This article was downloaded by: [Dr Rose M. Perez]On: 05 March 2012, At: 08:39Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Human Behavior in the SocialEnvironmentPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/whum20

Exploring Differences in FamilyInvolvement and Depressive Symptomsacross Latino Adolescent GroupsBeverly Araujo Dawson a , Rose M. Perez b & Carola Suárez-Orozco ca School of Social Work, Adelphi University, Garden City, New York,USAb Graduate School of Social Service, Fordham University, New York,New York, USAc Psychology Department, New York University, New York, New York,USA

Available online: 27 Feb 2012

To cite this article: Beverly Araujo Dawson, Rose M. Perez & Carola Suárez-Orozco (2012): ExploringDifferences in Family Involvement and Depressive Symptoms across Latino Adolescent Groups, Journalof Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 22:2, 153-171

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2012.647473

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representationthat the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of anyinstructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primarysources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 22:153–171, 2012Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1091-1359 print/1540-3556 onlineDOI: 10.1080/10911359.2012.647473

Exploring Differences in Family Involvementand Depressive Symptoms across Latino

Adolescent Groups

BEVERLY ARAUJO DAWSONSchool of Social Work, Adelphi University, Garden City, New York, USA

ROSE M. PEREZGraduate School of Social Service, Fordham University, New York, New York, USA

CAROLA SUÁREZ-OROZCOPsychology Department, New York University, New York, New York, USA

This study investigated the association between family involvementand depressive symptoms among a sample of 187 Dominican,Mexican, and Central American adolescents from the Longitu-dinal Immigrant Student Adaptation Study. The study used thetransactional stress model as its theoretical foundation. Findingsfrom a multiple regression model suggest that low levels of familyinvolvement were significantly related to higher levels of depressivesymptoms for Dominican youths but not for Mexican or CentralAmerican youths. Latina adolescents were significantly more likelyto have higher rates of depressive symptoms than their male coun-terparts. Research and practice implications are discussed.

KEYWORDS Family involvement, depression, Latino adolescents

INTRODUCTION

There has been growing concern regarding the increasing suicide rates amongLatino(a) adolescents (Zayas & Pilat, 2008). In fact, Latino(a) adolescents ingeneral have been described as having higher depressive-symptom rates thanWhite youths, which is a matter of concern given that depressive symptomscan be a precursor for suicide (Gore & Aseltine, 2003; Mueller, 2009; Ozer,

Address correspondence to Beverly Araujo Dawson, School of Social Work, AdelphiUniversity, 1 South Avenue, Garden City, NY 11530, USA. E-mail: baraujo@adelphi.edu

153

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

154 B. A. Dawson et al.

Park, Paul, Brindis, & Irwin, 2003). Additionally, Latino(a) immigrant youthshave been found to have higher depression rates than nonimmigrants, whichmay be due to the impact of immigration stressors (Berry, 1998; García-Coll& Magnuson, 1997; Suárez-Orozco, 2000). For example, language barriers,acculturative stress, and discrimination have been associated with negativemental-health outcomes among immigrant Latino(a) youths (Vega, Zimmer-man, Warheit, Khoury, & Gil, 1995). Despite the prevalence of psychologicaldistress among Latino(a) populations, some studies have found that immi-grant populations have better mental health outcomes on arrival (Vega &Alegría, 2001) than those born in the United States (Harker, 2001; Mendoza,Javier, & Burgos, 2007; Rumbaut, 1997), although most of these studieshave focused on Mexican participants (Alegría et al., 2008). This disparityhas been attributed to protective resources including those stemming fromfamily involvement, although there has been little scholarly attention to thisassociation (Smokowski, Chapman, & Bacallao, 2007; Smokowski, Rose, &Bacallao, 2008).

The limited literature on family involvement, which refers to sharedactivities with family members that fosters a sense of connectedness, sup-ports the important protective role family plays among immigrant youths(Kerr, Beck, Shattuck, Kattar, & Uriburu, 2003). The protective role of familyinvolvement is based on the premise that maintaining family ties allowsLatino(a) adolescents the ability to sustain their cultural values. In fact, familyties and connections to one’s native culture have been linked to bettermental health outcomes (Smokowski et al., 2007, 2008) and contributingto lower levels of risky behavior and acculturative stressors among immi-grant youths (Cooley, 2001; Parra-Cardona, Bulock, Imig, Villarruel, & Gold,2006; Smokowski & Bacallao, 2006; Torres-Saillant & Hernandez, 1999; Vega,Khoury, Zimmerman, & Gil, 1995; Vega, Zimmerman, Warheit, Apospori, &Gil, 1993; Zayas & Palleja, 1988). Although family involvement is considereda resource among Latino(a) immigrants (Gil, Wagner, & Vega, 2000), littleis known about potential differences among Latino(a) immigrant subgroups(e.g., Dominicans, Mexicans, Central Americans).

