisenberg, 2001). These high rates are especially concerning
given the well-established links between exposure to community violence and behavioral
problems (Gudiño et al., 2012), increased violent behaviors among adolescents (Brady,
Gorman-Smith, Henry & Tolan, 2008; Gorman-Smith & Tolan, 1998), and poor mental
health outcomes (e.g., PTSD, depression) (Aisenberg, Trickett, Mennen, Saltzman, &
Zayas, 2007; Franco Suglia, Ryan, Bellinger, Enlow, & Wright, 2011).
9
Broadening the dialogue of Latinx parents tasked with raising children in
communities of violence, researchers integrated considerations of the role of parents and
family factors (Aisenberg et al., 2007). This line of research has also expanded to include
considerations of the effect of community violence exposure on parent psychopathology,
parenting, and youth outcomes (Aisenberg et al., 2007; Franco Suglia et al., 2011; Self-
Brown, LeBlanc, Kelley, Hanson, Laslie, & Wingate, 2006; Westbrook & Jones Harden,
2010). Qualitative research also contributed to the dialogue by highlighting the voices and
unique experiences of Latinx parents raising youth in high-risk neighborhoods (Ceballo et
al., 2012). The current study aimed to integrate considerations of the stressor of community
violence in an in-depth understanding of Latinx immigrant parenting and parent-child
relationships.
Intra-familial stressors: Family Conflict, Acculturation Gaps, and Parents’
Mental Health. Latinx immigrant families experience various intra-familial stressors that
may impact family functioning and youth mental health. Two common stressors noted in the
literature are family conflict and acculturation gaps. Family conflict among immigrant
families was often discussed in the context of acculturation (Kapke et al., 2017; Smokowski
et al. 2017). Szapocznik & Kurtines (1993) suggested that parent-child conflict would arise
from differing values, interests, and language proficiency among immigrant parents and
their youth. Scholars have established that these intergenerational differences in values were
more distinct as time in the U.S. increases (Phinney, Ong, & Madden, 2000). Further, youth
recognized that these intergenerational differences were significant. Researchers examining
intra-familial stressors among 170 Latinx adolescents involved in 25 focus groups found that
adolescents identified parent-adolescent acculturation discrepancies to be pronounced
10
(Cordova et al., 2014). Specifically, they found that among predominantly first and second
generation Latinx adolescents, intra-familial stressors related to acculturation discrepancies
were comprised of overprotective parenting, challenges of language brokering, mistrust of
speaking English, disapproval of youth becoming more American, and gender differences in
families. These differences in values have been identified as acculturative gaps, and are
assumed to pose a risk for youths’ problem behavior (Marsiglia, Kulis, Fitz Harris, &
Becerra, 2009) and have been noted to impact positive parenting and family cohesion (Leidy
et al., 2010). Given the multitude of risk factors faced by immigrant parents and youth, it is
imperative to better understand parent-child relationship, highlighting the protective role of
family factors, and the experience of parenting in the context of these stressors.
The influence of acculturative gaps on mental health outcomes has been examined
using the acculturative gap stress hypothesis, which posits that intergenerational gaps in
values and acculturation may source family conflict that then leads to adolescent adjustment
difficulties (Lee, Choe, & Ngo, 2000; see Telzer, 2010 for a review on the acculturative gap
distress model). It is noteworthy that some scholars found contradictory evidence related to
the acculturative gap stress hypothesis. For example, one study found no relationship
between acculturation gaps and increased family conflict or conduct problems in youth (Lau
et al., 2005); while others found conflict to be associated with high rates of depression,
regardless of family acculturation, suggesting the mediating role of family conflict
(Gonzales, Deardorff, Formoso, Barr, & Barrera, 2006). Researchers also found partial
support of the acculturation gap stress hypothesis with middle-adolescents (e.g., ages 14-17)
but not for early-adolescents (e.g. ages 12-14) (Bámaca-Colbert et al., 2012). A more direct
pathway between acculturative gaps and youth outcomes was also examined. For example,
11
one study with 142 Mexican mother-adolescent dyads found that acculturative gaps were
related to significantly greater levels of externalizing difficulties (Marsiglia et al., 2009).
Hovey and King (1996) also established the direct relationships between acculturative stress
(e.g., family gap stress) and depressive symptoms, dissociation, and lifetime exposure to
community violence with a large sample of Latinx adolescents (N = 304). Although research
on the acculturative gap distress model is mixed, there is support to indicate the deleterious
mental health implications of both acculturative gaps and family conflict, or parent-child
conflict.
As with other populations, family conflict has also been recognized as a pervasive
mental health stressor among Latinx immigrant populations. Researchers employing CBPR
approaches in their work with 53 Latinx immigrant adolescents and parents found family
conflict to be noted as a prevalent mental health stressor across the eight focus groups
(Garcia & Lindgren, 2009). Adolescents in their study often referred to parent-child conflict,
which was expected of their developmental stage, whereas parents noted concerns for
interpartner conflict more frequently. Congruent with developmental considerations,
Laursen, Coy, and Collins (1998) conducted a meta-analysis and found parent-child conflict
to be the highest in early through middle adolescence. Together these results suggest the
importance of examining intergenerational conflict across a wide range of developmental
stages.
Family conflict is a risk factor among Latinx immigrant youth. In a large study of
immigrant youth (N = 2,063) family conflict strongly predicted youth depression and self-
esteem (Rumbault, 2000). Researchers also found family conflict to be associated with youth
aggression (Smokowski & Bacallao, 2006; Smokowski et al., 2017), emotional distress
12
(Chung, Flook, & Fuglini, 2009), and depression (Dennis, Basañez, & Farahmand, 2010).
Long lasting impacts of family conflict were also found. For example, researchers found
longitudinal relationships between family conflict and depression between middle school
and high school (Fosco, Ryzin, Connell, & Stormshak, 2016).
Expanding on research on family conflict, scholars have begun to integrate multiple
contextual considerations in their modeling of risk and protective factors that impact mental
health outcomes for Latinx immigrant youth. For example, Bámaca-Colbert and colleagues
(2012) used multiple group path analyses in their study with 271 Mexican immigrant
adolescents and their mother to elucidate a contextual model of depression. They found
mother-daughter conflict to be associated with increased depressive symptoms among early-
and middle-adolescents. It is interesting that Bámaca-Colbert and colleagues modeled these
relationships with mother-adolescent dyads, especially considering that adolescents report
higher rates of conflict in relationships with their mothers compared to their fathers (Chung
et al., 2009). Bámaca-Colbert and colleagues’ (2012) developmental-contextual model of
depressive symptoms contributes a comprehensive model of the interplay of various family
processes that impact youths’ mental health. However, attention to the influence of parents’
depressive symptoms on family risk or protective factors (e.g., parent-child conflict,
acculturative gaps, supportive parenting) would strengthen this relational and contextual
approach to understanding factors impacting youths’ depression.
In terms of Latinx immigrant parents’ depression, findings indicate the prevalence of
symptoms (Orneleas & Perreira, 2011) and associated impact on youths’ mental health
(Corona, Lefkowitz, Sigman, & Rumo, 2005) and family processes (e.g., Gilbert, Spears
Brown & Mistry, 2017; Ornelas & Perreira, 2011). Among Latinx immigrant parents, pre-
13
migration, migration, and post-migration factors were associated with depression symptoms
(Orneleas & Perreira, 2011). In turn, Latinx immigrant parents’ symptoms of depression
were associated with youths’ internalizing and externalizing behaviors (Corona et al., 2005).
Furthermore, depression was also found to impact family factors, such as familism
(Ornelas & Perreira, 2011), and Latinx immigrant parenting, as seen with reduced parental
monitoring (Gilbert et al., 2017). Among a sample of Mexican American two-parent families,
parent depression mediated the relationship between work pressure, warmth and conflict in
the parent-adolescent relationship (Wheeler, Updegraff, & Crouter, 2011). These findings
suggest the importance of considering the mediating or moderating role of parent depression
in the relationship with family factors.
Little is known about the role of parents’ depression on the relationships between risk
or protective factors and youth outcomes among Latinx immigrant families. Fendrich,
Warner and Weissman (1990) found that in the presence of family risk factors, parental
depression consistently served as a more significant predictor of youths’ depression and
anxiety in their study of youth with depressed (n = 153) and non-depressed (n = 67) parents.
Fendrich and colleagues found that youth who had a depressed parent reported higher rates
of family discord and lower family cohesion when compared to youth with a non-depressed
parent. Additionally, when considering the relationship between family risk factors and
youth outcomes, they found that reports of parent-child conflict and low family cohesion
were related to prevalence of conduct disorder among the youth with a depressed parent
when compared to youth of non-depressed parents. It is noteworthy, that although their
sample represented a diverse age range (e.g., between 6 and 23 years-old) the youth and
families were all White. Further research is needed to understand these relationships as they
apply to
14
Latinx immigrant families given the multifaceted stressors, risk and protective factors
commonly found in this ethnic minority group.
Protective Factors for Latinx Immigrant Parents and Youth
Current research on protective factors that buffer stressors and associated outcomes
offers a useful vantage point for understanding family strengths and functioning among
Latinx immigrant families, as well as the effects on youth outcomes. Scholars suggested that
supportive parenting may shield children from the adverse effects of environmental
adversities and stressors (Leidy et al., 2010). For example, parental support was found to
moderate the relationship between acculturative stress on mental health symptomology (e.g.,
anxiety and depression) (Crockett et al., 2007). Inclusive of parenting, the theme of family
support as a protective factor has been explored in the context of culturally related stressors,
trauma exposure and mental health (Gonzales et al., 2006; Gorman-Smith, Henry, & Tolan,
2010). Another family-level protective factor examined in relation to Latinx immigrant
families is family cohesion.
Family Cohesion. Olson, Russel, and Sprenkle (1982) defined family cohesion as
emotional closeness and bonds between family members. Family cohesion has consistently
shown utility as a protective factor that buffers against mental health outcomes for immigrant
youth. For example, in a large sample of immigrant youth in Southern California, family
cohesion was found to be a significant predictor of self-esteem and depression (Rumbault,
2000). Other researchers established that family cohesion was related to psychological
distress, such that higher cohesion was associated with lower levels of distress among diverse
groups of Latinx (e.g., Cubans, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and other Latinx) (Riviera et al,
2008). In a study with 151 first- and second-generation immigrant Mexican adolescents and
15
their parents, family cohesion was related to conduct problems and rule-breaking behavior
(Marsiglia, Parsai, Kulis, & Southwest Interdisciplinary Research Center, 2009). Considering
community-level stressors, family cohesion has also demonstrated protective capabilities.
For example, family cohesion buffered the relationship between Latinx youths’ community
violence exposure and substance use (Kliewer et al., 2006; Ramírez García et al., 2010).
Researchers also examined the promising protective effects of family cohesion beyond
exposure to extreme risk. Leidy and colleagues (2010) found that family cohesion was
associated with increases in youths’ problem solving skills and self-efficacy among a sample
of 282 Latinx parent-child dyads.
Family cohesion also serves a protective role in the context of Latinx immigrant
parenting. Specifically, one study examined cultural differences in cohesion and parenting
practices in the context of stressors among Mexican American and European American
parents (Behnke et al., 2008). Behnke and colleagues found that compared to European
American mothers, Mexican American mothers demonstrate consistent parenting practices
(e.g., use of discipline) and greater nurturing parenting styles when they rated family
cohesion high.
Discrepancies in Reporting of Risk and Protective Factors Among Latinx
Families. Interestingly, scholars found discrepancies in reporting of various intra-familial
risk and protective factors. For example, in a large study or 972 parent-child dyads, parent
and adolescent discrepancies of reports of family functioning (e.g., family conflict, family
cohesion) were predictive of adolescent well-being over time (Stuart & Jose, 2012).
Moreover, others have claimed that these discrepancies are notable on their own (De Los
Reyes, Henry, Tolan & Wakshlag, 2009; as seen in Stuart & Jose, 2012).
16
Overview of Research Gaps
Many researcher have identified unique risk and protective factors, and associated
mental health implications among Latinx immigrant families. The various community-
and family-level stressors are both pervasive in the lives of Latinx immigrant families and
associated with poor mental health outcomes among Latinx youth. Although existing
research has developed a foundation for understanding these relationships, there is limited
integration of multiple stressors unique to Latinx immigrant families in the literature.
Among existing research with Latinx immigrant families, scholars have called for the
need for more research to better understand factors impacting mental health of Latinx
immigrant youth (Ornelas & Perreira, 2011). To better understand depression among Latinx
samples, some scholars established a developmental-contextual model of depression with
Mexican adolescents (Bámaca-Colbert et al., 2012). Although in this model, family risk and
protective factors (e.g., family cohesion, family conflict) appeared important in predicting
youths’ depression, researchers have yet to incorporate parents’ depression as a factor, which
may be important provided the prevalence of depression among Latinx immigrant adults (De
Oliveira, Cianelli, Gattamorta, Kowalski, & Peragallo, 2017).
Given the deleterious impact that culturally based familial stressors have on Latinx
youths’ lives, researchers noted that existing research examining intrafamilial stressors in
Latinx families is lacking (Schwartz et al., 2012; Schwartz, Unger, Zambopanga, &
Szapocznik, 2010). Furthermore, regarding community-level stressors, research often lacked
discussion or measurement of unique immigrant stressors that may play a role in parenting
and youths’ mental health outcomes among Latinx immigrant samples.
17
Researchers have noted the paucity of research exclusively studying parenting
practices among immigrant (Perreira et al., 2006) and Latinx (Ceballo et al., 2012)
populations. Furthermore, research employing qualitative approaches to examine parenting
among Latinx immigrant parents (e.g., Ceballo et al., 2012) fails to highlight the unique
contextual risk factors (e.g., Aisenberg, 2001; Macartney, 2011; National Child Traumatic
Stress Network, 2005) that are prevalent in this population.
The Current Study
The current study aimed to fill these gaps in research by using mixed methods
sequential design and a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach while
drawing from a 5-year community-university partnership. We conceptualized and designed
the study as QUAL + quan, and data was collected sequentially (Creswell & Plano Clark,
2017). The qualitative approach was given precedence (Creswell et al., 2003) in the current
study given the sequential design and that the qualitative findings informed the design and
research questions of the quantitative phase (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2017). First, to gain an
in-depth understanding parent-child relationships and parenting experiences among Latinx
immigrant parents, we used focus groups to build on current research of immigrant parents
while integrating consideration of community-level stressors. Initial results of main themes
from the qualitative phase in conjunction with both formal and informal dialogues with CAB
members informed the decisions we made about the quantitative phase, including the
selection of measures and the decision to examine questions related to mental health. In
particular, the current study aimed to examine the relationships between family cohesion,
family conflict, parents’ depression symptoms and youths’ mental health outcomes next in
the quantitative phase. Although initial results from the qualitative phase informed the
18
decisions about the quantitative phase, the results of both the quantitative and qualitative
phases were integrated (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2017) in the discussion.
Research Questions and Hypotheses
Research Question 1. What are Latinx immigrant parents’ experiences of parent-
child relationships and parenting?
a. What themes emerge as challenges in the parent-child relationships among
Latinx immigrant parents raising their youth in the face of various stressors?
b. What themes of parent-child strength/protective factors emerge through parents’
reflections of living in a community with violence and stressors?
Research Question 2. Are there significant discrepancies between parent and youth
reports of family cohesion and family conflict?
Hypothesis 1. Parent and youth report of family cohesion and family conflict will be
significantly different.
Research Question 3. Are youth self-report of family cohesion and family conflict
significantly related to youth report of depression symptoms and parent report of youth
behavior problems?
Hypothesis 2. Youth self-report of cohesion will be negatively associated with
depression and behavior problems. Whereas, greater family conflict (youth self-report) will
be associated with less depression and behavior problems.
Research Question 4. Are youth reports of community violence exposure
significantly related to their depression and behavior problems?
Hypothesis 3. Exposure to community violence will be positively related to youth
depression and behavior problems.
19
Research Question 5. Is parents’ depression related to youth reports of family
cohesion and family conflict?
Hypothesis 4. Parents’ depression will be negatively related to youth reports of
family cohesion and associated with greater family conflict (youth report).
Research Question 6. Does parents’ depression moderate the relationship between
family cohesion or family conflict and youth depression?
Hypothesis 5. Parents’ depression will moderate the relationship between family
cohesion and youths’ depression.
Hypothesis 6. Parents’ depression will moderate the relationship between family
conflict youths’ depression.
CHAPTER TWO: METHOD
Research Approach: Community Based Participatory Research
The current study used a CBPR approach. Israel, Schulz, Parker, and Becker (2001)
described the key principles of CBPR to include, that it builds on community
strengths/resources, facilitates collaborative partnerships in research, and integrates mutually
beneficial knowledge and action for a unique approach to address research gaps and inform
culturally sensitive methodology. CBPR is a useful approach because it enhances the quality
and validity of research by involving diverse people with knowledge of the local community
in the research process (Israel et al., 2001). By including such input, CBPR may likely
increase the cultural relevance and efficiency of addressing health disparities (Israel, Eng,
Schulz, & Parker, 2012).
The current study is part of a larger community-university collaborative project,
Proyecto HÉROES, that uses CBPR. Proyecto HÉROES (Honor, Educación, Respeto,
20
Oportunidad, Esperanza, y Soluciones) is an existing ongoing collaboration funded by the
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
(NICHD). During the early stages of developing Proyecto HÉROES, the Primary
Investigators met with several community members and leaders to form an advisory board
of community partners, the Community Advisory Board (CAB). CAB was comprised of
twenty-four key stakeholders, that included leaders and representatives from Latinx-serving
community organizations (i.e., school district, afterschool programs, religious organizations,
mental health agencies) and city departments (i.e., police, city council), as well as
researchers, community health workers, and Latinx parents and youth.
Congruent with a CBPR approach, CAB members were engaged in various aspects of
research design, data collection, and interpretation. This community-driven approach helped
strengthen the cultural validity of the research, and may have offered opportunities for key
stakeholders collecting data to share insights and likely create a more comfortable experience
for focus group participants who may be more willing to share with a valued peer (Kia-
Keating, Santacrose, Liu, & Adams, 2017).