In the extant literature on Latino(a)s, there has been an assumptionof within-group homogeneity, as evidenced by Latino(a)s being studiedunder the umbrella term Latino or Hispanic. Although Latino(a)s tend toshare a common language, a colonial history, and migration patterns that in-clude certain physical features (Moscicki, Rae, Regier, & Locke, 1987; Suárez-Orozco & Paez, 2002), Latino(a)s in the United States represent a numberof different immigration statuses, ranging from U.S. citizenship to undocu-mented to families of mixed status (e.g., one or more children may holdcitizenship by virtue of being born in the United States whereas the parentsare undocumented; Moscicki et al., 1987; Pew Hispanic Center, 2009). Inaddition, many Latino(a)s are described as having transnational ties to theirhome country, but there is variation among these connections by group

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

Family Involvement and Depression across Latino Groups 155

(Levitt, 2003). For example, Dominicans have been described as one of themost transnational Latino(a) immigrant groups, given their relatively morefrequent return and circular migration patterns to the island (compared toother Latino(a) immigrant groups; Levitt, 2001). In fact, Dominicans, Mexi-cans, and Central Americans differ in numerical size, reasons for migrating tothe United States, the process by which they gained entry, reception of thehost society, and settlement patterns (Cervantes, Mejia, & Guerrero Mena,2010; R. C. Cervantes, de Snyder, & Padilla, 1989; Engstrom & Piedra, 2005;Massey & Sana, 2003; Pew Hispanic Center, 2010; Suárez-Orozco & Paez,2002; Torres-Saillant & Hernandez, 1999), each of which have the potentialto differentially affect their level of family involvement and correspondingdepressive symptoms. Thus, grouping Latino(a)s together overlooks the pos-sible differences among these groups.

Considering the potential immigration-related differences amongLatino(a) groups (Massey & Sana, 2003), it is possible that family involvementmay not play the same protective role for each group. Given that within-culture differences in family involvement and depressive symptoms amongLatino(a) subgroups have been studied less, the present study will examinethe association between family involvement and depressive symptomsamong Mexican, Dominican, and Central American immigrant youths.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK: STRESS AND COPING

To understand the relationship between family involvement and depres-sive symptoms, this study utilizes a stress-and-coping framework. Accord-ing to Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) transactional stress model, stress de-velops as a result of the interaction between persons and the environ-ment and the resources individuals use to cope with stressful events. There-fore, the experiences of immigrant youths (e.g., language barriers, accul-turation process) can translate into stress, depending on the appraisal ofthe event by the individual (Cronkite & Moos, 1984; Lazarus & Folkman,1984; Wheaton, 1999). For example, immigrant youths who have protectivefactors in place may not experience the same degree of stress or otheradverse mental health outcomes as those who lack sufficient resources tocope with such events. Specifically, Latino(a) youths who engage in familyinvolvement may have the resources to help shield them from immigra-tion stressors and may be less likely to experience depressive symptoms.In fact, family involvement and family cohesion have been described asdistinguishing features of Latino(a) families, and it has been noted that thesefeatures could potentially buffer stress for Latino(a) immigrant youths (Gilet al., 2000). Although these family connections have been found to actas a resource for Latino(a) youths, few studies have explored the directrelationship between family involvement and depressive symptoms across

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

156 B. A. Dawson et al.

Dominican, Mexican, and Central American youths. This study will attemptto fill this void.

Understanding Differences among Latino(a) Populations

At 15% of the United States population (U.S. Census Bureau, 2008), Latino(a)srepresent a large and growing population. Many studies, however, do notdistinguish among the various Latino(a) subgroups (Suárez-Orozco, Gaytán,& Kim, 2010). Latino(a)s are often grouped together on the basis of a com-mon history and language; yet there are major differences in group sizeand migration patterns among Latino(a) populations, and these differencescan affect their family involvement levels and depressive symptoms (Alegríaet al., 2008). For example, Mexicans constitute 66% of the total United StatesLatino(a) population, whereas Salvadorians, Hondurans, Guatemalans, andNicaraguans together constitute just 8% and Dominicans 3% (Pew HispanicCenter, 2010). Although Latino(a)s in the United States tend to be geographi-cally concentrated, some Latino(a) groups are represented in most every state(U.S. Census Bureau, 2008). Mexicans in particular are dispersed throughoutthe United States, can be found in almost every state, and continue tomigrate to the United States in large numbers (U.S. Census Bureau, 2008);Mexicans also constitute nearly 60% of the undocumented U.S. population(Passel, 2005). Although Dominicans make up only 3% of the population,they are highly concentrated in ethnic enclaves in the Northeast, with halfin New York alone, whereas Central Americans are located largely in theWest, South, and parts of the Northeast (Pew Hispanic Center, 2010). Giventhe large numbers of Mexicans in California and Texas and the rest of theUnited States (Pew Hispanic Center, 2010), this group can more easily de-velop Mexican communities and maintain familial support (Roberts, Frank, &Lozano-Ascencio, 1999). Central Americans, being the most recent immigrantgroup, may have relatively fewer available economic and social resources,which may contribute to the immigration stressors they experience. Forexample, Central Americans may not have the same level of family sup-port that Mexicans and Dominicans experience, which potentially affectstheir ability to maintain family cohesion or involvement (Menjívar, 2000).Thus, the differences in population size and settlement history may affectdifferent Latino(a) populations’ exposure to stressful events and their abilityto maintain family involvement levels.

In addition, it is important to consider each group’s complex migrationhistory and the reception they receive from the host society (Portes & Rum-baut, 2006). For example, Mexicans were already living in what became theSouthwestern United States before that territory was sold to the United Statesafter the treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo. They began migrating to the UnitedStates for economic reasons in patterns that have continued to the presentday (Del Castillo, 1992; Massey & Sana, 2003). The large population of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

Family Involvement and Depression across Latino Groups 157

Mexicans living in the United States today, regardless of their migration status,suffers from much of the anti-immigrant sentiment that is channeled againstthe undocumented, leaving many to feel marginalized (Jiménez, 2008). Con-versely, Dominican migration is more recent and increased significantly sincethe passing of the 1965 Naturalization Act (Torres-Saillant & Hernandez,1999). Although Dominicans come to the United States in search of economicopportunities and to reunite with family (Torres-Saillant & Hernandez, 1999),46.3% are U.S. citizens (Pew Hispanic Center, 2009). Yet, Dominicans tendto maintain strong connections to the home culture, as evidenced by thehigh number of Spanish speakers even among third-generation Dominicans(Alba, 2004). Other unique factors to consider regarding Dominicans is thatthey are more likely to be racialized than Mexicans and Central Americansdue to their dark complexions, which can increase their chance of beingtargets of discrimination in the United States (Gomez, 2000; Rodriguez, 2000;Torres-Saillant & Hernandez, 1999). These racial experiences can negativelyaffect the experiences of Dominicans in the United States and may con-tribute to the Dominicans’ reliance on family for support (Araujo Dawson &Panchanadeswaran, 2010).

Unlike Mexicans and Dominicans, Central Americans come from a con-text of political upheaval (Gzesh, 2006). In the decades leading up to the1980s, increasing numbers of Central Americans fled for reasons includingcivil wars; yet, upon arrival in the United States, Salvadorians, Guatemalans(Hernandez, 2005), and Nicaraguans (Portes & Stepick, 1994) requested butwere not granted asylum. Nevertheless, they remained in the country despitea hostile reception (Engstrom & Piedra, 2005; Hernandez, 2005). Being un-documented meant they were ineligible for the benefits accorded refugees,and consequently they were exposed to the stress associated with theiruncertain status (Hernandez, 2005). More recently, many of these groupshave been able to obtain temporary protection and refugee status, whichallows them to become eligible for health privileges under the PersonalResponsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, which does nototherwise allow noncitizens to receive benefits for the first 5 years after entry(Singer, 2004). Central Americans have been found to experience higherlevels of posttraumatic stress than Mexicans (Cervantes et al., 1989), and asa result of gender-specific terror in the contexts from which they migrated,women may fare worse (Aron, Corne, Fursland, & Zelwer, 1991).

In line with their varied immigration patterns, Mexican, Dominican, andCentral American transnationalism patterns also vary. Unlike Mexicans andCentral Americans, Dominican families have been described as transmigrants(Schiller, Basch, & Blanc, 1995), which refers to having daily connectionsin both the United States and the Dominican Republic (Levitt, 2003). Theyhave also been described as having the highest levels of participation intransnational practices or back-and-forth migration (Falicov, 2005; Kasinitz,2002). This has resulted in Dominican children’s and youths’ spending time

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

158 B. A. Dawson et al.

in their native country, which allows them to maintain ties to their familymembers (Kasinitz, 2002). Mexicans and Central Americans, like many otherimmigrant groups, also maintain transnational ties with their families in theirhome countries (Portes & Rumbaut, 2006; Sánchez & Machado-Casas, 2009;Schiller et al., 1995; Staton, Jackson, & Canache, 2007; Stepick & Stepick,2002). However, the strength of these ties varies by their migration status:Those who are undocumented are limited in their ability to travel back andforth to their home country (Levitt & Jaworsky, 2007). Given the varied ex-periences among Latino(a) subgroups, family involvement may differ acrossLatino(a) subgroups, thereby affecting the protective resources available toLatino(a) adolescents.

Family Involvement and Depressive Symptoms

There are several studies that support a relationship between family involve-ment and depressive symptoms among Latino(a) adults (Mueller, 2009; Rod-riguez, Mira, Paez, & Myers, 2007). Specifically, several studies have founda significant relationship between lower levels of family involvement andhigher rates of psychological distress among Mexican immigrants (Rodriguezet al., 2007), female Mexican college students (Castillo, Conoley, & Brossart,2004), and Latino(a) college students (Rodriguez, Mira, Myers, Morris, &Cardoza, 2003). In addition, factors such as low socioeconomic status andlack of parental education have been linked to lower family involvementlevels (Cortes, 1995; Gil, Vega, & Dimas, 1994). Unfortunately, most of theextant literature has focused on Mexican populations and less on Dominicanand Central American youth populations.