Qualitative Methodology
Participants
A total of 64 Latinx mothers (84%) and fathers (16%) participated in the focus
groups. See Table 1 and 2 for demographic information for the qualitative sample. All
participants identified as being a parent and two identified as being grandparents. Parents
reported having children between 1 and 33 years of age (Mage = 12.51, SD = 6.90), and the
number of children parents had ranged between 1 and 7 (M = 2.84, SD = 1.74). It is
noteworthy, that among the 12 parents from one of the focus groups that took place in a
21
housing center predominantly serving low-income families, all parents had between 4 and 7
children (M = 5.17). Information on marital status was reported for 49 parents, and among
these 67% were married, 28% were single, 2% were separated and 2% were widowed. Data
on participants’ country of origin was collected from the 42 participants who shared
information on their country of origin. The sample was predominantly Mexican origin,
except for one from Guatemala (92% immigrant, 90% Mexican, of participants who
reported their country of origin).
Community-Partnered Focus Group Recruitment
Groups of Latinx parents were recruited with assistance from CAB members. CAB
members strategically recruited in several predominantly Latinx, low-income neighborhoods
within Santa Barbara County, a context known for extreme economic disparities and
stratification. Focus group data collection occurred during a 12-month period. During this
time there were several publicized stressors that likely impacted the communities where data
collection took place. Local politics focused on the ruling of a controversial gang injunction,
there was tension between law enforcement and community members involved in a riot near
a university (in which several people were injured), and a mass shooting in which six people
were killed and fourteen were injured. During this time CAB members focused efforts on
how to respond to the various community stressors and increase service utilization.
Data collection took place in community settings, with two in a mental health clinic
(Midtown), a cultural community center (East), an elementary school (North), a facilitator’s
home (North), and a housing center (West). Locations were identified by CAB members who
expressed interest in organizing and facilitating a focus group. Location and time of the focus
groups were chosen to first, include a cross-section of neighborhoods and sub-communities
22
to get diverse perspectives, and then within those locations, to best accommodate the
participants needs (e.g., proximity to their home, availability from work). Childcare was
provided as an option to reduce barriers to participation.
Qualitative Data Collection
Demographics Questionnaire. The demographics information collected included
age, gender, marital status, country of origin, number of children, and ages of children. The
demographics questionnaire was only administered to participants in Focus Groups 3, 4, 5,
and 6. After completed Focus Groups 1 and 2, the research team discussed the importance of
collecting demographics information to better understand the sample; and a brief
demographics questionnaire was subsequently administered to Focus Groups 3, 4, 5, and 6.
Whenever possible, demographics information that was shared during narratives in the focus
groups for Focus Groups 1 and 2 were used to inform demographics for these two focus
groups.
Semi-structured interview. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted
with Latinx immigrant parents to develop a more comprehensive understanding of
community challenges impacting the Latinx community, how these challenges impact
parenting and families, as well as questions to gain a more nuanced understanding of
parents’ and youths’ perceptions of these issues and solutions. The semi-structured interview
questions and prompts were co-developed by the Proyecto HÉROES primary investigators
and the CAB. The focus group interviews were approximately two-hours in length.
Procedures
23
All procedures were approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of
California, Santa Barbara. Approval was also obtained from the participating community
agencies where focus groups were implemented.
Focus groups (approximately 120 minutes) were facilitated by pairs of two bilingual
Latinx facilitators and accompanied by 1-2 bilingual Latinx undergraduate research
assistants. All facilitators were associated with community organizations represented by
CAB members. Primary Investigators (PIs) trained facilitators on focus group interviewing
techniques. Focus group facilitators were encouraged to contact PIs for further assistance if
needed and received additional guidance on how to write a memo following the focus group.
Research assistants were trained on obtaining consent and demographics information, as
well as writing memos after the focus group.
At the start of each focus group, facilitators and research assistants distributed
consent forms that were available in both English and Spanish. Consent forms were
described, and consent was obtained by each interested participant. Focus group participants
were given the option to participate in either Spanish or English, however, all participants
preferred Spanish. All parents consented to participate in the focus groups. All focus groups
were audio-recorded, and research assistants transcribed during the session to aid in later
accuracy of audio transcriptions. As an incentive for participating, participants received a $30
grocery gift card.
Quantitative Methodology
Participants
A total of 38 Latinx youth between the ages of 8 and 16 (Mage = 12.05, SD = 2.07;
40% identified as female) participated in the survey. See Table 3 for demographics
24
information. Among the youth, 35 were born in the U.S. and 3 were born in Mexico, and
100% self-identified as Latino/a. Parent participants were comprised of 38 parents between
the ages of 27 and 50 (Mage = 39.32, SD = 5.85; 97.4% females). All of the parent sample
were immigrants, with the majority being from Mexico (with the exception of 1 who was
born in Guatemala). The amount of time parents lived in the U.S. ranged from 9 to 34 years
(M = 18.84, SD = 5.91). The youths’ other biological parent who did not participate were
also mostly immigrants, and the majority were from Mexico (with the exception of 3 born in
Guatemala, 1 born in Colombia and 3 born in the U.S.). Parents reported a range of marital
status, with parent participants reporting being either single (26.3%), married (65.8%) or
divorced (7.9%). The parent sample was socioeconomically diverse in regard to education,
with parent participants reporting that the highest level of education they attained was less
than high school (31.6%), some high school (18.4%), high school or equivalent (26.3%),
some college (7.9%), or associates degree (15.8%). The sample reflected a predominantly
low socioeconomic demographic, in that all but one participant received free or reduced
lunch at school.
Recruitment Approach
Eligibility criteria used for recruitment for the survey included: (1) youth between 8
and 16 years of age, (2) parents and youth identifying as Latinx, and (3) youth and parents
residing in Santa Barbara County. Participants were recruited from community agencies and
neighborhood centers in Santa Barbara County. CAB aided in identifying recruitment sites
and families that may be interested in participating. CAB members also suggested
recruitment opportunities for distribution of flyers at community fairs, school events, and
parenting groups. In addition to assistance from CAB, we shared recruitment information
25
with community agencies that served a high frequency of Latinx families (e.g., Boys and
Girls Club, housing projects, food banks). Data collection took place at the Latinx-service
community-based agencies, neighborhood centers and in participants’ homes, based on
participant preferences and ease of accessibility for families.
Data was collected starting during a 15-month period (2017-2018). During the time
of data collection there were various stressors that may have impacted participation in the
study. In particular, there were several socio-political stressors with a new administration, an
immigration ban, and highly publicized Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids.
Additionally, the community was impacted by two natural disasters. During the time of
recruitment there was also a streak of high school suicides. CAB members noticed an
increase of stress and fear impacting the Latinx community during the period when
recruitment was taking place.
Procedures
Informed Consent. Interested youth and parents were provided with study details
and informed about the consent procedures (Note: assent procedures were reviewed with
minors). Consent forms were presented in both English and Spanish. Participants were
notified that their participation was voluntary and that they may decline to participate at any
time. Additionally, participants were told they could skip any question they preferred not to
answer.
Data Collection. Trained, bilingual (Spanish-English) and bicultural graduate and
undergraduate students collected data in either Spanish or English based on participant
preference. After consenting or assenting, all youth and parents completed separate
individual interviews for approximately 60 minutes. Whenever possible, interviews were
26
conducted simultaneously in separate rooms to preserve confidentiality and to minimize time
commitments for the family.
All survey items were read verbatim verbally to minimize any barriers related to
literacy levels, and research assistants entered responses directly into a password-protected
tablet computer within a password protected Qualtrics survey. Similar research studies with
solely Latinx populations have used the method of reading all questionnaires to youth and
parent participants (Leidy et al., 2010; Marshall & Orlando, 2002).
All participants were provided with a list of community mental health resources and
a few psychoeducational pamphlets after the survey.
Measures
Method of translating measures. The Survey Research Center (2016) created a best
practice guide clearly stating the successful aims of cross-cultural translation of surveys:
A successful survey translation is expected to do all of the following: keep the content
of the questions semantically similar; keep the question format similar within the
bounds of the target language; retain measurement properties, including the range of
response options offered; and maintain the same stimulus (Harkness, Edwards,
Hansen, Miller, & Villar, 2010). Based on growing evidence, the guidelines presented
below recommend a team translation approach for survey instrument production
(Harkness, 2008a; Harkness, 2008b; Harkness, Pennell, & Schoua-Glusberg, 2004;
Pan & de la Puente, 2005; Willis et al., 2010). (p. 234)
Considering these best practices for cross-cultural survey translation, the current study used a
team translation method for measures that were not available in Spanish. A team or
committee approach requires individuals to translate independently, followed by reviewing
27
the translations with the translators, and having another member of the team review and
decide when the translation is finalized (Survey Research Center, 2016). The benefits of
utilizing a committee or team approach is in the process of ensuring consensus among
bilingual team members that go beyond the compounding factors (e.g., cultural differences,
unequal fluency in either language used) (Schoua-Glusberg, 2004).
In the current study, pairs of two bilingual and native Spanish-speakers worked
independently to translate each measure. Translators met to discuss translations, resolve
disagreements, come to a consensus and synthesize translations. Difficulties with specific
terms or questions were discussed and consensus reached with the research team of diverse
Latinx bilingual individuals (e.g., Mexican, Guatemalan, Costa Rican). Synthesized
translations were reviewed by a community-partner and member of the CAB who was also a
bilingual and native Spanish-speaker with expertise in working with Latinx children and
families in the community. Additionally, two Latinx, bilingual CAB members assisted in
determining the cultural relevance of some of the measures.
Demographics Questionnaire. The demographics information collected included
age, gender, generation level, years living in the U.S., a proxy for socio-economic status, and
parent marital status.
Family Cohesion. To measure family cohesion, both parents and youth completed
the Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales III (FACES III; Olson, Portner &
Lavee, 1985). The Family Cohesion subscale is a 10-item scale that measures bonds
between family members. Participants were asked to rate each statement with how
frequently these happen for them in their family, with responses ranging from 1 (Almost
never) to 5 (Almost always). Examples of these questions included, “Family members feel
very close to each
28
other” and in Spanish: “los miembros de la familia se sienten muy cercanos unos a otros.”
Scoring consisted of adding all items to create a sum score of cohesion. Olson (1991)
suggested an interpretation in which scores represent four styles of cohesion: Disengaged
(scored between 10-34), Separated (scores between 35-40), Connected (scores between 41-
45), and Very Connected (scores between 46-50). The English version of the FACES III
Cohesion subscale demonstrated adequate reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = .62) with
adolescents and adults (Olson et al. 1985) and with Caucasian and African American
adolescents between the ages of thirteen and fifteen (Cronbach’s alpha = .93) (Cumsille &
Epstein, 1994). The translated FACES III Cohesion scale demonstrated good reliability with
Spanish parents (n = 632; Cronbach’s alpha = .72) (Forjaz, Cano, & Cervera- Enguix, 2002)
and Mexican families (n = 270; Cronbach’s alpha = .70) (Ponce Rosas, Clavelina, Trill,
Irigoyen Coria & Ibanez, 2002). Another study established that the FACES III was
appropriate to use with Mexican-American families, by comparing norms reported by Olson
and colleagues (1983) with their sample of 969 Mexican-American families (n = 318, age
range: 13-19 years) (Flores & Sprenkle, 2014). Internal consistency in the current sample for
youth was α = .87, and for parents was α = .81.
Family Conflict. To assess family conflict, parents and youth completed the Brief
Family Relationships Scale (BFRS; Fok, Allen, Henry, & People Awakening Team, 2014).
The BFRS a 15-item measure adapted from the Relationship dimension of the Family
Environment Scale (Moos & Moos, 1994). This measure has been used across diverse
samples, including tribal communities in the Pacific Northwest (Rasmus et al., 2016), and
Alaska Native youth between the ages of 12 to 18 (Allen et al., 2017). However, it has yet to
be used with Latinx families. Respondents were asked to rate statements about families
using
29
a scale that ranged from 1 to 20, indicating “Not at all,” “Somewhat,” and “A lot.” Example
items from the Family Conflict subscale included, “In our family we argue a lot,” “In our
family we lose our tempers a lot,” and “In our family we often put down each other.” This
measure was translated for the current study. Prior to calculating a scale score, the 20 interval
responses were recoded and grouped based on Fok and colleagues (2014) approach of
grouping to estimated normal distribution (e.g., responses 1-7 =1, 8-11 = 2, 12-15 = 3, 16-18
= 4, 19-20 = 5). All six items on the Family Conflict subscale were reverse coded prior to
analyses and a scale score was calculated by summing these six items. Higher scores on this
scale were indicative of less family conflict, whereas lower scores were indicative of greater
family conflict. Factor analyses revealed close to adequate fit for a second-order 3-factor
model among a sample of 12 to 18-year-old Alaska Native youth (χ2 (101) = 164.9, χ2/df =
1.63, GFI = .93, RMSEA = .05, and CFI = .95) (Fok et al., 2014). Internal consistency for the
Family Conflict subscale for youth was α = .79 and for parents was α = .77.
Youth Depression. The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale- Revised
10-item version (CESD-R-10; Haroz, Ybarra, & Eaton, 2014) for adolescents was used to
measure youth symptoms of depression. The CESD-R-10 was developed to accurately
represent DSM-IV depression criteria and to be a succinct screener among adolescent
samples in the U.S. (Haroz et al., 2014). Respondents were asked to rate how often they
have experienced each symptom. Participants used a 5-point Likert scale that ranged from 0
(Not at all or less than 1 day in the last week) to 4 (Nearly every day for 2 weeks). Example
items included, “My appetite was poor,” “I felt sad,” and “I lost interest in my usual
activities.” This measure was translated into Spanish for the current study. A scale score was
created by averaging all items. A score of 4 or less was considered as not depressed, scores
30
ranging from 5 to 9 were categorized as mildly depressed, scores between 10 and 14 were
considered moderately depressed, and those 15 and above were considered severely
depressed. The measure demonstrated good internal consistency among two national
samples of predominantly Caucasian adolescents between 13 and 18 years of age (Sample 1:
n = 3,777, α = .90; Sample 2: n = 1,150, α = .91). Factor analyses also established a 1-factor
model with good model fit (Sample 1: RMSEA = .06, TLI = .99, CFI = .99; Sample 2:
RMSEA = .08, TLI = .96, CFI = .99) (Haroz et al., 2014). In the current sample, the CESD-
R-10 demonstrated good psychometric properties (α = 80).
Youth Behavior Problems. To assess youth behavior problems parents completed
the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, 1997), which is a 25-item
parent-report measure designed to assess children's strengths and difficulties across a number
of domains. The SDQ is comprised of a total score and individual scores from five subscales:
Emotional Symptoms, Conduct Problems, Hyperactivity/Inattention, Peer-Relationship
Problems, and Prosocial Behaviors. Each subscale is composed of 5 items that parents
ranked using a 3-item Likert scale indicating, 0 (Not true) 1 (Somewhat true), and 2
(Certainly true). Parents were asked to provide responses based on the target child’s behavior
over the last six months or during the school year. Example items included, “Restless,
overactive, cannot stay still for long,” “Many worries or often seems worried,” and “Often
fights with other children or bullies them.” Scoring included reverse scoring some items
(e.g., 1, 11, 14, 21, 25), calculating the sum of all subscales, and then creating a Total
Difficulties score by calculating the sum of the several of the subscales (e.g., Emotional
Symptoms, Conduct Problems, Hyperactivity/ Inattention, Peer-Relationship Problems). A
score above 17 on the Total Difficulties was indicative of a clinically significant level of
child difficulties. The
31
SDQ was available in Spanish and English. As a measure, the SDQ demonstrated good
internal consistency (α = .73) (Goodman, 2001) and was used with Latinx samples (Lakes,
Vargas, Riggs, Schmidt, & Baird, 2011; Valdez, Padilla, Moore, & Magaña, 2013). In the
current study, the SDQ demonstrated good internal reliability (α = .83).
Parent’s Depression Symptoms. Parents completed the Patient Health
Questionnaire (PHQ-9) which measures symptoms of depression by assessing moods and
feelings over the last 2 weeks (Kroenke et al. 2001). Parents rated each item on a 4-point
Likert scale, ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day). A total score was created by
summing all items.
Scores ranged from 0 to 27, in which lower scores indicated lower symptom severity (e.g.,
10-14 represents minor depression symptoms), mid-range scores (e.g., 15-19) indicated
moderately severe depression symptoms, and higher scores indicated severe depression
symptoms (e.g., scores greater than 20). The PHQ-9 was found to be valid among English
and Spanish speaking Latinx (Chavez-Korell, Benson-Flórez, Delgado Rendón, & Farías,
2014; Gilbody, Richards, Brealey, & Hewitt, 2006). Additionally, among a large sample
of Latinx primary care patients, the PHQ-9 demonstrated good internal reliability (α = .80)
(Huang, Chung, Kroenke, Delucchi, & Spitzer, 2005). In the current study, the PHQ-9
demonstrated excellent internal reliability (α = .90).
Youth Exposure to Community Violence. Youth completed the Children’s
Exposure to Community Violence (CECV; Richters & Martinez, 1993). The CECV is an
abbreviated 13-item measure that assesses exposure to community violence around the home
or neighborhood. Respondents were asked to indicate how often they have seen or heard the
event occur using a 4-point Likert scale that ranged from 1 (Never) to 4 (Many times).
Example items included: “I have seen someone being beaten up,” “I have seen somebody get
32
stabbed,” and “I have heard guns being shot.” The CECV was translated into Spanish for the
current study. Although approaches to scoring this measure vary, scoring followed
Thompson and colleagues’ (2007) suggestions of using a global community violence score.
Items about family violence were excluded from analyses. Items were dichotomized by re-
scoring responses that ranged from 2 to 4, as 1 (exposed), and responses that were 1, were
recoded to 0 (not exposed). Researchers dichotomized this measure to understand whether
exposure has occurred (Thompson et al., 2007). All items were summed to indicate total
number of different types of exposure to community violence, with higher scores indicating
more exposure to acts of crime and violence. The measure demonstrated excellent internal
consistency with a large sample of students between the ages of 11 and 13 (Cronbach’s
alpha ranged from .90 to .94) (Ritchers & Martinez, 1990). In the current study, the CECV
demonstrated poor internal reliability (α = .51).
Data Analytic Plan
Mixed Methods Design
The current study used a mixed methods participatory-social justice design, with a
QUAL → quan approach that incorporated exploratory sequential design (Creswell & Plano
Clark, 2017). The mixed method participatory-social justice design emphasizes the marriage
of participatory approaches that integrate collaboration with participants or key-stakeholders
with a central mixed method design (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2017). Efforts to delineate the
utility of this integration to account for the cyclical nature of participatory research have been
well documented (e.g., Ivankova, 2015).
The mixed methods sequential exploratory design is comprised of two phases, a
qualitative phase in which interview data may be collected and analyzed, followed by a
33
quantitative phase (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2017). The second phase is typically informed
by main themes or trends seen in the qualitative data, and is often used to examine whether
the results from the qualitative data generalize to others (Morgan, 2014). Quantitative data in
the second phase may also be used to study relationships, phenomenon or emerging research
questions found from the qualitative data (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2017). As a core design,
the qualitative data informs the construction of quantitative measures, or further exploration
of research questions, yet for mixed methods participatory-social justice designs the
integration of findings also emphasizes the study’s participatory framework (Creswell &
Plano Clark, 2017).
The philosophy of science behind the mixed method research we conducted was
informed by two paradigms, constructivism and postpositivism. Constructivism, often used
in qualitative methods, incorporates assumptions that meaning is generated through
understanding participants’ subjective perspectives (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2017). In the
qualitative phase, our findings were informed by participants’ perspectives in which we
learned from their experiences, while also balancing our own perspectives. Our quantitative
phase was informed by applying a postpositivism approach that is often used in quantitative
methods and focuses on causal thinking, examining how select variables relate, empirical
observation and measurement of constructs, and examining theories (Creswell & Plano
Clark, 2017)
Qualitative Data Analysis
Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim in Spanish shortly after
data collection. Focus groups initially transcribed were checked for accuracy by having a
second Latinx bilingual research assistant listen to the audio-recorded focus group and
34
simultaneously read the transcription to correct any errors. Focus group transcripts were then
translated by two bilingual and bicultural research assistants, initially by one and then
checked by the second. Translation discrepancies between the two translators were discussed
and resolved by eight members of the research team who were all bilingual and bicultural.
The coding team was comprised of one of the PIs for Proyecto HÉROES (a faculty
member with a Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology), two doctoral graduate students, and three of
the trained undergraduate students who helped with translating focus groups. Among the
coding team, one of graduate students and all three undergraduate research assistants were
bilingual in English and Spanish, and identified as Latinx. The coding team analyzed the data
using thematic analysis to generate a coding system of themes emerging from the data
(Braun & Clarke, 2006). The coding team applied an inductive, data-driven approach to
coding, meaning the themes emerged were strongly linked to the data rather than theoretical
understanding (Braun & Clarke, 2006).
Braun and Clarke (2006) described the phases of thematic analysis to involve (1)
familiarizing yourself with your data by transcribing verbal data, reading and re-reading, (2)
creating initial codes by coding all possible themes or patterns, (3) searching for themes
after initial coding and organizing has occurred, (4) reviewing and refining themes, (5)
defining and refining themes, while writing a detailed analysis for each theme, (6) writing-
up results to share the story of your data. Following these stages, our coding team began by
becoming familiar with the data by reading the transcripts several times, thinking about the
content being read and what was important about what each participant was saying. Next,
our team identified concepts and initial themes in one of the focus groups by using open
coding, known as a line-by-line examination of initial categories to capture participant’s
narratives
35
(Strauss, 1987). Coders manually noted any concepts or initial themes in the margins.
Themes that may have been better reflected in Spanish were manually noted in Spanish. The
second PI for Proyecto HÉROES, and CAB member, joined coding team meetings during
open coding as a cultural expert to aid in cultural validity of initial coding themes that were
found. Each transcript was coded through open coding at least twice. Next, the team
continued with a detailed coding process of applying the themes generated in open coding to
three additional focus groups (e.g., Focus Group 2, 3, and 4); each coded by two coders. The
coding team met to establish consensus among pairs of coders, discuss and refine
organization of coding themes into specific codes and sub-codes.
Next, the coding team all re-coded Focus Group 1 with the refined coding scheme.
Coders examined both the English and Spanish transcripts to ensure that the codes fit the
language of our participants. The coding team engaged in an interactive process of going
through all of Focus Group 1 to ensure consistency among coders, discuss any codes that
may not have had enough data or use to support retaining them, and examine codes that
may have required being merged or dropped. This meeting resulted in a revised system of
codes and sub-codes that was then used to re-code all focus groups. The PI for the current
project re-coded all focus group transcripts and met with a Proyecto HÉROES PI and a
graduate student who had divided re-coding all six focus groups to ensure consistency in
coding.
Coding Select Themes. To investigate overarching themes of parent-child
relationships and parenting related to Latinx immigrant families, the MAXQDA retrieved
segments tool was used to isolate all focus group data coded as PARENT AND CHILD, or
ACCULTURATION, and coding was conducted within each code segment. PARENT AND
CHILD was coded when parents spoke about parent-child relationships, communication, or
36
interactions between parents and their youth. ACCULTURATION was coded when the parent
spoke about differences in culture or practices comparing Latino culture to mainstream
American culture. Coding within the PARENT AND CHILD and ACCULTURATION codes
revealed unique community and family experiences related to parenting and parent-child
relationships.
Trustworthiness and credibility. To ensure trustworthiness of the qualitative
analysis the team used various verifications/procedures. The coding team used different
stages of coding the data and memo development, including memos in the data collection
phase, in the phase of processing verbal data into transcripts, and at various phases of
coding. Scholars have recommended using different approaches (e.g., member-checking,
triangulation of data, presenting disconfirming evidence, or asking others to examine the
data) to ensure trustworthiness or qualitative validity and consistency (Braun & Clarke,
2006). In line with this recommendation, the current study used triangulation of data by
ensuring that themes were considered when there multiple individuals shared a similar
experience in the process of developing and applying the coding scheme. Additionally, all
six transcripts were coded by at least two coders for reliability. Lastly, to support the
analysis process and account for dependability of results, the coding team engaged in clear
descriptions of the research/analysis process (e.g., notes during data collection, memos from
focus group interviewers/note-takers, summaries and memos from transcribers, notes on
reflexive coding discussions from coding team meetings, progression of coding drafts, and
clear documentation of coding decisions).
37
Reflexivity. In her book, Ivankova (2015) describes the importance of reflexivity in
action research that occurs throughout the research process. This reflexive practice “occurs
through spirals of reflection and action” (Ivankova, 2015, p.47).
My role as a researcher was often impacted by my worldview and lived experiences.
My worldview is one which is influenced by my intersecting identities as a female and
daughter of two parents who immigrated to the U.S. from Costa Rica and Greece. As a
researcher, I often straddled the line between being an insider and outsider with the
community, and I was very aware of how my bilingualism and appearance was both a
strength and limitation in traversing these roles. Throughout the process, I engaged in
discussions with our research team about being considered an insider or outsider among
certain community groups, and whether other members of our team would better represent
recruitment and data collection efforts. I did not observe any overt indication that my
involvement in recruitment or data collection efforts impacted participants’ behavior, but
continuously reflected on this issue throughout the project.
When coding the focus groups, I was often reminded of similar lived experiences in
my own immigrant family. To address this, I would engage in memo writing about my
reactions, discuss these with the research team, and corroborate all findings with members of
the coding team. Given that during open coding, several of our coders also shared similar
identities of being Latinx and having their own immigration histories; we recognized this as a
strength in our ability to understand the experiences of participants in the focus group, and to
engage in conversations about the importance of not over identifying with the narratives but
reading the transcripts for what they said.
38
It is also important to reflect upon how my role as a researcher may have been
impacted by my professional training in clinical psychology and prior research training
examining family conflict and communication in dyadic and triadic interactions. In my
clinical training, I developed a theoretical orientation of applying systems approaches, in
which I look through the lens of how a child or individual is mutually influenced by multiple
systems (e.g., family, community, school) in which they interact. My clinical training was
also influenced by specializing in both trauma research and clinical service working with
diverse clients, including several Latinx families. My role as a researcher in coding was often
complicated as I was drawn to integrating research I previously read, labeling themes with
clinical terminology I had learned, and processing emerging themes through a systemic lens.
As Ivankova (2015) described, reflexivity is an ongoing process in action research,
and one that I continue to engage in daily.
Quantitative Data Analysis
Prior to conducting analyses to tests hypotheses, assumptions of paired-sample t-test
and multiple regression were examined. Assumptions included normality tests (e.g.,
univariate and multivariate), homoscedasticity, reliability of measures, and collinearity
between variables. Both visual analyses using histograms, and Q-Q plots, as well as Shapiro-
Wilk normality tests were used. The Shapiro-Wilk normality test was the recommended test
(Thode, 2002), especially for samples smaller than 50 (Elliot & Woodward, 2007). All
analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics software version 24.0.
Sample size estimation. Although an a priori power analysis using “G*Power3”
(Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, & Buchner, 2007) is often recommended to determine sample size,
the current study conducted a post hoc power analysis. However, mixed method approaches
39
have been found to be appropriate for exploratory research when working with small sample
sizes (Creswell, Plano Clark, Gutmann, & Hanson, 2003).
Research Question 2. Are there significant discrepancies between parent and youth
reports of family cohesion and conflict?
Hypothesis 1. Parent and youth report of family cohesion and family conflict will be
significantly different.
Data analysis for hypothesis 1. Paired samples t-tests were conducted to examine
whether significant differences between parent and youth report of family cohesion and
conflict were present.
Research Question 3. Are youth self-report of family cohesion and family conflict
significantly related to youth report of depression symptoms and parent report of youth
behavior problems?
Hypothesis 2. Youth self-report of cohesion will be negatively associated with
depression and behavior problems. Whereas, greater family conflict (youth self-report) will
be associated with less depression and behavior problems.
Data analysis for hypothesis 2. Pearson correlations were used to examine the
strength of the associations.
Research Question 4. Are youth reports of community violence exposure
significantly related to their depression and behavior problems?
Hypothesis 3. Exposure to community violence will be positively related to youth
depression and behavior problems.
Data analysis for hypothesis 3. Pearson correlations were used to examine the
strength of the associations.
40
Research Question 5. Is parent depression related to youth reports of family
cohesion and family conflict?
Hypothesis 4 Parents’ depression will be negatively related to youth reports of family
cohesion and associated with greater family conflict (youth report).
Data analysis for hypothesis 4. Pearson correlations were used to examine the
strength of these associations.
Research Question 6. Does parents’ depression moderate the relationship between
family cohesion or family conflict and youth depression?
Hypothesis 5. Parents’ depression will moderate the relationship between family
cohesion and youths’ depression.
Hypothesis 6. Parents’ depression will moderate the relationship between family
conflict youths’ depression.
Data analyses for hypotheses 5 and 6. To investigate these hypotheses, four
hierarchical regression models were constructed, examining these relationships using youth
and parent report of family cohesion and family conflict. In each model, youth age,
cohesion/conflict, and parents’ depression were entered in the first step. In the subsequent
step, an interaction term (e.g., cohesion x parents’ depression, conflict x parents’ depression)
was entered.
CHAPTER THREE: RESULTS
Qualitative
Given the focus on violence, all participants reflected on their experiences of various
stressors; including community violence, interpersonal conflict with peers in the
neighborhood, witnessing or awareness of crime, and gang involvement. Participants shared
41
their personal experiences of interacting with their youth in the face of these stressors.
Detailed below are several salient themes that emerged from participant responses, and
quotations are used to demonstrate themes. Whenever possible, details about the type of
stressor encountered are described or embedded in the quote.
Integrative Theoretical Model of Family Cohesion, Family Conflict, and Parent-Child
Relationships
Based on the findings described below, we developed an integrative theoretical model
of family cohesion, family conflict, and parent-child relationships among a sample of
predominantly Mexican immigrant families dealing with various stressors. This model
integrated consideration of contextual stressors Latinx immigrant parents and/or youth may
encounter in their communities, schools or neighborhoods. The model offered a theoretical
understanding of variables related to parent-child relationships (See Figure 1). More
specifically, the model demonstrated pathways between four common parent-child
interactions amidst stressors (e.g., guidance/support, monitoring, communication and
impotencia) that related to family cohesion and conflict, and in turn to parent-child
relationships. The various constructs of the integrative theoretical model were detailed in the
sections to follow.
Immigrant Parent-Child Interactions in the Face of Stressors
Based on findings from parent narratives, there were four parent-child interactions
immigrant parents expressed when encountering various stressors: 1) guidance/support, 2)
monitoring, 3) communication, and 4) impotencia.
Guidance and Support. Parents identified instances where they provided advice to
their children about taking care of themselves, and reflected how as parents they were aware
42
of the increased risks of being near violence. Parents’ fears about these risks impacted their
providing guidance and messages of self-protection to their youth; but as parents they still
had to grapple with the uncertainty that something bad may happen to their youth despite
this support. For example, amidst a discussion about parents’ fears for youth and community
violence, one mother of two children (ages: 4 and 6 years) shared:
I think that while there is violence on the streets, I don’t think it matters if you had
nothing to do with it. Simply by being there and there being violent people on the
streets and although you don’t do anything, you are in the wrong place and time…As
a mother, I would educate my daughters, teach them morals and respect and show
them how to take care of themselves when they are adolescents. I’ve already talked to
them about it. My worry is that even teaching them that, something bad might happen
to them even though they don’t do anything, all because of the violence on the
streets. [Yo creo que mientras haiga violencia en las calles, no importa si tu no
(24:09) tengas nada que ver. O simplemente por el hecho de estar allí y hay gente
violenta en la calle, y aunque no has hecho nada estas en el lugar y en el momento
no educado también toca también… Para mí como madre sería educar a mis hijas,
enseñarles morales, respeto y que sepan cuidarse a sí mismas para cuando ellas sean
adolescentes que ya no estén a mi lado. Mi preocupación es que habiéndoles
enseñado eso, les pase algo, aunque no hayan hecho ellas algo malo, pero por culpa
de la violencia que está en las calles.]
In this example, the mere knowing about violence in the community was enough to prompt
this mother to preventatively provide guidance. Whereas parents also shared interactions with
their youth in which they provided guidance and support in response to youth communication
43
about encounters they had regarding conflict, bullying, and other risky-behaviors. In these
cases, parents’ worry and awareness about the stressors also impacted their provision of
guidance.
For example, a mother (youth’s age: 10) reflected that her parenting strategies
differed based on the temperament of her two sons-- one a fighter and the other more
“docile,” and the conflict they experienced. This mother described interactions of providing
guidance after her son told her about how he was dealing with discrimination and violence
with a peer at school. In her reflection, she illustrated the emotions that inform her guiding
her son to reciprocate violence by engaging in self-defense, or to access support from adults.
There are times that I tell him, “Don’t hit him. If he hits you, go to the office.” But
there are times that I get so angry about them hitting and bothering him and that he
doesn’t defend himself. I told him, “Son, if they hit you, return the hit because if you
don’t defend yourself, they are going to keep bothering” … I always tell them,
“don’t get involved in problems. If you see that someone is bothering you, back
away and ignore them” ... Don’t pay attention to them. My son is always getting
bothered because he is browner… I mean what can I do? I don’t want to keep telling
him to hit back but if he does, who is going to be expelled? My son? But if he
doesn’t defend himself what are we going to do? That is my fear with him right now.
I’m telling myself, okay, he is only in elementary right now, when he goes to middle
school, if he doesn’t defend himself it’s going to keep on happening.
[Yo hay a veces que si le digo “no le pegues. Si te pega ve a la oficina.” Pero hay a
veces que me lleno de coraje que le peguen y que le estén molestando, y él no se
defienda. Dije “mijo si te pega, regrésale el golpe porque si tú no te defiendes, te van
44
a seguir molestando y te van a encontrar todo el tiempo, te van a seguir molestando”
… Siempre le digo, “no se metan en problemas. Si ven que alguien les está
molestando, retírense, ignórenlos... No les hagan caso.” Pero ya a mi niñas siempre
constantes lo están molestando porque él es más morenito... ¿Qué hago? No le quiero
decir golpéalo y si lo golpea, ¿A quien van a expulsar? ¿A mi hijo? ¿Pero si no se
defiende que vamos a hacer? Ese es mi temor ahorita con él. Digo okay ahorita está
en la primaria, cuando él llegue a la junior, si el no se defiende va a seguir más.]
These interactions led parents to feelings of uncertainty, worry, frustration. Participants’
worry about youth stressors increased as they reflected on youths’ dislike of defending
themselves, the effectiveness of the guidance they provided, and parents’ own cultural
“dichos” or sayings of how conflict lives within a system; these in turn impacted family
relationships. For example, a mother (youth’s age: unknown) stated:
I have always taught my children that if someone does something to them, that they
tell me or some other adult and for them not to do anything. I don’t know if I made a
mistake with my oldest son since he doesn’t want to defend himself. He doesn’t
know how to defend himself. I just don’t know sometimes I think it was a mistake.
And sometimes, I think that, and I tell them “no mijo because violence will bring
more violence, instead tell me” but I know that he stays quiet sometimes…now that
my son left well I am left with the worry, I say now what are they going to do to
him.” I mean yeah, I am no longer calm. But also, one as a mother too, it affects the
whole family… In Mexico, they would apply this saying a lot "the strong one lives
until the weaker one wants them to” … it is what I don’t want, well for me it doesn’t
take
45
much to tell my son “defend yourself” but for me it isn’t right, I think that it isn’t the
best solution, I would want other solutions.