Although research on family involvement among adolescents and spe-cific Latino(a) populations is scarce, a number of studies have found arelationship between family involvement and depression among Latino(a)adolescents (Mueller, 2009; Vega, Kolody, Valle, & Weir, 1991). For exam-ple, Mueller (2009) found that family cohesion served as a buffer againstdepressive symptoms for Latino(a) youths (and Black and White youths).Another study found that family emotional support and income predicteddepression (Vega et al., 1991). Unfortunately, most of the literature linkingfamily involvement to depressive symptoms among adolescents has focusedon Latino(a)s in general. Thus, little is known about group differences amongLatino(a) adolescents regarding the association between family involvementand depressive symptoms.

The present study, which draws on data from the Longitudinal Immi-grant Student Adaptation Study (LISAS), focuses on advancing the knowledgebase (1) by examining differences in family involvement across Latino(a)populations (e.g., Dominican, Mexican, Central American immigrant adoles-cents) and (2) by exploring the relationship between family involvement anddepressive symptoms across Latino(a) adolescent populations.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

Family Involvement and Depression across Latino Groups 159

METHODS

LISAS was a 5-year longitudinal study originating in 1997 that used inter-disciplinary and comparative approaches, mixed methods, and triangulateddata in order to document patterns of adaptation among recently arrived im-migrant youths from Central America, China, the Dominican Republic, Haiti,and Mexico (Suárez-Orozco, Pimentel, & Martin, 2009; C. Suárez-Orozco,Rhodes, & Milburn, 2009; C. Suárez-Orozco, Suárez-Orozco, & Todorova,2008).

Recruitment and Participants

The sample began with 408 participants in the first year and was reducedby attrition to 308 by the fifth year (Song, 2009). The sample for the presentanalysis consisted of the 187 youths who self-identified as Latino(a) in theLISAS data set. Students were recruited from seven school districts in Bostonand San Francisco with high densities of newcomer immigrant students.Participation in the study was limited to students who (1) had arrived inthe United States within 5 years of the first wave of the study; (2) lived inthe United States for two-thirds of their lives; (3) have one relative livingnearby; and (4) had at least one employed parent. Bilingual/bicultural re-search assistants conducted one face-to-face interview during each of thefive study periods; interviews were conducted in the participants’ languageof preference. Not surprisingly, as the study progressed, the preference forspeaking English during interviews increased. Interviews with parents wereconducted only in the first and last periods of the study; in all cases, parentschose to have the interviews conducted in their native language.

Eighty participants from each country of origin were recruited in the firstyear of the study. By the fifth year, the 187 Latino(a) participants consisted of60 Dominicans, 70 Mexicans, and 57 youths from Central America. CentralAmericans included 28 participants from El Salvador, 17 from Guatemala,10 from Honduras, and 2 from Nicaragua. The majority of the sample wasfemale (60%). The average age of the participants at baseline was 11.6 years,ranging from 8 to 14, indicating that participants were primarily in the earlyto mid-phases of adolescence. Although in the first year the participants’parents reported being in the United States from 1 to 25 years, the samplewas primarily made up of newcomers averaging only 5.4 years; that the rangeextended to 25 years suggests some that stepparents with longer trajectoriesin the United States may have been included. There were no significantdifferences between the parents’ reported time in the United States and thatof the participants. At baseline, students ranged in education from third toninth grade. The average years of education for fathers was 7 (0–21) years,whereas for mothers it was 8.3 years (1–17). Ninety percent of the parents

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

160 B. A. Dawson et al.

TABLE 1 Descriptive Statistics (n D 187)

M SD Range

DV: Depressive symptoms at wave 5* 10.3 6.2 0–28Independent variables

Country of origin (%):Dominican Republic 32.1% 32.1%Mexico 37.4% 37.4%Central American 30.4% 30.4%

Family involvementa 1.6 1.3 0–4Covariates

Depressive symptoms at year 1a 11.3 5.7 0–29Participant’s age (in years) 11.6 1.5 8–14Low income (less than $30,000) (%) 49%Time since immigration (months)b 65.3 50.5 1–300Father education (years) 7.0 3.9 0–21Mother education (years) 8.3 4.5 1–17Percent male 44.4%Grade level 6.2 1.5 3–9Parents employed 86.4%

aThese items were calculated using the mean of the scale multiplied by the number ofitems on the scale.bAlthough the vast majority of the sample consisted of newcomer youths and parentsnot in the country longer than 10 years, it is possible some stepparents may have beenincluded.

were employed at baseline and half earned less than $30,000 per year (seeTable 1 for descriptive statistics for the sample).