[Siempre a mis niños les ha ensenado que, si alguien les hace algo, estos me digan a
mi o cualquier adulto que ellos no hagan nada. Yo no sé si hice un error con mi niño
más grande, el, como él no quiere defenderse. No sabe defenderse. No sé a veces
pienso que fue un error. Y a veces pienso que, y yo les digo ‘no mijo porque violencia
va a traer más violencia, mejor dime.’ Pero yo sé que él se queda callado a veces…
Ahora que se fue mi hijo pues yo me quedo con apuro, yo digo ahora que les van a
hacer. Ósea ya, ya no estoy tranquila, claro que primero ellos. Pero uno como madre
también, afecta toda la familia…en México se aplicaba mucho el dicho ese que
tenemos de que ‘el valiente vive hasta que el cobarde quiere’… Es lo que yo no
quiero, ósea yo a mí que me cuesta a decirle a mi hijo “defiéndete” pero yo para mí
no está bien, yo pienso que eso no es la mejor solución, yo quisiera otras soluciones.]
Parents also reflected on times when their guidance seemed to be ineffective and
seemed to impact the parent-child relationship. For example, a mother (Child’s age:
unknown) shared: “I always tell him ‘no you shouldn’t use violence, you have to talk first
with your teacher or tell me.’ So, one time they were bothering him a lot, until it got to a
point where he told me that he didn’t love me because I didn’t believe him, because I let
them do what they were doing to him and I didn’t believe him.” [“Siempre le digo ‘no, tu no
debes de usar violencia, tú tienes que hablar primero con tu maestra o decirme a mí’
entonces un tiempo le estuvieron molestando mucho, hasta que llego al grado que me dijo
que ya no me quería, porque yo no le creía aunque porque yo dejaba que hicieran lo que
hicieran y yo no le creía, dijo que yo no lo creía.”]. This mother verbalized the difficulties
46
that arise when providing guidance may not be a sufficient strategy for youth to resolve their
stressors, and the sense of mistrust youth may feel when their parent does not demonstrate
an understanding of the severity of the situation.
Parents understanding of the stressors youth encountered was often highlighted as
youth communicated about how they implemented parents’ guidance and as parents
responded by getting even more involved. For example, a mother shared a narrative about
her need to get involved with the school because her son (age 5) defended other children
using the self-defense suggestions his mother provided. This mother illustrated the
difficulties Latinx parents often face in their efforts to provide guidance to their youth, while
simultaneously navigating a school system and at times, confrontation with other parents. As
a mother, she got involved in talking to the teachers, the principal, and her son to understand
her son’s involvement in the conflict with a peer. After communicating dissatisfaction with
school monitoring to prevent this occurrence, she was confronted by the other child’s parent.
For example, she stated:
I told the principal, how can you tell me that my son is a bully when two, three people
have told me that the kid who hit my son was the school’s bully? Why didn’t you do
anything about that boy?...Then the mom came to me from the back and told me “if
your son hits my son again then I will fix things with you.” I looked at her and said
“are you serious? Are you talking to me like that here at the school, seriously?” She
said “yes.” “I’m going to do you a favor let’s go outside the school and let’s talk.
Because at the school I will not give a bad example of fighting. They come here to
learn, not to fight. But now if you want to solve it, if you think that you are going to
47
solve this problem by fighting let’s go outside the school... Now I see why your kid
is the school’s bully. Because you are teaching him that.”
[Le dije a la principal, “¿como me puedes decir que mi hijo es un bullí cuando a mí
me acaban de decir dos tres personas que el que le pego mi hijo era el bullí de la
escuela? ¿Porque no hiciste tu nada de ese niño?” …Entonces la mama me llego por
atrás y me dijo, “si tu hijo vuelve a golpear al mío pues yo me voy arreglar contigo.”
Le dije “¿En serio? ¿Me estás hablando así aquí en la escuela, enserio?” Dice “sí.”
“Te voy a hacer un favor vamos fuera de la escuela, vamos a ver. Porque yo en la
escuela no voy a dar el ejemplo de estar peleando. Aquí vienen a aprender, no a
pelear. Pero ahora si quieres resolver, tú piensas que se va a resolver este problema
con golpeas vámonos afuera de la escuela. … Ahora veo porque tu hijo es bullí en la
escuela. Porque tú le estas ensenando eso.”]
This mother highlighted the importance of considering the implications of modeling violence
while providing support to her son. Parents emphasized their understanding that violence
was being taught within families and then extended out to schools and communities.
Monitoring. A second theme that emerged in relation to parent-child interactions was
parents’ experiences of and decisions around monitoring their children. Based on participant
responses, monitoring consisted of supervising, watching youth directly, or having
conversations with youth about their activities, whereabouts and which peers they spent time
with. Parents discussed parental monitoring as strategies to help youth stay out of trouble and
prevent youth involvement in gangs, community violence, and crime. A mother reflected on
how her parenting was impacted by living in a mostly Latinx neighborhood in which the
neighborhood youth her son interacted with were minimally monitored. She verbalized the
48
struggles Latinx immigrant parents face in trying to provide sufficient monitoring, the fear of
what youth may be exposed to, and the larger struggle of dealing with other parents’
parenting practices. This mother reflected on her interactions with her son (age 8) in the
neighborhood park who was exposed to another boy’s private parts and nude pictures:
I am very worried because there are kids that, I suppose aren’t cared for well enough
by the parents or they can’t because they work or have older siblings…It’s just that
you have to be there all the time but that is impossible. At what time am I going to
make food? …
I can see [my son] from the window of the house and when I see that something is
wrong then I go down… they are very young kids that are already exposed to very
ugly things…We are always on top of them. And sometimes my son tells me, “why
are you always here? You don’t let me play, look at my friends, where are their
moms? They don’t even come and watch them.” I tell him, “you know that they
don’t worry about them but I do worry…What if… someone hits you or kidnaps you
and I don’t notice. That’s why I have to be watching where you are, who you are
with, what you are doing.”
[Estoy muy preocupada porque hay niños que, yo supongo que no están bien
cuidados por los papas o no pueden porque trabajan o tienen hermanos mayores…
es que tienen que estar usted todo el tiempo allí’ pero eso es imposible. ¿A qué hora
voy a hacer la comida? Yo lo puedo ver desde la ventana de la casa y cuando veo que
algo está mal pues me bajo…son niños muy chiquitos pues y ya están dispuestos a
cosas muy feas. Yo siempre ando atrás de los míos y se por dónde andan... Y a veces
me dice mi hijo “¿porque siempre estás aquí, no me dejas jugar, mira mis amigos,
49
sus mamas ¿dónde están? Ni siquiera vienen a verlos.” Y yo le dijo, “sabes que ellas
no se preocupan por ellos. Pero yo me preocupo… Que tal si…alguien te pega o te
roba y yo no ve voy a dar cuenta. Así que tengo que estar mirando donde andas, con
quien estas, que andas hacienda.”]
Youth frustration with parental monitoring was a barrier identified by parents, as was
evident from the above quote. These interactions about monitoring were even more
complicated as youth noticed differences in parenting approaches and parents grappled with
their fears of community danger or what may happen to their youth.
Parents felt that using positive practices, such as parental monitoring at an early age
with their youth instilled good values, facilitated more time together as a family and
positively impacted parent-child relationships. For example, a widowed mother of two boys
and one girl (ages: unknown) described how from an early age she would “tell them this is
your life, this is your body, you have to take care of it for the rest of your life because you
are responsible for yourselves… From a young age, they were not standing in corners with
friends, I did not let them go out, no…Wherever we went, the whole family went,
everywhere. They never went alone with friends… from the beginning as they say since they
are little, they take shape.” [“Les decía este es su vida, este es su cuerpo, lo tienen que cuidar
para toda su vida porque ustedes, responden por ustedes…Desde chiquitos no tenía en
esquinas parados con amigos, nos los dejaba salir, no . . . Donde íbamos iba toda la familia,
a todos lados. Nunca iban ellos solos con los amigos… como dicen desde chiquitos, se van
este haciendo.”]. Parents recognized the importance of starting these parenting practices
when their children were young. Parents also discussed how they noticed long-lasting
50
benefits of closely monitoring in regard to family cohesion and parent-child relationships.
For example, one mother described parenting her daughter (age: unknown):
We always take her to school, we always pick her up, always when arriving at the
house…we were really vigilant after them. Until now the oldest daughter that is 21
years old is still with us. Until now I still see that she is obedient with what we tell
her. In reality, they see that we are by their side, we find a way to treat them right,
with care.
[Siempre la llevamos a la escuela, siempre la vamos a recoger, siempre llegando a la
casa… sí que estemos al pendiente de ellos. Hasta ahorita, hasta la mayor que tiene
21 años todavía pues está con nosotros. Hasta ahorita todavía la veo que, que nos
obedece en lo que, le decimos. Ellos ven realmente que estamos al pie de ellos,
buscamos la manera como este, como, como tratarlos verdad con, con cariño.]
Parents emphasized the importance of their youth experiencing a sense of support, knowing
that their parents were nearby and monitoring them.
Communication. Based on participants’ responses, communication between parents
and their youth was a third common interaction in the face of various stressors. Parents
discussed values of open communication and instilling trust as a cornerstone of their
parenting. For example, a mother (youth’s age: 20) shared: “I think that the best as a parent
is good communication and trust…because if we do not trust them, we do not communicate
with our children, who is going to guide them?” [“Yo pienso que lo mejor de un padre es la
buena comunicación y la confianza…Porque si no les tenemos confianza, no los
comunicamos con nuestros hijos, quien los va a guiar?”]. This mother was referring to other
parents who expected the schools to discipline and manage their children. However, other
51
parents discussed their fears that delinquent peers would influence their children,
especially if they did not build a strong, trusting parent-child relationship with open
communication.
A father of four (ages: 3, 7, 11, and 13) reflected the value of open
communication and trust even as it deviated from his upbringing:
I think that many of us in Mexico had an education with a lot of violence, with
very little education from our parents that in some part was their way, that treated
us bad, beating us. What we have tried ourselves to do is to break the chain of
abuse.
Obviously, as parents we must sometimes be strong with the kids, talk to them
strongly, but not with the violence we were treated with. Instead to have a lot of
communication with them, to try and explain the most of what they want to learn, to
ask them, give them trust, make them value the strength of their mother and father,
that they love each other I think it is one of the most important principals.
[Pienso que muchos de nosotros en México tuvimos una educación con mucha
violencia, con muy poca educación de nuestros padres que a lo mejor era su modo de
ellos, que nos trataron mal, golpes lo que sea. Lo que hemos nosotros tratado de
hacer es romper esa cadena de malos tratos. Obvio uno como padre también tiene
que a veces ser fuerte con los hijos, hablarles fuerte, pero no con la violencia que nos
trataron a nosotros. Sino con tener mucha comunicación con ellos, este tratar de
explicarles lo más que pueda uno de lo que ellos quieran saber, este preguntarles,
darles la confianza, hacerles que valoren el esfuerzo de su madre y de su padre, este
que se quieran entre ellos pienso que es una de las bases principales.]
Parenting was impacted by Latinx immigrant parents’ past, as parents had to intentionally
52
work to break the cycle of violence and parent in a manner that would instill a sense of
53
communication and trust, closeness between family members, and overall strong parent-child
relationships.
Parents provided examples of ways they incite communication to strengthen the
parent-child relationship. One mother (child’s age: unknown) offered advice as she
shared the importance of parental involvement:
When they get home from school ask, “What did you do at school, what happened?”
and little by little they will start telling you what happened to them at school and you
won’t have to dig for it yourselves…there they will tell you and maybe there you will
find out if they are being bullied. With good words, you all can bring out the truth.
[Llegan de la escuela, pregúntenles, “¿Que hiciste en la escuela? ¿Que paso?” Y
poco a poco ellas les van diciendo que les paso en la escuela y no le están
escarbando ustedes...ya allí ellas le van a decir y quisas allí se dan cuenta si alguien
les está haciendo bullying. Con buenas palabras ustedes les pueden sacar la verdad.]
Parent also discussed how in the face of stressors, they commonly had trouble with
communication with their youth. One common communication difficulty that arose from
participant responses was the theme we termed youth callado, reflecting the notion of youth
not expressing themselves or refraining from sharing information with their parents.
A mother described her experience with her daughter (age: 15), who struggled with
bullying for many years and had depression. This mother shared instances where she would
arrive at school and see her daughter curled up and crying, suggesting the importance of
relying on non-verbal cues parents use for information about their youth’s stressors. In this
example, the mother described how her daughter would not communicate what was going on
at school:
54
I got to the school, the ladies were gossiping by the tree…She would not tell me,
“Mom this is a problem, mom.” No no no. My daughter is very quiet, she would keep
it in. Day after day after day she didn’t want to go and it wasn’t because there were
problems at home...I wouldn’t want to go either if they kept attacking and attacking
and attacking me all the time.
[Llegue a la escuela, las viejas estaban de chismosas al lado del árbol...Ella no me
decía, “Mami este es problema, mami.” No no no. Mi hija bien callada, se lo
guardaba. Mi hija ya no quiso ir a la escuela. Día tras día tras día, y no era porque
había problemas en la casa…Yo tampoco quisiera ir si me estaban ataque y ataque y
ataque todos el tiempo.]
The relationship between providing guidance/support and parent-child
communication was apparent as parents reflected on youth fears that contributed to youth
not sharing information. In particular, a mother who typically would respond to her youth’s
stressors by providing support and addressing the stressor with the school directly, discussed
an instance when her son (Age: unknown) came home annoyed because a boy sprayed
deodorant in his eyes while on the bus. As she reflected on the interaction, she shared that
she was bothered by the situation and frustrated that she cannot be with her son all the time.
The following quote exemplified this mother’s understanding as to why her son does not
share more with her:
It is the first time well that he tells me, that this happened, I always talk to him and
tell him to tell me but, unfortunately at this age kids are very scared because they
know that if they are going to tell us something and one talks, then the people find
out
55
and the kids find out and they also begin to say “you’re a snitch”, “oh you went and
told your mommy” and I know that my son is afraid because of that.
[Es la primera vez bueno que él me dice, que paso esto, yo no sé, yo siempre hablo
con él y le digo ‘dime’ pero, desgraciadamente a esta edad los niños tienen mucho
miedo porque ellos saben que sí que van a decirle a uno y uno habla, ya la gente se
da cuenta y los niños se dan cuenta y empiezan también a “ay usted es un chismoso,”
“ay, fuiste a mami a decirle.” Y yo sé que mi niño tiene miedo por eso.]
For this mother, she was faced with managing her emotional reactions of wishing she could
provide support or increase her monitoring, and the reality that protecting her son from this
type of conflict was difficult. Like others, this mother’s frustration about youth callado and
what she manageably could do to support her son were present. Similar frustrations about
parent-child communication and parenting experiences were exemplified in another mother’s
example with her teenage daughter (Age: unknown). While sharing her experience with the
focus group she banged her hand on the table and stated:
I told her "that is enough, okay, you know what? Something is going on with you
and you are going to tell me why you are so mad with the world. I don’t do anything
to you, I ask you a question and you answer angrily at me. I am your mother, I must
help you, and I can see that things aren't okay. What is happening to you?" She
didn’t want to say anything to me, she didn’t want to tell me. At last, I told her,
“today we aren't going to do anything, we have to talk and resolve this because I
don’t feel happy that you are responding mean to everyone else. I see that no one
offends you. No one says anything to you and you still answer mean.”
56
[Le dije “¿sabes qué? A ti algo te pasa. Me lo vas a decir, porque estas corajuda con
todo el mundo. Yo no te hago nada, te hago una pregunta y también a mí me
contestas mal. Yo soy tu mama, yo te tengo que ayudar, y yo veo que las cosas no
están no se ven bien. ¿Que es lo que está pasando?” Y entonces ya este no me quería
decir. No me quería decir. Al fin este le dije “hoy no vamos hacer nada tenemos que
hablar y resolver esto porque yo no me siento a gusto de que tu anda, contestando
muy mal a las demás personas. Yo veo que nadie te ofende. Que nadie te dice nada y
tu contesta mal.”]
This mother’s experience of communication with her daughter was marked by distance and
conflict, and in turn related to the mother’s own frustration. Communication for this parent
and her daughter relied on the mother reflecting her daughter’s expression of anger and
pointing out these patterns. By confronting her daughter, reminding her of a parent’s
responsibility to provide support, she was attempting to resolve the challenge of parent-child
communication, youth callado, and trying to create a space for her daughter to share her
experience.
Impotencia. Based on parents’ reports, a fourth common theme of parent-child
interactions emerged: impotencia, defined as lack of parenting self-efficacy or hopelessness.
For example, one mother expressed the sentiment of impotencia or hopelessness regarding
parenting efforts to address children hitting each other: “Me telling my kid not to hit others
doesn’t help if all the other kids are going to be hitting each other. Or if the parents are not
going to do anything. That’s what worries me. That I don’t know what I’m going to do.”
[“Que gano yo si le digo a mi niño no pegues, si todos los demás niños van a pegar. O si no
van hacer nada los papas. Es lo que me preocupa a mí. Que no sé qué voy hacer.”]. This
57
parent’s helplessness is fueled by recognizing the difficulties of raising her child with a
certain set of values-to not be violent- that may not be mirrored by those of other parents.
Additionally, parents grappled with their worries about things that were out of their control
and the effectiveness of their parenting. In the face of various stressors, parents reflected on
their fears and parenting self-efficacy of how their parenting strategies may be effective or
not in protecting their youth from poor outcomes. Even among neighborhoods populated
with other Latinx families, parents reflected their fears about how other parents socialize
their youth to harass children and be aggressive. When sharing these fears and concerns for
other parents’ socializing practices, parents felt less efficacious in their own parenting:
I saw that even the parents incite their children to bully. So, I said, if the parents
themselves do that, how are we going to teach our children to be respectful children?
And that is my fear. Because maybe I can teach my daughter, you teach her to be
defenseless to face those kids who are being taught to be aggressive in their homes.
That is my fear, and I do not want my daughter to grow up being aggressive towards
others. I don’t want that because maybe one day when she is all grown up she might
end up in a coffin, and I don’t want that.
[Yo veo que hasta los papas incitan a los niños a este al bullying. ¿Entonces digo si
los papas hacemos eso, entonces como vamos a educar a unos niños que sean niños
con respeto? Y ese es mi miedo. Porque tal vez yo pueda educar a mi niña, pero a la
niña la apoyas ser indefensa, para poder enfrentar a esos niños que los están
educando con dientes en su casa. Y ese es mi miedo, y yo no quiero que mi niña
crezca este siendo agresiva ni agraviando a las demás personas. Oses no quiero eso
58
porque tal vez cuando ella se grandevalla a terminar en una caja de muerto, y yo no
quiero eso.]
This mother discussed the power of fear. For her, she drew a relationship between being
aggressive and ending up in a coffin, suggesting the intensity of fear she experienced when
considering probable risky outcomes for her daughter. She felt helpless that she could not be
with her daughter to protect her because she has to work, but also recognized that in teaching
her daughter to not be aggressive, she may be setting her up to be defenseless when
encountering conflict.
Family conflict and distancing. Participants described family conflict and distancing as
they reflected on parent-child and family interactions. A source of conflict parents discussed
was in handling communication about adverse experiences from parents’ upbringing and
their concerns about sustaining these patterns within their families. Parenting involved
navigating the burden of one’s own trauma, recognizing differences in parents’ compared to
youths’ upbringings, and handling disagreements. A mother described her disagreement with
her husband sharing his difficult upbringing of working as an orphan at a young age with
their son (age: 21). She communicated her worry about what this does for their relationships:
A lot of times one drags the things we carry, like they say, since childhood… [My
husband] has always told to my son, “me at your age, I would do this.” I told [my
husband], “you do not have to make him drag it too, what you suffered.” I told [my
husband], “that is your problem, you are always telling him. ‘I did not have this, I do
not have it, you have to be like me.’ That is wrong.” …One day my son told my
husband, “it is not my fault you were alone. For you to be telling me, ‘no at your age I
did this, and that and that.’ That is how you had to live, you had to live like that but
59
not me.” So those are patterns that we also carry and if [our children] do not have a
place to have fun, they do not have a place to do good things.
[Muchas veces se arrastran las cosas que traen como dicen desde niños… [Mi
esposo] siempre le ha dicho a mi hijo, “yo a tu edad ya hacia esto.” Le dije “pero es
que no tiene porque arrástralo, que tu sufriste.” Le dije “allí está un problema tuyo,
siempre estás diciéndole. ‘Yo no tuve esto, yo no lo tengo yo, tú tienes que ser como
yo.’ Eso está mal.” …Un día le dijo mi hijo a mi esposo, “no es mi culpa que tu
hagas estado solo. Para que me estés poniendo, ‘no yo a tu edad hacia esto, y esto y
esto.’ Así te toco vivir a ti, a ti te toco vivir, pero a mí no.” Entonces son patrones
que ya los traemos también. Y si [nuestros niños] no tienen en que divertirse, no
tienen en que hacer cosas sanas.]
As this mother reflected on this conflict, she expressed her worry that not having a place to
have fun at home is how children “lose their way.” Mexican immigrant parent-child
relationships may be challenged by a constant reminder of parent’s adversities, sacrifices, or
direct comparison to how upbringings may be different between parents and youth.
Parents’ descriptions of family conflict often incorporated a multitude of stressors,
including time, parenting stress, maneuvering work schedules and roles within a family, as
well as communication difficulties that played into family conflict. For example, one mother
shared how she has learned from other people’s mistakes of the impact of family conflict.
This mother shared the following statement about her nephew and his parents:
The [mom] was stressed at home… [the father] wanted his free time because it was
his days off. In the end, they did not agree in any form of communication. When the
parents would start to fight, the child would cover his ears and he wanted to go to the
60
street. He didn’t want to listen, he perhaps wanted the time and attention with his
parents but they would fight, so instead he would go out into the street. So that
resulted, he was about ten when he began to go out into the street with his friends,
going to the park around the corner from his house and he began to get involved with
the gangs so much that he began to get involved with drugs later on…At fifteen or
fourteen years-old, the girlfriend was 13 and he got her pregnant. At fifteen he was
sent to jail. Now he is eighteen and he has been to jail five times. The other brother is
thirteen years-old and he is equally involved in the gangs and the drugs and the bad
thing is that he has tried to kill the enemy gangs. I say that the violence began with
their parents, at home.
[La [madre] estaba estresada de la casa… [el padre] quería también su tiempo libre
porque eran sus días de descanso. Total de que ellos no se acordaban en nada en la
comunicación. Cuando los padres se empezaban a pelear, el niño se tapaba los oído
y se quería ir a la calle. No quería escuchar, el quería a la mejor tener la atención y
el tiempo con los padres pero era pleito, entonces el mejor se salía a las calles. Se
eso se genero, el tenía como diez años de edad cuando empezaba ya a salirse con los
amiguitos al parque de la esquina de su casa y allí se empezó a involucrarse en las
pandillas tanto que después empezó con drogas… A sus quince años- catorce años,
la noviecita 13 años y embarazo a la novia. A los quince años el callo la primera vez
a la cárcel. Ahorita tiene 18 años y a caído cinco veces a la cárcel. Y el orto
hermanito tiene trece años y esta igual, metido en pandillas y en drogas y lo malo es
que ya a intentado matar con las pandillas contrarias. Digo, la violencia empezó en
sus padres, en el hogar.]
61
As vocalized by this mother, family conflict led to more distanced parent-child
relationships and youth turning to the streets to escape the conflict. For this family, the
stakes of strained parent-child relationships that resulted from the conflict were high, given
the youth’s deleterious outcomes. Mexican immigrant parents shared their perspectives of
the role of parenting and parent-child relationships, recognizing this larger issue that was
previously mentioned- violence begins at home.
In higher conflict examples, parents involved authorities. For example, a mother of
three shared a story in which she relied on authorities to address conflict that marked her
relationship with one of her sons who was now eighteen:
I locked my son up in prison for the first time. My son was in jail because of me. He
started yelling at me in the house. He hit and broke the door. I called the police to
come get him, when he was taken away. He arrived at juvenile hall…They kept them
busy, things that my son did not want to do at home… For me my son was safer
because he didn’t listen to me, and we were already confronting each other and it was
a horrible thing, I would prefer for him to be locked up.
[Yo metí por primera vez a mi hijo a la cárcel. Mi hijo toco la cárcel por mí. Empezó
detonando la casa, le metió una, un golpe a la puerta, me rompió la puerta. Llame a
la policía, vengan por él, cuando a él se lo llevaron, llego a la juvenil...Allí los
mantenían ocupados. Cosa que mi hijo no quería ser en mi casa… Yo para mí, mi
hijo estaba más seguro, porque como a mí no me hacía caso, y ya estábamos
confrontándolos era una cosa horrible, yo lo preferiría adentro.]
In high conflict situations, reliance on judicial or police sources became the solution. Parents
reflected helplessness in their parenting efforts, and extreme difficulty in their relationships
62
with their youth. As evident in this parent’s narrative she believed in the justice system, more
so than in her own parenting to keep her son safe. She reflected on how her decision to
intervene with police strengthened her relationship with her son, because he learned values of
respect while incarcerated.
Parents also reported situations in which youth threatened to or did involve
authorities such as police or child protective services. Youth would threaten to call the police
in response to being told to do something they didn’t want to do. Parents’ responses to these
threats included being fearful that youth would actually call, threatening that the police
would get the child to do the unwanted task, or expressing concerns that the police would
take a parent away. One parent shared an example he heard from another father about a
parenting interaction that illustrated this conflict:
So, he said that one day his wife told him, “My daughter is being rebellious, every
time I discipline her or something she tells me that if I discipline her she is going to
call the police, and she grabs the telephone.” She said, “I don’t tell her anything
anymore.” One day the man said, “I arrived, arrived angry and I don’t know what she
was doing, a tantrum and I grabbed her and told her, ‘what is going on?’ ‘If you
scream at me,’ [his daughter] said, ‘if you discipline me,’ she said, ‘I will call the
police.’ No I gave her a little push and I passed her the telephone, ‘call the police’ I
told her, ‘I am going to go to jail but you will leave my house, I’ll let the government
do what they want with you, I don’t want you.’”
[Entonces dice que un día su esposa un día le dijo, “me dijo, mi hija se está poniendo
rebelde, cada que yo la regano o algo me dice si me reganas voy a llamar a la
policía dice y agarra el teléfono.” Y todo dijo, “yo ya no le digo nada.” Un día dijo
el señor,
63
“llegue encabronado y no sé qué estaba haciendo berrinche y que agarro y le dije, “y
tú que tienes?” “Si me gritas” dijo, “si me reganas” dijo, “voy a llamar a la
policía.” No yo le di un pachoncito así dijo y que le paso el teléfono, “llámale a la
policía” le dije, “yo me voy a ir a la cárcel, pero tú de mi casa te me vas, ahí que el
gobierno haga contigo lo que quiera, yo no te quiero.”]
Family conflict of this caliber challenged parents’ abilities in setting limits, disciplining their
children, and recognizing rebellious behavior that could have serious implications for the
family. In addition to handling family conflict around discipline, parents had to negotiate the
power imbalance that may have occurred as youth express conflict by threatening to involve
police authorities. Concurrently, the parent-child relationship was strained by parents’
responses of explaining potential consequences of incarceration that may have resulted from
involving police.
Family cohesion. As with family conflict and distancing, family cohesion was
described in relation to several of the other key themes previously explored. Family cohesion
was identified as closeness in emotional and relational bonds between family members.
Parents shared their perspectives of prioritizing closeness within family relationships. One
mother (youth ages unknown) provided a good example of this:
I think because the children always need someone to pay attention to them so that
they feel that security in themselves of someone that listens to them and loves
them… sometimes I stop cooking and I prefer to buy food to be with them…I give
them affection and they don’t say anything back I say, “I know that something is
wrong, your face tells me everything”, “I want to talk with you and we are going to
sit and
64
relax” and that’s when they start to express how they’re feeling about what’s
happening and a lot of times because of that I feel happy to have talked with them.
[Todos los dias necessitan que uno este al pendiente de ellos para que ellos sientan
esa seguridad de en ellos mismos de que halla alguien que los escucha que los
quiere…yo dejo de aveces de cocinar prefiero comprar comida para estar con ellos…
les ago carinos y ni dicen nada. Yo les digo “yo se que si les pasa algo, su cara me lo
dice todo,” “yo quiero hablar con ustedes vamos a sentarnos vamos a relajarnos” y
es cuando empiesan a expresar lo que sienten lo que esta pasando y por eso muchas
veces me siento—despues de que pasa eso me siento feliz estando haber hablado con
ellos.]
This notion of emotional closeness as representative of family cohesion was illustrated as this
single mother reflected on the interactions with her youth (two sons and a daughter; ages
unknown):
Have patience, calmness, and more than anything talk to them. “How do you feel?”
“How was your day?” “You don’t want to talk right now? Okay, later then.” “In a
moment, I will talk to you, in a moment I’ll talk.” That was my job, like a mother and
father. I learned to know the three of them. If I cried, one of them cried, because I
knew that he was crying with me. If I got mad, he knew that he made me mad. And
with my other child, it is the same. But that is our job, to learn to know the
personalities of our children, because we are all different, and we cannot treat them
the same.
[Tenerles paciencia, y calma, y más que nada platicar con ellos. “Cómo te sientes?”
“Como te fue?” “No quieres hablar ahorita bueno, al ratito.” “En un momento
65
hablo contigo, un momento hablo.” Ese fue mi trabajo, como madre y padre.
Entonces yo aprende a conocer a los tres. Si yo lloraba, uno lloraba, porque el que
yo sabía que si lloraba conmigo. Si yo me enojaba ya sabía que pues él me hacía
enojar. Y con la otra pues también igual. Pero eso es el trabajo de nosotros,
aprender a conocer el carácter de nuestros hijos, porque todos somos diferentes, y no
podemos tratarlos a todos igual.]
These various examples allude to the protective role that family cohesion can have on parent-
child relationships, especially when raising youth in the face of various stressors.
Parent-Child Relationships. Parents highlighted the importance of parent-child
relationships as they discussed interactions they have had with their youth, considered their
upbringing and reflected on parenting ideals. While discussing their role in creating positive
parent-child relationships, parents reflected on their own experiences with their parents,
recognizing the long-term impact of how they were parented with violence, abuse, or harsh
parenting; and making a point to change these experiences in their relationship with their
child. For example, a mother of three (ages: unknown) stated:
I do not hit them, my father would hit us. But I said, no I will not hit them, because
they only have their mother, and where were they going to seek comfort. Usually the
children seek comfort from their mom or the dad, right? And I would say, they do not
have a father, so that is why, I made a change there, one has to learn to know their
children in order to coexist with them.
[Yo no golpes, mi papa si con golpes. Pero yo dije no yo no les voy a golpear porque
nomas tienen mama y en donde se van a refugiar. Usualmente los hijos se refugian en
la mama o en el papa, ¿Verdad? Y yo decía estos no tienen un padre, entonces por
66
eso, allí vuelvo hacer un cambio, uno tiene que aprender, a conocer a sus hijos para
convivir con ellos.]
This mother recognized the importance of her role as a single mother to provide support and
comfort for her youth, so they do not seek this support elsewhere. One goal of trusting and
open parent-child communication for Mexican parents is for youth to seek support within the
home rather than from others. For example, a father drew from his own upbringing,
challenged by being raised around violence and being removed from the home at 12-years of
age, to reflect on the importance of closeness between parents and children, open
communication, and creating an environment where youth feel supported:
The reality is that it will help your children, and these are teachings that [parents]
teach from childhood. That is, many of our traditions that children learn from the
time that they are in the bellies of our mothers... The teachings to begin in our
homes…if young boys and young girls see violence in their homes, they are also
going to see it in the community, but also it depends how one raises their kids. It’s
how many adolescents are going to make their decisions...All it takes is simple being
there for them with an open door because if we lie to our kids they are no longer
going to ask us questions. And if you don’t get involved in your children’s lives,
someone else is going to involve them.
[La realidad que, si les va a ayudar a sus hijos, y son enseñanzas que enseñan desde
niños. Este muchas de las tradiciones de nosotros es que los niños aprenden desde
que están en el estómago de nuestras madres… Este son las enseñanzas si empiezan
en la casa de nosotros… si los muchachos o las muchachas ven violencia en su casa,
también lo van a ver en la comunidad, e pero también depende como uno crea a los
67
hijos es como las decisiones que muchos muchachos van a tomar. Es simplemente
estar puerta abierta con ellos porque si nosotros les mentimos a los a nuestros niños
ya no nos van a hacer preguntas. Y si usted no se involucra en la vida de sus hijos
alguien más los va a involucrar a ellos.]
This parent illustrated the tension between modeling lessons (both positive and negative) in
the home through the parent-child relationship and interactions that later impact youth’s
decision making, especially around issues of violence, and seeking support. It is evident that
this parent recognized the crucial role of parents in being engaged in their youth’s lives, in
fostering closeness and cohesion, to prevent youth from turning to other places to seek this
type of support.
Parents explained the significance of parent-child relationships and the value of
supporting youth starting at an early age. Parents discussed the challenges of balancing work,
time, and their attention for their children, as well as recognizing that their absence in
relationships with their children runs the risk of youth being exposed to bad influences from
peers, gangs, or addictions. In response to parents sharing these concerns, a father of four
children (ages: 3, 7, 11, and 13) reflected on his perspective of the role of parents:
It’s one very important base, the children from an early age in their house, to know
what the home is, the support, to be told, “I love you, I love you,” and to support
them in their homework and to lend your attention more than anything.
[Es una base bien importante, los niños que desde chiquitos en su casa, que sepan los
que es el hogar, el apoyo, que les digan “te quiero, te amo,” y que les apoyen en sus
tareas y que les presten atención más que nada.]
68
This father verbalized the responsibility parents have in being able to foster interactions that
strengthen the parent-child relationship. Parents described everyday interactions,
communication, modeling, and developing a sense of closeness that start when youth are
young to strengthen these relationships. In doing so, parents recognized their imperfections,
the barriers of time, energy, and balancing other stressors, but nonetheless shared the value of
these relationships with their children.
Mental Health. Parents identified mental health challenges that impacted parenting
and interactions with their youth, including providing guidance or support and
communication. Parents reflected on understanding the adversities children face, the
importance of empathy and communication about these stressors. A widowed mother of three
(ages: unknown) stated:
Because the kids, they too, have depression, the kids face everything at school. We
too face everything in our lives, which is how we should understand our children.
And have patience, and calm, and more than anything talk to them.
[Porque los niños también tienen depresión, los niños también se enfrentan en la
escuela a todo. Entonces como nosotros también nos enfrentamos a la vida a todo,
así debemos de entender a nuestros hijos. Y tenerles paciencia, y calma, y más que
nada platicar con ellos].
Parents emphasized the importance of communicating patience and understanding as
parents drew from their own experiences with stressors to gain perspective of their youth’s
challenges. Parents discussed how stressors youth experienced, such as being victimized by
peers for many years, affected them: noticing they were sadder, crying a lot, isolated, and
depressed.
69
Parents disclosure of their own mental health challenges came up as they reflected on
various adversities they experienced in the community (e.g., sexual assault in their
neighborhood). A mother explained how her mental health after being physically assaulted
impacted her ability to provide support and care for her daughters (Ages: unknown): “I
stayed in bed so much that in reality I did not want to know anything about the world, I
wanted to, I don't know, end my life. So, it came to the point in which I could no longer take
care of my daughters because I was in a very bad place” [“Me metí tanto en la cama que en
realidad yo no quería saber nada del mundo, yo quería, no se quitarme la vida. Entonces
hubo esto caso que, ya después este yo no podía cuidar en mis hijas, del mal que estaba.”].