Measures

DEPENDENT VARIABLE

Depressive symptoms measured in years 1 and 5 were assessed using themean of the 14-item psychological-symptom scale. The scale is based on a 4-point Likert scale, with 3 indicating high rates of depressive symptoms and 0indicating no depressive symptoms (Suárez-Orozco, Todorova, & Qin, 2006).This scale was informed by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of MentalDisorders (4th ed.; DSM-IV-TR; American Psychiatric Association [APA], 1994)and the SCL90 (Derogatis & Cleary, 1977). Because we were interested inunderstanding whether prior depression affected later depression, only itemsthat were available in year 1 and year 5 were included in these analyses. Inaddition, an exploratory factor analysis (APA, 1994; Derogatis & Cleary, 1977)was utilized to assess the factor structure of the depressive-symptoms scaleand determine which of the original 25 scale items should be included in thefinal measure. In the final model for each of the two time periods, only thosequestions with a .35 or higher factor loading were selected for inclusionin both year 1 and year 5 depressive-symptoms scales. Items selected for

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

Family Involvement and Depression across Latino Groups 161

inclusion queried such feelings as ‘‘frequency of feeling like bad thingswill happen,’’ ‘‘frequency of feeling sad,’’ and ‘‘frequency of loosing tempereasily.’’ Once a factor structure was determined, Cronbach alpha internalconsistency reliability coefficients were utilized to determine the randomerror in the scales. Reliability scores were .81 for year 1 and .85 for year 5,which is consistent with a study that yielded a reliability coefficient of .78using a similar scale with Latino(a) adolescents (Peña et al., 2008).

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

Family involvement was measured in the third year of the study by themean of four binary variables. For each scale item a 0 indicated a negativeresponse, and 1 indicated a positive response. Of the family involvementitems in the LISAS at year 3, only those with a .35 or higher factor loading inan exploratory factor analysis were included. Consequently, of the original 13items on the scale, 4 items met our inclusion criteria. The four included itemsthat captured behavioral family involvement included (1) going to museums;(2) going together to the library to borrow books; (3) going together to thelibrary to use the computer/Internet; and (4) playing games of ball withparents or relatives. The family involvement measure yielded a reliabilityscore of .65; it should be noted that this score is lower than that of a previousstudy with Latino(a) populations (.81) but is considered within a generallyacceptable range in the broader non-Latino(a) literature (Romero, Robinson,Haydel, Mendoza, & Killen, 2004).

CONTROL VARIABLES

Based on the existing literature, several control variables were included in thepresent study. Depressive symptoms were measured at both year 1 and year 5.Participant’s age, father’s education, and mother’s education were measuredin years, whereas the amount of time parents had spent in the United Stateswas measured in months. Income was measured using a set of intervals in$10,000 increments (e.g., less than $10,000, $10,000–20,000). This variablewas recoded as low income, a dichotomous variable with 1 indicating thatthe family earned less than $30,000 and 0 indicating income of $30,000 ormore. Country of origin was indicated by participants’ responses to an open-end question asked during the first interview. Time since immigration is thenumber of months since the parents’ arrival in the United States and includedstepparents who were not immigrants. Gender consisted of a dichotomousvariable that was coded 1 D male and 0 D female. Grade level was indicatedby the grade in which a child was enrolled in at school. Parental employmentwas measured by a dichotomous variable with 1 being employed and 0 notemployed. Control variables (e.g., participant, parental educational status,and years in the United States) were all centered at their group means inorder to ensure that the intercept in each regression was an observable

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

162 B. A. Dawson et al.

value. Age was centered at the group mean by grade level to remove thecollinearity between age and grade level.

Missing Data

The amount of missing data in the LISAS subsample required the use ofmultiple imputation analysis to reduce the likelihood of spurious results(Twisk & De Vente, 2002). Multiple imputation analysis consists of a simu-lation that produces multiple versions of the data with a different value foreach missing observation. Using PROC MIXED in SAS 9.1, missing valueswere replaced with values drawn from conditionally random probabilitydistributions developed from the observed data (Schafer, 1997). Analyseswere then run on each of the imputed data sets and combined so that thestandard errors of the imputed values were inflated to reflect the uncertaintyof the imputed values. For the analysis used in this study, 10 simulatedversions of the data were created.

Data Analysis

Using the data set created from the imputation process, an analysis of vari-ance was conducted to test for differences in family involvement levels inyear 3 across Mexican, Dominican, and Central American adolescents. Inaddition, an ordinary least-squares regression was conducted to test theassociation between family involvement in year 3 and depressive symptomsin year 5, as well as the effect of country of origin, after controlling for demo-graphic variables (e.g., parental income, time in the United States, parentaleducation) across Dominican, Mexican, and Central American adolescents.To test the model, all covariates were entered, along with family involvement,depressive symptoms, and country of origin. The Dominican Republic wasused as the reference category for country of origin. To determine whetherthe association of family involvement and depressive symptoms varies bycountry of origin, two interaction terms—‘‘family involvement’’ and ‘‘countryof origin’’ (e.g., Central America, Mexico)—were tested in the model (Aiken& West, 1991). All p-values presented are two-sided, and standardized betaswere calculated for each parameter estimate. The analyses for the presentstudy were performed using SAS 9.1.