This mother discussed how harm impacts the whole family, as she reflected on her
daughter’s subsequent emotional distress. As a mother, she adapted strategies to buffer her
daughters from seeing her emotional turmoil (e.g., crying when her children are not around),
engaged in communication about her daughter’s emotional distress, and sought mental health
services.
Although not many parents disclosed mental health challenges, the few that were
shared were compelling and warranted being highlighted. Parents were not given specific
prompts to discuss mental health and the format of focus groups was not conducive to
disclosure about mental health challenges that parents or their youth faced, thus we further
explored this theme in a more anonymous approach using quantitative approaches.
Quantitative
Data Screening. Normality statistics, comparison of variances, and measure
reliability were reported in Tables 4 and 5. Histograms and P-P plots were used in addition to
Shapiro-Wilk tests of normality to establish that data met assumptions of paired-sample t-
70
tests and multiple regression. Given histogram and P-P plot visual analyses indicating a left
skew, a square transformation was completed for the teen report of BFRS Family Conflict
subscale. Similarly, the same was done for the parent report of BFRS Family Conflict
subscale, as results from the Shaprio-Wilk test indicated non-normal distribution, and the
histogram indicated a slight left skew. Results from the Shapiro-Wilk test of normality
indicated a violation of normality for parent and teen report of family cohesion (e.g.,
FACES), and examination of histograms indicated a left skew; thus, square transformations
were completed. Results from normality statistics and visual analyses of histograms and P-P
plots indicated a right skew that required square root transformations for the teen and parent
report of depression. See Table 6 for an examination of collinearity using bivariate
correlation for variables included in each research question. There was no concern for
multicollinearity among the variables included in analyses.
Missing Data. Subscale scores were calculated if at least 80% of the scale items had
been completed. The amount of missing data for teen subscales was at or below 5%,
whereas the amount of missing data for parents was at or below 12.5% (see Table 3). There
was missing data for two participants among the total of 40 parent-child dyads who were
recruited for the current study. One youth participant chose not to assent or participate, thus
only parent data was collected. Additionally, there was a technology error in saving the data
through Qualtrics for the second participant, and thus the child’s data is missing. These two
parent-child dyads were excluded from analyses and thus the sample used for data analyses
was comprised of 38 parent-child dyads.
Discrepancies in Parent and Youth report of Family Cohesion and Family Conflict
(RQ2)
71
H1: Parent and youth report of family cohesion and family conflict will be
significantly different. After assumptions were met by completing square transformations,
two paired samples t-test were conducted to examine whether there were significant
discrepancies between parent and youth reports of family cohesion and family conflict.
Congruent with our hypothesis, there were significant differences in youth and parent report
of family cohesion. Specifically, youth reported significantly lower levels of family cohesion
(M = 38.82, SD = 8.05) compared to parents (M = 42.33, SD = 5.45), t(37) = -2.64, p = .01.
As seen in Table 7, similar results were found regarding family conflict, in which youth
reported significantly more family conflict (M = 25.96, SD = 3.92) compared to parents (M =
27.18, SD = 3.96), t(31) = -2.67, p = .01, as evidenced by their lower scores.
Family cohesion and family conflict and youth’s mental health outcomes (RQ3)
H2: Youth self-report of family cohesion will be negatively associated with
depression and total behavior problems. Whereas, greater family conflict (youth self-
report) will be associated with less depression and behavior problems.
Pearson correlations were used to examine associations between youth reported
cohesion or conflict and depression and behavior problems (See Table 6). Youth’s report of
family cohesion was negatively and significantly associated with youth depression (r = -0.58,
p < .001), and parent reported behavior problems among youth (r = -0.40, p = .01), such that
higher family cohesion was associated with lower depression symptoms and behavior
problems. Similarly, our hypothesis was confirmed, in regard to findings suggesting that
youth reports family conflict were associated with increased youth’s depression (r = -0.47, p
= .004) and behavior problems (r = -0.35, p = .04). The direction of these association is
congruent with our hypotheses given that lower scores on the family conflict subscale were
72
indicative of higher family conflict. Among our sample, 55% were scored within the not
depressed range, 22.5% were considered mildly depressed, 5% were moderately depressed,
and 13.5% were severely depressed.
Youth community violence exposure and mental health outcomes (RQ4)
H3: Exposure to community violence will be positively related to youth
depression and behavior problems. Pearson correlations were used to examine the strength
of the association between exposure to community violence and self-reported depression
symptoms, as well as parent report of behavior problems. Our hypothesis was partially
supported, in that youth report of exposure to community violence was positively associated
with youth depression (r = 0.35, p = .03), but not with behavior problems (r = -0.16, p =
.34).
Parents’ depression as related to youth reports of family cohesion and family conflict
(RQ5)
H4: Parents’ depression will be negatively related to youth reports of family
cohesion and associated with greater family conflict (youth report). We used Pearson
correlations to examine our hypothesis. Results partially supported our hypothesis, indicating
parents’ depression was moderately and negatively associated with youth reports of family
cohesion, (r = - .32, p = .05). However, we did not find a significant relationship between
parents’ depression and youth’s report of family conflict (r = - .24, p = .17).
RQ 6: Moderating role of parents’ depression in the relationship between family
cohesion or family conflict and youth mental health outcomes
H5: Parents’ depression will moderate the relationship between family cohesion
and youths’ depression. To test this hypothesis, four hierarchical regression models were
73
constructed, the first two to examine youth reports of cohesion, and the second two to
examine parent reports of cohesion in the models. All four models are present in Table 8. In
the first step (Model 1(Y)), youth age, youth report of family cohesion, and parents’
depression accounted for 35% of the variance in youths’ depression symptoms, F(3, 33) =
5.87, p = .003. Next, an interaction term of parents’ depression was added to the model as a
moderator in order to examine its moderating effects. Contrary to the hypothesis, parents’
depression did not significantly moderate the relationship between youth reported family
cohesion and youth symptoms of depression (β = .45, p = .26). In the moderation model,
youth reported family cohesion was the only significant predictor of youth’s depressive
symptoms (β = -0.92, p = .009). This model, which was comprised of youth’s age, youth
report of family cohesion, maternal depression and the interaction term accounted for 37%
of the variance in youths’ symptoms of depression F(4, 32) = 4.76, p = .004.
Two additional hierarchical regression models were conducted to examine this
hypothesis using parent report of family cohesion. In Model 1(P), youth’s age, parent report
of family cohesion, and parents’ depression were entered as predictors of youths’ depression
symptoms. Results indicated no significant predictors of youths’ depression, and a model that
was not significant, F(3, 33) = 1.82, p = .16. Similar results were found in Model 2(P), in
which parents’ depression was added as a moderator, by including an interaction term. Our
hypothesis was again not supported by these results, suggesting that parents’ depression did
not moderate the relationship between family cohesion (parent report) and youth’s depression
(β = -0.25, p = .16). Additionally, results revealed a non-significant model (F(4, 32) = 1.94, p
= .13), in which youth’s age, parent-report of cohesion, maternal depression, nor the
interaction term were significant predictors of youth’s depression. Results from the post-hoc
74
power analyses suggested that in Model 2(Y) our power was .97, meaning we had adequate
sample size to achieve a high level of power and reduce the chance of making a Type II
error. However, post-hoc power analyses revealed that our Model 2(P) was underpowered
(.62).
H6: Parents’ depression will moderate the relationship between family conflict
and youth depression. Four hierarchical regression models were conducted to test this
hypothesis. Results from hierarchical regression analyses utilizing youth self-reported
depression symptoms as the criterion variable were presented in Table 9. In Model A(Y),
youths’ age, youth-report of family conflict and parents’ depression accounted for 22% of
the variance in youths’ depression symptoms, F(3, 32) = 3.06, p = .04. In this model, youth’s
report of family conflict was the only variable that emerged as a significant predictor of
youths’ depression symptoms (β = -0.44, p = .01). In Model B(Y), an interaction term was
added to examine whether parents’ depression served as a moderator in the relationship
between family conflict (youth report) and youths’ symptoms of depression. Contrary to our
hypothesis, parents’ depression did not moderate the relationship between youth self-
reported conflict and youths’ depression (β = -0.14, p = .42). Additionally, adding the
interaction term weakened the model, such that the model was no longer significant (F(4, 31)
= 2.43, p = .07, and age (β = 0.14, p = .44), nor parents’ depression (β = -0.30, p = .85)
significantly predicted youths’ depression symptoms; however, youth reported conflict (β = -
0.40, p = .03) did significantly predict youth depression. It is noteworthy, that results from a
post-hoc power analysis revealed we did not have sufficient power for Model B(Y) (.79),
given the sample size.
75
To examine this hypothesis with parent reported family conflict, we conducted two
additional hierarchical regression models, Model A(P) and Model B(P). In Model A(P),
when youths’ age, parent reported conflict, and parents’ depression were entered, only
parent reported conflict was predictive of youths’ depression symptoms (β = -0.38, p = .05).
However, the overall model was not significant, F(3, 29) = 2.18, p = .11. Similar results
were found in Model B(P), in which the model with youths’ age, parent reported conflict,
parents’ depression and an interaction term was not significant, F(4, 28) = 2.06, p = .11.
Additionally, results suggest that the moderating effect of parents’ depression was not found
in the relationship between parent reported family conflict and youths’ depressive symptoms
(β = - 0.22, p = .22). Post-hoc power analyses suggested that we did not have adequate
power for Model B(P) (.70) given our sample size.
CHAPTER FOUR: DISCUSSION
The current study was embedded within the unique context of an ongoing community
based participatory research collaboration involving Latinx youth-serving agencies and
community partners.
Using a CBPR, mixed methods approach, that integrated community key stakeholders
in various aspects of the research process (i.e., conceptualization, recruitment, data
collection), offered a culturally-responsive way of engaging an underrepresented and
vulnerable population. This project contributed both methodologically and conceptually to
current literature. Scholars have suggested that examining discrepancies in parent and child
reports is a notable area of research (De Los Reyes et al., 2009; as seen in Stuart & Jose,
2012), yet is an area that is understudied among Latinx immigrant samples. This study
contributed to the literature by examining discrepancies in parent and youth reports of family
76
cohesion and family conflict. By using a QUAL-quan approach, we demonstrated how when
working with vulnerable populations, the format of data collection (e.g., focus group as
compared to individual interview) may limit participants’ comfort with personal disclosures
about sensitive topics like mental health; thus, using mixed methods allows for a more
comprehensive approach.
Current literature with Latinx families has been criticized for being limited in the
contexts studied, and for lacking consideration of unique Latinx immigrant stressors. Thus, a
strength of this study was in applying the Cultural-Ecological- Transactional Perspective
(Kuperminc et al., 2009) to examine unique experiences of Latinx immigrant parents and
their youth. This study integrated cultural considerations in examining the daily transactions
and broadly defined stressors youth and parents face in their neighborhoods, communities,
and schools. This research furthered our understanding of contributing factors that impact
family conflict and family cohesion, and overall parent-child relationships among Mexican
immigrant families navigating a multitude of stressors.
Parent-Child Interactions and Implications for Family Processes
Results from focus groups indicated that families experienced several stressors
consistent with prior research, including neighborhood violence (Ceballo et al., 2012),
bullying (Shea, Wang, Shi, Gonzalez, & Espelage, 2016) and concerns about deviant peers
(Eamon & Mulder, 2005). We found that immigrant parents and youth responded to
stressors in their neighborhoods, schools and communities in four ways: by providing
guidance and support, monitoring, communication, and parents’ impotencia. Several of our
findings were congruent with previous research, including parents’ emphasis on monitoring
and communication (Ceballo et al., 2012). Additionally, in accordance with previous
research,
77
parents identified the importance of open and trusting communication (Crockett et al., 2007;
Perreira et al., 2006), and difficulties of callado (Nicolaidis et al., 2011). However, to our
knowledge, findings of callado or keeping things inside have only been investigated among a
sample of Latina adult survivors of violence (Nicolaidis et al., 2011) and not among youth
encountering similar stressors of violence.
Parents’ tendencies to provide support and guidance in the face of stressors also
aligned with Shea and colleagues’ (2016) research that examined responses to bullying
among Asian and Latinx immigrant parents. They found parents to employ “pragmatic or
solution-focused strategies” that included telling their children to distance from the problem,
speak to an authority figure, or directly get involved themselves (p. 90). Parents in the
current study, however, highlighted fears about leaving their child defenseless in the face
aggression or violence in their community and worries about the prospective adverse
outcomes their youth may encounter living in their communities, which impacted their
provision of support and guidance. These concerns are especially valid, when considering
that ethnic and racial minority youth are at disproportionately greater risk of exposure to
violence (Massetti & David-Ferdon, 2016), and parents in the focus groups identified that
just being around violence increased youth risk for poor outcomes. In navigating these
stressors and fears about deleterious outcomes, parents expressed impotencia. However,
there is little existing research to contextualize this finding among Latinx immigrant families.
Scholars have alluded to parents’ “diminished sense of self-esteem and self-efficacy”
resulting from being unable to protect youth from community violence (Aisenberg et al.,
2007, p. 1232), but have yet to empirically test this construct. Others demonstrated parents’
expression of helplessness for their insufficient abilities of protecting their youth while living
among community violence
78
(Richters & Martinez, 1993), however, this study was not exclusively focused on Latinx
immigrant families.
Family Cohesion and Family Conflict
Family cohesion and conflict are constructs that have largely been studied as
protective or risk factors among Latinx samples in separate bodies of literature. For
example, Leidy, Guerra, and Toro (2012) examined family cohesion among 12 Latina
mothers and found barriers to parenting and family cohesion to include acculturation,
barriers to educational involvement, loss of family social support, and discrimination
regarding immigrant and legal status. The current study added to this existing research by
offering a model of factors contributing to family cohesion, conflict and parent-child
relationships in the face of multiple neighborhood, school and community stressors.
Results of the integrated theoretical model indicated the associations between parent-
child interactions (e.g., guidance/support, monitoring, communication, and impotencia),
family cohesion and family conflict, and implications for parent-child relationships. The
associations we found between various parent-child interactions and family conflict and
cohesion are congruent with previous research (e.g., Knight, Tein, Shell, & Roosa, 1992;
Wagner et al., 2010). For example, in a large sample of Latinx 9th and 10th graders (N =
1,433), Wagner and colleagues (2010) found communication and monitoring to be negatively
related to family conflict and positively related to family cohesion. The link we found
between providing support and family cohesion was also consistent with previous research
examining youth exposed to high rates of community violence (Houtlberg, Henry, & Morris,
2012).
79
Related to experiences of family conflict and cohesion within Latinx immigrant
families, results from our survey indicated that parents perceived significantly greater family
cohesion, but youth perceived greater family conflict. These findings were consistent with
current research in samples not specific to Latinx (e.g., Stuart & Jose, 2012), and among
Latinx families based on different stages of acculturation (e.g., Miranda, Estrada, & Firpo-
Jimenez, 2000). Although acculturation stages or differences in acculturation have often been
examined in relation to family conflict (e.g., Gonzales et al., 2006; Lee et al., 2000; Telzer,
2010), in the current study, these challenges were not as prevalent in parents’ narratives of
parenting or in their reflections on parent-child relationships in the face of various stressors
related to violence.
Focus group findings indicated the difficulties families face when family conflict
involved youth threats to call police or child protective services. Leidy and colleagues
(2012) found similar challenges in their study with 12 immigrant Latina mothers. They
highlighted that parents in these instances were burdened with managing the power
imbalance with their youth, navigating new laws around parenting their youth, and amending
their discipline strategies. Another expression of family conflict was in parents’ use of the
judicial system or communicating to their child the prospect of them being taken away.
Researchers found similar language in their study with Latinx fathers. In particular, scholars
examined the concept of psychological aggression, which appears to include an aspect of
this- “threatening to send the child away” (Lee, Altschul, Shair, & Taylor, 2011, p. 2). Lee
and colleagues (2011) suggested an area of future research to include assessing whether
perceived threats of child welfare involvement impacts immigrant parenting behaviors.
These trends are especially important to consider given the hazard to family stability with
the changing U.S.
80
immigration policies (Roche, Vaquera, White, & Rivera, 2018) and the difficulties youth and
parents may face in the aftermath of family separation from detainment or deportation
(Chaudry et al., 2010; Brabeck & Xu, 2010).
Even in the context of facing a multitude of stressors, findings suggested that parents
greatly emphasized the importance of closeness, family being the source of support, and the
protective role of establishing good parent-child relationships at an early age. However, as
parents discussed the importance of parent-child relationships, they reflected on their own
upbringing, trauma histories, and experiences of harsh parenting. Thus, an important concern
that warrants further investigation is whether Mexican immigrant parents navigating
parenting decisions about communicating their adversities, sacrifices and likely histories of
trauma impacts parent-child relationships.
Examining relationships between these previously mentioned constructs and youths’
or parents’ mental health within the focus groups was challenging given the format not
being conducive to this form of personal disclosure. Nevertheless, focus group participants
identified mental health difficulties resulting from exposure to stressors (e.g., victimization
and assault). As a result, we examined these mental health challenges in a more anonymous
way using quantitative approaches and found that approximately 40% of parents and youth
experienced between mild to severe depression symptoms. As hypothesized, the association
between community violence and youths’ depression was established and was consistent
with prior research (Aisenberg et al., 2007; Ayón, Marsiglia, &Bermudez-Parsai, 2010;
Bennett & Joe, 2015; Gorman-Smith & Tolan, 1998; Hovey & King, 1996; Huynh & Fuligni,
2010; Kessler, Mickelson, & Williams, 2009; Gudiño et al., 2012). In line with previous
research, results indicated that increased family cohesion was associated youths’ reduced
81
depression and total behavior problems; whereas, greater family conflict was associated with
higher rates of depression and behavior problems (Xu, Boyd, Butler, Moore, & Benton,
2017).
The findings partially supported our hypotheses that parents’ depression would be
related to youth report of family conflict and family cohesion. Consistent with previous
research, we found parents’ depression to be negatively associated with family cohesion
(Zapata, Carlos, Merten, Gallus, & Grzywacz, 2017). However, we did not find a significant
relationship between parent’s depression and family conflict. Wheeler and colleagues (2011)
reported mixed findings regarding the associations between parents’ symptoms of depression
and parent-youth conflict, such that maternal depression was associated with parent-youth
conflict, but paternal depression symptoms was associated with parent-youth conflict for
younger but not older youth in their sample.
The role of parents’ depression was examined as a moderator of the relationship
between family cohesion (parent- or youth-report) and youths’ depression, and similarly of
the relationships between family conflict (parent- or youth-report) and youths’ depression.
Overall, the results did not support these hypotheses. Parents’ depression did not moderate
the relationship between family cohesion and youths’ depression, or family conflict and
youths’ depression. Among the predictors in the model, youth-reported family cohesion was
the only strong predictor of youths’ depression, even when controlling for age, and parents’
depression. Although other studies report similar predictive relationships between family
cohesion and youths’ depression (e.g., Nair, Roche, & White, 2018; Roche et al., 2018), to
our awareness, none to date have examined parents’ depression as a moderator in these
relationships. One explanation of our finding that in our model with our sample of
82
predominantly Mexican immigrant parents, parents’ depression did not demonstrate a
moderating role between family conflict or family cohesion and youths’ depression may be
that Latinx experience depression more commonly in somatic forms that may not impede on
interpersonal relationships. For example, Corona and colleagues (2005) found that among
111 Latinx parent-adolescent dyads, parent self-report of depression symptoms was not
related to observations of maternal behavior while having a conversation about conflicts
with their adolescents, or to adolescent reports of family satisfaction. The nonsignificant
moderation results may also be attributed to a small sample size, and a model that is
underpowered by too many predictors.
Strengths and Limitations
There were several limitations to the current study, for both the qualitative and
quantitative approaches. The most notable limitation in the qualitative phase was not being
able to link demographic variables to participant narratives. Additionally, although we had a
large sample that was representative of various neighborhoods, we had relatively few father
participants in the focus groups. In particular, several focus groups had only one father
participating, and one focus group had no fathers participating. It could be possible that
content discussed in focus groups may have differed with more gender homogeneity.
Although this was not tested empirically in this study, it warrants consideration.
There are several limitations for the quantitative phase of the study regarding the
sample. One possible limitation included generalizability of the sample given the wide age-
range of 8 to 16 years of age. Yet most notable, was the small sample size of 38 parent-child
dyads, which limited the type of analyses feasible. There were several potential reasons
regarding recruitment difficulties that may have contributed to the small sample size; these
83
included several socio-political stressors (e.g., new administration, immigration ban,
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids), natural disasters, and a streak of high
school suicides. CAB identified increase fear impacting the Latinx community and reduced
rates of service utilization during several months when recruitment was taking place.
Together, given these stressors along with issues of documentation status and fear of
deportation, it is important to consider the selection bias of who was willing to participate,
and question the vulnerability of individuals who may not have been willing or able to
participate.
There were also limitations related to using mixed method approach. In particular, the
study design required a lengthy amount of time to complete the two phases. Thus,
consideration of temporal and contextual factors that may have impacted the sample during
the span of time required to implement both phases was necessary.
There were significant strengths of the current study despite these limitations. Using a
CBPR mixed method approach with CAB members facilitating focus group data collection
helped to ensure cultural validity of the project. Having Latinx bilingual and bicultural CAB
members facilitate focus groups was intended to foster an environment where participants
could be more comfortable to share their perspectives, although this was not tested
empirically.
Implications and Future Directions
There is a dearth of research that elucidates how Latinx parents’ mental health
impacts parenting or relationships between parents and youth (Corona et al., 2005). Similar
to the current study, researchers found family cohesion to be associated with depression
among Latina immigrant women (Zapata et al., 2017). However, no study to date has
84
examined the moderating role of parents’ depression on the relationship between family
cohesion/conflict and youths’ depression. More research is needed, with larger samples, to
understand the interplay of parents’ mental health and family processes of cohesion/conflict,
and youths’ outcomes. The current study included a sample of predominantly mothers, thus
increasing father participation in similar studies is recommended in future research.
Researchers have begun to integrate culturally-specific factors that may impact
Latinx immigrant parenting (e.g., Ayón, Williams, Marsiglia, Ayers, & Keihne, 2015; Leidy
et al., 2012), and the current study contributes to this literature. The results of this research
provided an integrated theoretical model of family cohesion, conflict, and parent-child
relationships among a sample of predominantly Mexican immigrant families. With the rise in
Latinx immigrant children in the U.S., researchers have highlighted the importance of
understanding family processes that hinder and promote youth’s adjustment and the
challenges families may encounter in trying to sustain healthy family functioning among
Latinx immigrant families (Leidy et al., 2012). Recognizing not only the unique stressors,
adversities and everyday experiences of Latinx immigrant families, it is also important to
examine promotive practices parents employ in raising their youth amidst these stressors.
One important point from the current research is parents’ difficulties with self-
efficacy and youth callado that impacted family cohesion and conflict. Future research
should examine how these experiences impact help-seeking among Latinx immigrant
families, especially given the trends of underutilization of mental health services (Vega,
Kolody, Aguilar-Gaxiola & Catalano, 1999). A contributing factor may include the
challenges of limited access to insurance and health care immigrant that populations face
(Ku & Matani, 2001). Thus, to reduce barriers to accessing services, communities, schools,
and
85
policy-makers should consider incorporating prevention programs into systems Latinx
immigrant families frequent.
Researchers developed culturally-sensitive and trauma informed school-based mental
health programs that demonstrated improvements in reducing depression and trauma
symptoms among Latinx immigrant youth exposed to community violence (Kataoka et al.,
2003). Other scholars have partnered with promotores to implement prevention programs to
address the needs of Latinx communities. Specifically, Edberg and colleagues (2010) worked
with promotores, or “lay facilitators” (p.224), to implement a multi-tiered prevention
approach, SAFER Latinos, to address aspects within a Latinx immigrant community that
prevented youth violence. It is noteworthy that the Latino community in which this
prevention program was implemented was predominantly from El Salvador. SAFER Latinos
was designed to address difficulties with family cohesion, school-barriers, instill community
cohesion, and address gang presence in the community by using promotores, peer advocates,
a community drop-in centers, events and media (Edberg et al., 2010). The Madres a Madres
program is another example of partnering with promotores to meet the needs of Latinx
communities. In particular, the Madres a Madres program is a four session parent training
program designed to help immigrant mothers to foster stronger relationships with their young
children (Williamson, Knox, Guerra, & Williams, 2014). Together, these prevention and
intervention efforts that target unique challenges of Latinx immigrant children impacted by
violence, and/or practices that foster strong family ties and a sense of community cohesion
may be especially important for vulnerable populations. Furthermore, given that results from
the current study illustrated parents’ emphasis on values of closeness, desire for open and
trusting communication, monitoring and provision of support, there is a need for continued
86
implementation and dissemination of culturally-responsive prevention and intervention
efforts that strengthen family bonds and engage parents in building family support among
Latinx immigrant families and communities.
87
REFERENCES
Aisenberg, E. (2001). The effects of exposure to community violence upon Latina mothers
and preschool children. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 23(4), 378-398.
Aisenberg, E., Ayón, C., & Orozco-Figueroa, A. (2008). The role of young adolescents’
perception in understanding the severity of exposure to community violence and
PTSD. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23(11), 1555–78.
http://doi.org/10.1177/0886260508314318
Ayón, C., Marsiglia, F. F., & Bermudez-Parsai, M. (2010). Latino family mental health:
Exploring the role of discrimination and familismo. Journal of Community
Psychology, 38(6), 742–756. http://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.20392
Ayón, C., Williams, L. R., Marsiglia, F. F., Ayers, S., & Kiehne, E. (2015). A latent
profile analysis of Latino parenting: The infusion of cultural values on family
conflict. Families in Society, 96(3), 203-210.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.ucsb.edu:2048/10.1606/1044-3894.2015.96.25
Bámaca-Colbert, M. Y., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., & Gayles, J. G. (2012). A developmental-
contextual model of depressive symptoms in Mexican-origin female adolescents.
Developmental Psychology, 48(2), 406.
Behnke, A. O., MacDermid, S. M., Coltrane, S. L., Parke, R. D., Duffy, S., & Widaman, K.
F. (2008). Family cohesion in the lives of Mexican American and European
American parents. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70(4), 1045-1059.
Bennett Jr, M. D., & Joe, S. (2015). Exposure to community violence, suicidality, and
psychological distress among African American and Latino youths: Findings from the
88
CDC Youth Violence Survey. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social
Environment, 25(8), 775-789.
Bernal, G., & Saez-Santiago, E. (2006). Culturally centered psychosocial interventions.
Journal of Community Psychology, 34, 121–132. doi: 10.1002/jcop.20096
Brabeck, K. M. & Xu, Q. (2010). The impact of detention and deportation on Latino
immigrant children and families: A quantitative exploration. Hispanic Journal of
Behavioral Sciences 32(3) 341–361 doi: 10.1177/0739986310374053
Brady, S. S., Gorman-Smith, D., Henry, D. B., & Tolan, P. H. (2008). Adaptive coping
reduces the impact of community violence exposure on violent behavior among
African American and Latino male adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child
Psychology, 36(1), 105–15. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-007-9164-x
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research
in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and
design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Brumariu, L. E., & Kerns, K. A. (2010). Parent–child attachment and internalizing symptoms
in childhood and adolescence: A review of empirical findings and future
directions. Development and Psychopathology, 22(01), 177-203.
Ceballo, R., Kennedy, T. M., Bregman, A., & Epstein-Ngo, Q. (2012). Always aware
(Siempre pendiente): Latina mothers' parenting in high-risk neighborhoods. Journal
of Family Psychology, 26(5), 805.
Chaudry, A., Capps, R., Pedroza, J. M., Castaneda, R. S., Santos, R., & Scott, M. M. (2010).
Facing our future: Children in the aftermath of immigration enforcement.
89
Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved from
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/28331/412020-Facing-Our-
Future.PDF
Chavez-Korell, S., Benson-Florez, G., Rendon, A. D., & Farias, R. (2013). Examining the
relationships between physical functioning, ethnic identity, acculturation, familismo,
and depressive symptoms for Latino older adults. The Counseling Psychologist,
42(2), 255–277. http://doi.org/10.1177/0011000013477906
Child Trends Data Bank, (2014). Immigrant children: Indicators of child and youth well-
being. Retrieved from
https://www.childtrends.org/wpcontent/uploads/2013/07/110_Immigrant_Children.pd
f
Chung, G. H., Flook, L., & Fuligni, A. J. (2009). Daily family conflict and emotional distress
among adolescents from Latin American, Asian, and European backgrounds.
Developmental Psychology, 45(5), 1406.
Cordova, D., Ciofu, A., & Cervantes, R. (2014). Exploring culturally based intrafamilial
stressors among Latino adolescents. Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Journal
of Applied Family Studies, 63(5), 693-706. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/fare.12095
Corona, R., Lefkowitz, E. S., Sigman, M., Romo, L. F., Corona, R., Lefkowitz, E. S., …
Romo, L. F. (2018). Latino adolescents’ adjustment, maternal depressive symptoms,
and the mother-adolescent relationship. Family Relations, 54(3), 386–399.
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods
research. Sage publications.
90
Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced
mixed methods research designs. In: Tashakkori, A., and Teddlie, C. (eds.),
Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 209–240.
Creswell, John W.. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (p. 351). Sage
Publications. Kindle Edition.
Crockett, L. J., Brown, J., Russell, S. T., & Shen, Y. (2007). The meaning of good parent–
child relationships for Mexican American adolescents. Journal of Research on
Adolescence, 17, 639–668. doi:10.1111/j.1532- 7795.2007.00539.x
Cumsille, P. E., & Epstein, N. (1994). Family cohesion, family adaptability, social support,
and adolescent depressive symptoms in outpatient clinic families. Journal of
Family Psychology, 8(2), 202.
De Los Reyes, A., Henry, D. B., Tolan, P. H., & Wakschlag, L. S. (2009). Linking
informant discrepancies to observed variations in young children’s disruptive
behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 37(5), 637-652.
De Oliveira, G., Cianelli, R., Gattamorta, K., Kowalski, N., & Peragallo, N. (2017). Social
determinants of depression among Hispanic women. Journal of the American
Psychiatric Nurses Association, 23(1), 28-36.
Dennis, J., Basañez, T., & Farahmand, A. (2010). Intergenerational conflicts among Latinos
in early adulthood: Separating values conflicts with parents from acculturation
conflicts. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 32(1), 118-135.
91
Eamon, M. K., & Mulder, C. (2005). Predicting antisocial behavior among Latino young
adolescents: An ecological systems analysis. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 75(1), 117.
Edberg, M., Cleary, S. D., Andrade, E., Leiva, R., Bazurto, M., Rivera, M. I., … Calderon,
M. (2013). SAFER Latinos: A community partnership to address contributing factors
for Latino youth violence. Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research,
Education, and Action, 4(3), 221–233. http://doi.org/10.1353/cpr.2010.0009
Edwards, L. M., Romero, A. J., (2008). Coping with discrimination among Mexican descent
adolescents. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Science, 30, 24-39. doi:
10.1177/0739986307311431
Elliott, A. C., & Woodward, W. A. (2007). Statistical analysis quick reference guidebook:
with SPSS examples. Sage Publications.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical
power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences.
Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191.
Fendrich, M., Warner, V., & Weissman, M. M. (1990). Family risk factors, parental
depression, and psychopathology in offspring. Developmental Psychology, 26(1), 40.
Flores, M. T., & Sprenkle, D. H. (2014) Can therapists use FACES III with Mexican
Americans? A preliminary analysis. In D. Olson, C. Smill Russell, & D. H. Sprenkle.
(Eds.), Circumplex Model: Systemic Assessment and Treatment of Families, 239-248.
Routledge New York: NY.
92
Fok, C. C. T., Allen, J., Henry, D., & People Awakening Team (2014). The Brief Family
Relationship Scale: A brief measure of the relationship dimension in family
functioning. Assessment, 21(1), 67–72. http://doi.org/10.1177/1073191111425856
Ford, J. D., Hartman, J. K., Hawke, J., & Chapman, J. F. (2008). Traumatic victimization,
posttraumatic stress disorder, suicidal ideation, and substance abuse risk among
juvenile justice-involved youth. Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 1(1), 75-92.
Forjaz M. J., Cano, P. M., & Cervera-Enguix, S. (2002). Confirmatory factor analysis,
reliability, and validity of a Spanish version of FACES III. The American Journal of
Family Therapy, 30(5), 439-449. doi: 10.1080/01926180260296332
Fortuna, L. R., Porche, M. V., & Alegria, M. (2008). Political violence, psychosocial
trauma, and the context of mental health services use among immigrant Latinos in
the United States. Ethnicity & Health, 13(5), 435-463.
Fosco, G. M., Van Ryzin, M. J., Connell, A. M., & Stormshak, E. A. (2016). Preventing
adolescent depression with the family check-up: Examining family conflict as a
mechanism of change. Journal of Family Psychology, 30(1), 82.
Foster, R. P. (2005). The new faces of childhood perimigration trauma in the United States.
Journal of Infant, Child, and Adolescent Psychotherapy, 4(1), 21-41.
Gallo, L. C., Penedo, F. J., Espinosa de los Monteros, K., & Arguelles, W. (2009).
Resiliency in the face of disadvantage: Do Hispanic cultural characteristics protect
health outcomes? Journal of Personality, 77(6),1707–1746.
García Coll, C., Crnic, K., Lamberty, G.,Wasik, B.H., Jenkins, R.,Vazquez Garcia, H., et al.
(1996). An integrative model for the study of developmental competencies in
minority children. Child Development, 67, 1891–1914.
93
Garcia, C., & Lindgren, S. (2009). “Life grows between the rocks”: Latino adolescents' and
parents' perspectives on mental health stressors. Research in nursing & health,
32(2), 148-162.
Gilbert, L. R., Spears Brown, C., & Mistry, R. S. (2017). Latino immigrant parents’ financial
stress, depression, and academic involvement predicting child academic success.
Psychology in the Schools, 54(9), 1202-1215.
Gilbody, S., Richards, D., Brealey, S., & Hewitt, C. (2006). Screening for depression in
medical settings with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ): A diagnostic meta-
analysis. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 22, 1596-1602.
Gonzales, N. A., Deardorff, J., Formoso, D., Barr, A., & Barrera, M. (2006). Family
mediators of the relation between acculturation and adolescent mental health. Family
Relations, 55(3), 318–330. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2006.00405.x
Goodman, R. (1997). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: a research note. Journal
of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38(5), 581-586.
Goodman, R. (2001). Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire.
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(11), 1337-
1345.
Gorman-Smith, D., & Tolan, P. (1998). The role of exposure to community violence and
developmental problems among inner-city youth. Development and Psychopathology,
10(1), 101–116. Retrieved from
http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0954579498001539
94
Gorman-Smith, D., Henry, D. B., & Tolan, P. H. (2004). Exposure to community
violence and violence perpetration: The protective effects of family functioning.
Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33(3), 439-449.
Gudiño, O. G., Nadeem, E., Kataoka, S. H., & Lau, A. S. (2011). Relative impact of violence
exposure and immigrant stressors on Latino youth psychopathology. Journal of
Community Psychology, 39(3):316–35. doi: 10.1002/jcop.20435
Gudiño, O. G., Nadeem, E., Kataoka, S. H., & Lau, A. S. (2012). Reinforcement sensitivity
and risk for psychopathology following exposure to violence: A vulnerability-
specificity model in Latino youth. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 43(2),
306–21. Retrieved from: http://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-011-0266-x
Harkness, J. A. (2008a). Round 4 ESS translation strategies and procedures. Retrieved
January 16, 2017, from
http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/docs/round4/methods/ESS4_translation_guideli
nes.pdf
Harkness, J. A., Edwards, B., Hansen, S. E., Miller, D. R., & Villar, A. (2010). Designing
questionnaires for multipopulation research. Survey methods in multinational,
multiregional, and multicultural contexts, 31-57.