RESULTS

An analysis of variance was conducted to answer Question 1 and demon-strated no significant differences in family involvement among Dominican(M D 1.33, standard deviation [SD] D 1.31), Mexican (M D 1.66, SD D

1.24), and Central American (M D 1.91, SD D 1.39) youths F(2, 184) D

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

Family Involvement and Depression across Latino Groups 163

TABLE 2 Summary of Regression Analyses: Exploring the Relationship between FamilyInvolvement and Depressive Symptoms (n D 187)

Variable B SE ˇ

Independent variablesCountry of origin: Mexican 0.69 1.14 .05Country of origin: Central American 0.67 1.15 .05Family involvement (for Dominicans, the referent group) !1.19 0.56 !.25*Interaction: Family involvement by CO: Mexican 0.71 0.77 .09Interaction: Family involvement by CO: Central American 0.67 0.77 .08

CovariatesDepressive symptoms at wave 1 0.35 0.07 .32***Participant’s age (C) 0.95 0.62 .11Low income (less than $30,000) 1.55 0.96 .13Time since immigration (Months) (C) !0.01 0.01 !.05Father education (years) (C) 0.24 0.17 .15Mother education (years) (C) !0.04 0.14 !.03Gender: Male !2.43 0.83 !.20**Grade level 0.10 0.31 .02Parents employed !1.64 1.52 !.09

Note. R2D .24. The referent group is Dominicans.

*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

2.86, MSE D 1.73, p D .06. Second, a regression analyses was utilized toanswer research Question 2, which supported a significant negative effect offamily involvement (Year 3) on depressive symptoms (year 5) for Dominicanimmigrant youths (b D !1.19, p < .05) but not for Mexican or CentralAmerican adolescents, while controlling for sociodemographic variables (seeTable 2).

In addition, several of the covariates yielded significant results. First,results show that the depressive-symptoms scale at year 1 was significantlyrelated to depressive symptoms at year 5 (b D .35, p < .001). Therefore,Latino(a) immigrant adolescents who experienced depressive symptoms atyear 1 of the study were more likely to continue experiencing depressivesymptoms at year 5. Second, the gender covariate was significantly relatedto depressive symptoms; therefore, being a Latino male was associated withlower levels of depressive symptoms than being a Latina female (b D !2.43,p < .01). This model accounted for 24% of the variance (R2

D .24), leaving76% of the variance on the effect of family involvement and country of originamong Latino(a) adolescents on depressive symptoms unexplained.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

The present study examines the relationship between family involvementand depressive symptoms across Mexican, Dominican, and Central American

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

164 B. A. Dawson et al.

immigrant adolescents Interestingly, among Dominican adolescents, lowerfamily involvement was found to be more severely associated with depres-sion than for the Mexican or Central American groups. This finding is notsurprising given the high rates of transmigration and its maintenance ofcontacts with family in the home country among Dominicans (Levitt, 2003;Schiller et al., 1995). It is possible that youths who maintain familial ties inthe home country may have lower levels of close local family relationshipsand robust family involvement in the host country. Therefore, lacking thesefamily resources in the United States, Dominican youths may be less ableto cope with the stressors they are exposed to as immigrant youths in theUnited States (Kasinitz, 2002).

In addition, the results of the present study support the possibility ofconstancy of depressive-symptom levels over several years. For example,Latino(a) adolescents who were depressed at the start of the study were morelikely to be depressed in year 5. This finding is consistent with the existingliterature, which suggests that there is an increase in depressive-symptomlevels that peaks in early adolescence (Xiaojia, Natsuaki, & Conger, 2006).The peak in depressive symptoms experienced by adolescents has been ex-plained by the emotional turmoil youths encounter during the developmentalphase of adolescence when individuals are struggling to develop autonomyand a sense of self (Adkins, Wang, & Elder, 2009; Schiefman, Van Gundy,& Taylor, 2001). Knowing that the Latino(a) immigrant youths were about11 years old at year 1 of the study, it is probable that the study resultspicked up on the onset of normative/age appropriate depressive symptoms.In addition, this study’s finding is not entirely surprising considering thatyoung Latino(a)s have been found to have higher depressive-symptom ratesthan White adolescents (Mueller, 2009). These findings support the need tofurther understand the protective factors available to Latino(a) youths andthe importance of treating depressive symptoms during adolescence.

Our findings also support the existing literature regarding the rela-tionship between gender and depressive symptoms. For example, Latinaadolescents in the LISAS were more likely to experience depressive symp-toms than Latino males. This finding supports the existing literature that hasconsistently found that females have higher depressive-symptom rates thanmales (Hankin et al., 1998). Higher rates of depressive symptoms amongfemale adolescents may be due to exposure to stereotypes and sex-rolesocialization regarding gender-specific ways to exhibit psychological distress(Allen, Denner, Yoshikawa, Seidman, & Aber, 1996; Nolen-Hoeksema, 1994).For example, girls are often encouraged to internalize stress, whereas boysare discouraged from crying or demonstrating sadness (Nolen-Hoeksema,1994). This finding is important because it supports the view that genderdifferences in depressive-symptom rates found in many studies with differentpopulations extend to Latino(a) groups.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

Family Involvement and Depression across Latino Groups 165

LIMITATIONS

There are several limitations that need to be taken into consideration wheninterpreting the present findings. In the study, Salvadorians, Hondurans,Guatemalans, and Nicaraguans were grouped together under the umbrellaterm Central American. We recognize that this strategy overlooks the po-tential differences in experiences among these groups, but the sample sizefor each of these groups was very small, rendering within-group analysisunfeasible. We also realize that measuring family involvement at year 3 ratherthan year 5 is not ideal; however, we were limited to the variables availablein the dataset, and the year 5 family involvement variable was not measured.Despite these limitations, the study made several contributions to the currentliterature.