Harkness, J., Pennell, B. E., & Schoua‐Glusberg, A. (2004). Survey questionnaire translation
and assessment. Methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires, 453-473.
Haroz, E. E., Ybarra, M. L., & Eaton, W. W. (2014). Psychometric evaluation of a self-report
scale to measure adolescent depression: The CESDR-10 in two national adolescent
samples in the United States. Journal of Affective Disorders, 158, 154-160.
95
Houltberg, B. J., Henry, C. S., & Morris, A. S. (2012). Family interactions, exposure to
violence, and emotion regulation: Perceptions of children and early adolescents at
risk. Family Relations, 61(2), 283–296. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-
3729.2011.00699.x
Hovey, J. D., & King, C. A. (1996). Acculturative stress, depression, and suicidal ideation
among immigrant and second-generation Latino adolescents. Journal of the American
Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 35(9), 1183-1192.
Huang, F. Y., Chung, H., Kroenke, K., Delucchi, K. L., & Spitzer, R. L. (2005). Using the
patient health questionnaire-9 to measure depression among racially and ethnically
diverse primary care patients. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21(8), 547–
552. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00409.x
Huynh, V. W. and Fuligni, A. J. (2010), Discrimination hurts: The academic, psychological,
and physical well-being of adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence,
20: 916–941. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00670.x
Israel, B. A., Eng, E., Schulz, A. J., & Parker, E. A. (2012). Methods for community-based
participatory research for health (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.
Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. A., & Becker, A. B. (2001). Community-based
participatory research: policy recommendations for promoting a partnership approach
in health research. Education for health, 14(2), 182-197.
Ivankova, N. V. (2014). Mixed methods applications in action research. Sage Publications.
Jaycox, L. H., Stein, B. D., Kataoka, S. H., Wong, M., Fink, A., Escudero, P., & Zaragoza, C.
(2002). Violence exposure, posttraumatic stress disorder, and depressive symptoms
96
among recent immigrant schoolchildren. Journal of the American Academy of Child
& Adolescent Psychiatry, 41(9), 1104-1110.
Kapke, T. L., Grace, M. A., Gerdes, A. C., & Lawton, K. E. (2017). Latino early adolescent
mental health: Examining the impact of family functioning, familism, and global self-
worth. Journal of Latina/o Psychology, 5(1), 27.
Kataoka, S. H., Stein, B. D., Jaycox, L. H., Wong, M., Escudero, P., Tu, W., ... & Fink, A.
(2003). A school-based mental health program for traumatized Latino immigrant
children. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry,
42(3), 311-318.
Kataoka, S., Langley, A., Stein, B., Jaycox, L., Zhang, L., Sanchez, N., & Wong, M. (2008).
Violence exposure and PTSD: The role of English language fluency in Latino youth.
Journal of Child and Family Studies, 18(3), 334–341. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-
008-9235-9
Kessler, R., Mickelson, K., & Williams, D. (2009). The prevalence, distribution, and mental
health correlates of perceived discrimination in the United States. Journal of Health
and Social Behavior, 40(3), 208–230.
Kia-Keating, M., Capous, D., Juang, L., & Bacio, G. (2016). Family factors: Immigrant
families and intergenerational considerations. In Psychotherapy for Immigrant Youth
(pp. 49-70). Springer, Cham.
Kia-Keating, M., Santacrose, D. E., Liu, S. R., & Adams, J. (2017). Using community-based-
participatory research and human-centered design to address violence-related health
disparities among Latino/a youth. Family & Community Health, 40(2), 160-169.
97
Kliewer, W., Murrelle, L., Prom, E., Ramirez, M., Obando, P., Sandi, L., & del Carmen
Karenkeris, M. (2006). Violence exposure and drug use in Central American youth:
Family cohesion and parental monitoring as protective factors. Journal of Research
on Adolescence, 16(3), 455-478.
Knight, G. P., Tein, J. Y., Shell, R., & Roosa, M. (1992). The cross‐ethnic equivalence of
parenting and family interaction measures among Hispanic and Anglo‐American
families. Child Development, 63(6), 1392–1403. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
8624.1992.tb01703.x
Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., & Williams, J. B. (2001). The PHQ‐9. Journal of General
Internal Medicine, 16(9), 606-613.
Ku, L., & Matani, S. (2001). Left out: Immigrants’ access to health care and
insurance. Health Affairs, 20(1), 247-256.
Kulis, S., Marsiglia, F. F., & Nieri, T. (2009). Perceived ethnic discrimination versus
acculturation stress: Influences on substance use among Latino youth in the
Southwest. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 50(4), 443-459.
Kuperminc, G. P., Wilkins, N. J., Roche, C., & Alvarez-Jimenez, A. (2009). Risk,
resilience, and positive development among Latino youth. Handbook of US Latino
Psychology: Developmental and Community-Based Perspectives, 213-233.
Lakes, K. D., Vargas, D., Riggs, M., Schmidt, J., & Baird, M. (2011). Parenting intervention
to reduce attention and behavior difficulties in preschoolers: A CUIDAR evaluation
study. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 20(5), 648-659.
98
Lau, A. S., McCabe, K. M.,Yeh, M., Garland, A. F., Wood, P. A., & Hough, R. L. (2005).
The acculturation gap-distress hypothesis among high-risk Mexican American
families. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(3), 367.
Laursen, B., Coy, K. C., & Collins, W. A. (1998). Reconsidering changes in parent‐child
conflict across adolescence: A meta‐analysis. Child Development, 69(3), 817-832.
Lee, R. M., Choe, J., Kim, G., & Ngo, V. (2000). Construction of the Asian American
Family Conflicts Scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 211–222.
Lee, S. J., Altschul, I., Shair, S. R., & Taylor, C. A. (2011). Hispanic fathers and risk for
maltreatment in father-involved families of young children. Journal of the Society for
Social Work and Research, 2(2), 125–142. http://doi.org/10.5243/jsswr.2011.7
Leidy, M. S., Guerra, N. G., & Toro, R. I. (2010). Positive parenting, family cohesion, and
child social competence among immigrant Latino families. Journal of Family
Psychology, 24(July 2015), 252–260. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0019407
Leong, F., Park, Y. S., & Kalibatseva, Z. (2013). Disentangling immigrant status in mental
health: Psychological protective and risk factors among Latino and Asian
American immigrants. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 83(2pt3), 361-371.
Leyendecker, B., Cabrera, N., Lembcke, H., Willard, J., Kohl, K., & Spiegler, O. (2018).
Parenting in a New Land. European Psychologist.
Macartney, S. (2011). Child poverty in the United States 2009 and 2010: Selected race
groups and Hispanic origin. U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey
Reports, ACSBR/ 10-05. Retrieved from: http://www.census.gov/
hhes/www/poverty/
99
Marshall, G. N., & Orlando, M. (2002). Acculturation and peritraumatic dissociation in
young adult Latino survivors of community violence. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 111(1), 166–174. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.111.1.166
Marsiglia, F. F., Kulis, S., Fitz Harris, B., & Becerra, D. (2009). Acculturation gaps and
problem behaviors among U.S. Southwestern Mexican youth. Social Work Forum 42-
43, 6–26.
Marsiglia, F. F., Parsai, P., & Kulis, S. (2009). The Southwest Interdisciplinary Research
Center. Effects of familism and family cohesion on problem behaviors among
adolescents in Mexican immigrant families in the Southwest US. J Ethnic Cultur
Divers Soc Work, 1, 203-20.
Massetti, G. M. (2016). Preventing violence among high-risk youth and communities with
economic, policy, and structural strategies. MMWR supplements, 65.
Migration Policy Institute. (2018). Children in U.S. Immigrant Families. Retrieved from
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/children-immigrant-
families
Miranda, A. O., Estrada, D., Firpo-Jimenez, M. (2000). Differences in family cohesion,
adaptability, and environment among Latino families in dissimilar stages of
acculturation. The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and
Families, 8(4), 341-350.
Moos, R. H., & Moos, B. S. (1994). Family environment scale manual. Consulting
Psychologists Press.
Morales, A., & Hanson, W. E. (2005). Language brokering: An integrative review of the
literature. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 27(4), 471-503.
100
Morgan, D. L. (2014). Pragmatism as a paradigm for social research. Qualitative
Inquiry, 20(8), 1045-1053.
Nair, R. N., Roche, K. M., & White, R. M. B. (2018). Acculturation gap distress among
Latino youth: Prospective links to family processes and youth depressive
symptoms, alcohol use, and academic performance. Journal of Youth and
Adolescents, 47(1), 105-120. doi: 10.1007/s10964-017-0753-x
Nicolaidis, C., Perez, M., Mejia, A., Alvarado, A., Celaya-Alston, R., Galian, H., & Hilde,
A. (2011). “Guardarse las cosas adentro” (keeping things inside): Latina violence
survivors’ perceptions of depression. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 26(10),
1131-1137. doi:10.1007/s11606-011-1747-0
Olson D. H., Russell C. S., Sprenkle D. H. (1982). The circumplex model of marital and
family systems, VI: Theoretical update. Family Process, 22, 69–83.
Olson, D. H. (1991). Commentary: Three‐dimensional (3‐D) circumplex model and revised
scoring of FACES III. Family Process, 30(1), 74-79.
Olson, D. H., Portner, J., & Lavee, Y. (1985). Family adaptability and cohesion evaluation
scales (FACES III). St. Paul: University of Minnesota, Family Social Science.
Ornelas, I. J., & Perreira, K. M. (2011). The role of migration in the development of
depressive symptoms among Latino immigrant parents in the USA. Social Science &
Medicine, 73(8), 1169-1177.
Pan, Y., & de La Puente, M. (2005). Census Bureau guideline for the translation of data
collection instruments and supporting materials: Documentation on how the guideline
was developed. Survey Methodology, 6.
101
Partida, J. (1996). The effects of immigration on children in the Mexican-American
community. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 13(3), 241-254.
Perreira, K. M., Chapman, M. V., & Stein, G. L. (2006). Becoming an American parent:
Overcoming challenges and finding strength in a new immigrant Latino community.
Journal of Family Issues, 27(10), 1383-1414.
Phinney, J. S., Ong, A. and Madden, T. (2000), Cultural values and intergenerational value
discrepancies in immigrant and non-Immigrant families. Child Development,
71: 528–539. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00162
Ponce Rosasa, E. R., Gómez Clavelinab, F. J., Terán Trilloc, M., Irigoyen Coriad A. E., &
Landgrave Ibáñeze, S. (2002). Validez de constructo del cuestionario FACES III en
español (México). Aten Primaria, 30(10), 624-630.
Ramírez García, J. I., Manongdo, J. A., & Cruz-Santiago, M. (2010). The family as mediator
of the impact of parent–youth acculturation/enculturation and inner city stressors on
Mexican American youth substance use. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority
Psychology, 16(3), 404.
Rasmus, S., Allen, J., Connor, W., Freeman, W., Native Transformations Community
Action Board, & Skewes, M. (2016). Native transformation in the Pacific Northwest:
A strength-based model of protection against substance use disorder. American
Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research (Online), 23(3), 158–186.
Reyes, J. A., & Elias, M. J. (2011). Fostering social–emotional resilience among Latino
youth. Psychology in the Schools, 48(7), 723–738. http://doi.org/10.1002/pits
Richters, J. E., & Martinez, P. (1993). The NIMH community violence project: I. Children as
victims of and witnesses to violence. Psychiatry, 56(1), 7-21.
102
Rivera, F. I., Guarnaccia, P. J., Mulvaney-Day, N., Lin, J. Y., Torres, M., & Alegria, M.
(2008). Family cohesion and its relationship to psychological distress among Latino
groups. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 30(3), 357–378.
http://doi.org/10.1177/0739986308318713
Roche, K. M., Little, T. D., Ghazarian, S. R., Lambert, S. F., Calzada, E. J., & Schulenberg,
J. E. (2018). Parenting processes and adolescent adjustment in immigrant Latino
families: The use of residual centering to address the multicollinearity
problem. Journal of Latina/o Psychology.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.ucsb.edu:2048/10.1037/lat0000105
Roche, K. M., Vaquera, E., White, R. M., & Rivera, M. I. (2018). Impacts of immigration
actions and news and the psychological distress of US Latino parents raising
adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 62(5), 525-531.
Rumbaut, R. G. (2000). Profiles in resilience: Educational achievement and ambition among
children of immigrants in Southern California. In National Invitational Conference
on" Resilience Across Contexts: Family, Work, Culture, and Community.", Mar,
1998, Temple U, Philadelphia, PA, US; This chapter is a revision of a paper
presented at the aforementioned conference. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Publishers.
Schofield, T. J., Parke, R. D., Kim, Y., & Coltrane, S. (2008). Bridging the acculturation gap:
Parent-child relationship quality as a moderator in Mexican American
families. Developmental Psychology, 44(4), 1190-1194. doi: 10.1037/a0012529
103
Schoua-Glusberg, (2004). U.S. Census Bureau. Census Bureau Guideline: Language
Translation of Data Collection Instruments and Supporting Materials. Issued April 5,
2004.
Schwartz, S. J., Unger, J. B., Des Rosiers, S. E., Huang, S., Baezconde-Garbanati, L.,
Lorenzo-Blanco, E. I., & Vilamar, J. A. (2012). Substance use and sexual behavior
among recent Hispanic immigrant adolescents: Effects on parent-adolescent
differential acculturation and communication. Drug & Alcohol Dependence, 125,
526 – 534.
Schwartz, S. J., Unger, J. B., Zamboanga, B. L., & Szapocznik, J. (2010). Rethinking the
concept of acculturation: Implications for theory and research. American
Psychologist, 65(4), 237.
Self-Brown, S. R., LeBlanc, M., Kelley, M. L., & Hanson, R. (2006). Effects of
community violence exposure and parental mental health on the internalizing
problems of urban adolescents. Violence and Victims, 21(2), 183.
Shea, M., Wang, C., Shi, W., Gonzalez, V., & Espelage, D. (2016). Parents and teachers’
perspectives on school bullying among elementary school-aged Asian and Latino
immigrant children. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 7(2), 83-96.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.ucsb.edu:2048/10.1037/aap0000047
Smokowski, P. R., & Bacallao, M. L. (2006). Acculturation and aggression in Latino
adolescents: A structural model focusing on cultural risk factors and assets. Journal
of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34(5), 657-671.
Smokowski, P., Guo, S., Evans, C., Wu, Q., Rose, R., Bacallao, M., . . . Spaulding, William.
(2017). Risk and protective factors across multiple microsystems associated with
104
internalizing symptoms and aggressive behavior in rural adolescents: Modeling
Longitudinal Trajectories From the Rural Adaptation Project. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 87(1), 94-108.
Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge University Press.
Stuart, J. & Jose, P. E. (2012). The influence of discrepancies between adolescent and parent
ratings of family dynamics on the well-being of adolescents. Journal of Family
Psychology, 26(6), 858-868. DOI: 10.1037/a0030056
Suglia, S. F., Ryan, L., Bellinger, D. C., Enlow, M. B., & Wright, R. J. (2011). Children's
exposure to violence and distress symptoms: Influence of caretakers' psychological
functioning. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 18(1), 35-43.
Survey Research Center. (2016). Guidelines for Best Practice in Cross-Cultural Surveys. Ann
Arbor, MI: Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of
Michigan. Retrieved February 26, 2017, from http://www.ccsg.isr.umich.edu/
Szapocznik, J., & Kurtines, W. M. (1993). Family psychology and cultural diversity:
Opportunities for theory, research, and application. American Psychologist, 48(4),
400.
Telzer, E. H. (2010). Expanding the acculturation gap-distress model: An integrative review
of research. Human Development, 53, 313–340. doi: 10.1159/000322476
Thode, H. C. (2002). Testing for normality (Vol. 164). CRC press.
Thompson, R., Proctor, L. J., Weisbart, C., Lewis, T. L., English, D. J., Hussey, J. M., &
Runyan, D. K. (2007). Children's self-reports about violence exposure: An
examination of the Things I Have Seen and Heard Scale. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 77(3), 454.
105
Valdez, C. R., Padilla, B., Moore, S. M., & Magaña, S. (2013). Feasibility, acceptability, and
preliminary outcomes of the Fortalezas Familiares intervention for Latino families
facing maternal depression. Family Process, 52(3), 394-410.
Vega, W. A., Kolody, B., Aguilar-Gaxiola, S., & Catalano, R. (1999). Gaps in service
utilization by Mexican Americans with mental health problems. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 156(6), 928-934.
Wagner, K. D., Ritt-Olson, A., Chou, C., Pokhrel, P., Duan, L., Baezconde-Garbanati, L., . . .
Unger, J. B. (2010). Associations between family structure, family functioning, and
substance use among Hispanic/Latino adolescents. Psychology of Addictive
Behaviors, 24(1), 98-108.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.ucsb.edu:2048/10.1037/a0018497
Westbrook, T. P. R., & Harden, B. J. (2010). Pathways among exposure to violence, maternal
depression, family structure, and child outcomes through parenting: A multigroup
analysis. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 80(3), 386-400.
Wheeler, L. A., Updegraff, K. A., & Crouter, A. (2011). Work and Mexican American parent–
adolescent relationships: The mediating role of parent well-being. Journal of Family
Psychology, 25(1), 107.
Xu, Y., Boyd, R. C., Butler, L., Moore, T. M., & Benton, T. D. (2017). Associations of
parent-adolescent discrepancies in family cohesion and conflict with adolescent
impairment. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26(12), 3360-3369.
Zapata Roblyer, M. I. Z., Carlos, F. L., Merten, M. J., & Grzywacz, J. G. (2017).
Psychosocial factors associated with depressive symptoms among Latina immigrants
living in a new arrival community, Journal of Latina/o Psychology, 5(2), 103–117.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.ucsb.edu:2048/10.1037/lat0000068
Zong, J., Batalova, J., & Hallock, J. (2018). Frequently requested statistics on immigrants
and immigration in the United States.
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested-statistics-immigrants-
and-immigration-united-states