First, the finding that low levels of family involvement is associatedwith more depressive symptoms is an important contribution because ofthe lack of empirical evidence regarding the differential role family involve-ment plays across different Latino(a) populations. Understanding how familyinvolvement can be a resource against negative mental health outcomesis supported by the stress-and-coping framework, which asserts that thepresence of resources can minimize stress levels (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).The present findings support the theory that a lack of family involvementmay be related to more depressive symptoms for Dominican youths butnot Central American and Mexican immigrant youths. These findings areconsistent with the existing literature, which supports the robustness offamily involvement among Latino(a) groups (Sabogal, Marín, Otero-Sabogal,& Marín, 1987), whereas others argue that cultural protective factors may varyamong Latino(a) populations (Gil et al., 2000). Given the present findings,researchers would do well to explore this association further.

Furthermore, the present study contributes to the knowledge of prac-titioners working with Latino(a) adolescents and their understanding of po-tential protective factors. Specifically, the findings indicate that maintainingfamily involvement can be beneficial in contributing to lower depressive-symptom rates for Dominican adolescents. This implies that practitionersserving Latino(a) youths might be well served to understand the importantrole that family can play among Latino(a) adolescents and utilize family-based interventions that can help build on family relationships as a resourcefor Latino(a) youths (Zayas & Pilat, 2008). For example, research on socialwork practice with Latino(a)s emphasizes the importance of family inclusionin family therapy and treatments such as strategic and structural family ther-apy, which incorporate the family, which have been found to be beneficialwhen working with Latino(a) families (Canino & Canino, 1982; Celano &Kaslow, 2000). Such methods would help emphasize the importance ofenhancing family involvement through family-based interventions that in-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

166 B. A. Dawson et al.

corporate shared family activities and emphasize cohesion (Miranda, Bilot,Peluso, Berman, & Van Meek, 2006).

In addition, based on the current findings, an area that warrants fur-ther investigation is our understanding of the role of family involvementamong Mexicans and Central Americans. The present study provides empir-ical evidence that a lack of family involvement is associated with increaseddepressive symptoms among Dominican youths but not Mexican or CentralAmerican ones. More research is needed to understand the role that familyinvolvement plays across Latino populations, especially considering howLatino(a)s subgroups are centralized in certain regions of the country. It islikely that practitioners may find themselves serving one particular Latino(a)group and would benefit from understanding the potential protective factorsamong this population. Thus, additional research on the impact of familyinvolvement on depressive symptoms across Latino(a)s is warranted.

In conclusion, considering the increasing number of Latino(a) youthsfrom different subgroups in U.S. schools, it is imperative that practition-ers understand the potential protective factors—and the differences—thatexist among these groups. For example, practitioners would benefit fromunderstanding how family involvement can potentially affect mental healthproblems (including depressive symptoms) across groups of Latino(a) im-migrants from different sending countries. It is also crucial that practitionersunderstand how the unique settlement and migration patterns of specificLatino(a) subgroups can influence the potential protective role of familyinvolvement.

REFERENCES

Adkins, D. E., Wang, V., & Elder, G. H. Jr. (2009). Structure and stress: Trajectories ofdepressive symptoms across adolescence and young adulthood. Social Forces,88(1), 31–60.

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpretinginteractions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Alba, R. (2004). Language assimilation today: Bilingualism persists more than in thepast, but English still dominates. Working Paper, no. 111. San Diego, CA: Centerfor Comparative Immigration Studies, University of California. Retrieved fromhttp://escholarship.org/uc/item/0j5865nk.

Alegría, M., Canino, G., Shrout, P. E., Woo, M., Duan, N., & Vila, D. (2008). Preva-lence of mental illness in immigrant and non-immigrant U.S. Latino groups.American Journal of Psychiatry, 165(3), 359–369.

Allen, L., Denner, J., Yoshikawa, H., Seidman, E., & Aber, J. L. (1996). Acculturationand depression among Latina urban girls. In B. J. R. Leadbeater & N. Way (Eds.),Urban girls: Resisting stereotypes, creating identities (pp. 337–352). New York,NY: New York University Press.

American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of men-tal disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

Family Involvement and Depression across Latino Groups 167

Araujo Dawson, B., & Panchanadeswaran, S. (2010). Discrimination and accultura-tive stress among first-generation Dominicans. Hispanic Journal of BehavioralSciences, 32(2), 216–231.

Aron, A., Corne, S., Fursland, A., & Zelwer, B. (1991). The gender-specific terrorof El Salvador and Guatemala: Post-traumatic stress disorder in Central Ameri-can refugee women. Women’s Studies International Foundation, 14(1–2), 37–47.

Berry, J. W. (1998). Acculturative stress. In P. B. Organista, K. M. Chun, & G. Marín(Eds.), Readings in ethnic psychology (pp. 117–122). New York, NY: Routledge.

Canino, G., & Canino, I. (1982). Culturally syntonic family therapy for migrant PuertoRicans. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 33(4), 299–303.

Castillo, L. G., Conoley, C. W., & Brossart, D. F. (2004). Acculturation, White mar-ginalization, and family support as predictors of perceived distress in MexicanAmerican female college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 151–157.

Celano, M., & Kaslow, N. (2000). Culturally competent family interventions: Reviewand case illustrations. American Journal of Family Therapy, 28(3), 217–228.

Cervantes, R. C., de Snyder, V., & Padilla, A. M. (1989). Posttraumatic stress in immi-grants from Central America and Mexico. Hospital and Community Psychiatry,40(6), 615–619.

Cervantes, J. M., Mejia, O. L., & Guerrero Mena, A. (2010). Serial migration and theassessment of extreme and unsual psychological hardship with undocumentedLatina/o families. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 32(2), 275–291. doi:10.1177/0739986310366286.

Cooley, C. (2001). The relationship between familism and child maltreatment inLatino and Anglo families. Child Maltreatment, 6(2), 130–142.

Cortes, D. E. (1995). Variations in familism in two generations of Puerto Ricans.Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 17(2), 249–255.

Cronkite, R. C., & Moos, R. H. (1984). The role of predisposing and moderatingfactors in the stress-illness relationship. Journal of Health & Social Behavior,25(4), 372–393.

Del Castillo, R. G. (1992). The treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo: A legacy of conflict.Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.

Derogatis, L. B., & Cleary, P. A. (1977). Confirmation of the dimensional structureof the SCL-90: A study in construct validation. Journal of Clinical Psychology,33(4), 981–989.

Engstrom, D. W., & Piedra, L. M. (2005). Central American survivors of politicalviolence: An examination of contextual factors and practice issues. Journal ofImmigrant and Refugee Services, 3(1/2), 171–190.

Falicov, C. J. (2005). Emotional transnationalism and family identities. Family Process,44(4), 399–406.

García-Coll, C., & Magnuson, K. (1997). The psychological experience of immigra-tion: A developmental perspective. In A. Booth, A. C. Crouter, & N. Landale(Eds.), Immigration and the family: Research and policy on US immigrants(pp. 91–132). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Gil, A. G., Vega, W. A., & Dimas, J. M. (1994). Acculturative stress and personal ad-justment among Hispanic adolescent boys. Journal of Community Psychology,22(1), 43–54.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

168 B. A. Dawson et al.

Gil, A. G., Wagner, E. F., & Vega, W. A. (2000). Acculturation, familism, and al-cohol use among Latino adolescent males: Longitudinal relations. Journal ofCommunity Psychology, 28(4), 443–458.

Gomez, C. (2000). The continual significance of skin color: An exploratory study ofLatinos in the Northeast. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 22(1), 94.

Gore, S., & Aseltine, R. H. Jr. (2003). Race and ethnic differences in depressed moodfollowing the transition from high school. Journal of Health & Social Behavior,44(3), 370–389.

Gzesh, S. (2006). Central Americans and asylum policy in the Reagan era. Immi-gration Monthly. Retrieved from http://www.migrationinformation.org/usfocus/display.cfm?ID=384

Hankin, B. L., Abramson, L. Y., Moffitt, T. E., Silva, P. A., McGee, R., & Angell,K. E. (1998). Development of depression from preadolescence to young adult-hood: Emerging gender differences in a 10-year longitudinal study. Journal ofAbnormal Psychology, 107(1), 128–140.

Harker, K. (2001). Immigrant generation, assimilation, and adolescent psychologicalwell being. Social Forces, 79, 970–1004.

Hernandez, M. (2005). Central American families. In M. McGoldrick, J. Giordano, &N. Garcia-Preto (Eds.), Ethnicity and family therapy (pp. 178–191). New York,NY: Guilford Press.

Jiménez, T. (2008). Mexican immigrant replenishment and the continuing signifi-cance of ethnicity and race. American Journal of Sociology, 113(6), 1527–1567.

Kasinitz, P. (2002). Transnationalism and the children of immigrants in contemporaryNew York. In P. Levitt & M. C. Waters (Eds.), The changing face of home:The transnational lives of the second generation (pp. 96–122). New York, NY:Russell Sage Foundation.

Kerr, M. H., Beck, K., Shattuck, T. D., Kattar, C., & Uriburu, D. (2003). Familyinvolvement, problem and prosocial behavior outcomes of Latino youth. Amer-ican Journal of Health Behavior, 27, 55–65. doi: 343410661.

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York, NY:Springer.

Levitt, P. (2001). The transnational villagers. Berkeley & Los Angeles, CA: Universityof California Press.

Levitt, P. (2003). Transnational villagers. In J. Stone & D. Rutledge (Eds.), Race andethnicity: Comparative and theoretical approaches (p. 424). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Levitt, P., & Jaworsky, B. N. (2007). Transnational migration studies: Past develop-ments and future trends. Sociology, 33(1), 129–156.

Massey, D., & Sana, M. (2003). Patterns of U.S. migration from Mexico, the Caribbean,and Central America. Migraciones Internacionales, 2(2), 5–39.

Mendoza, F. S., Javier, J. R., & Burgos, A. E. (2007). Health of children in immigrantfamilies. In J. E. Lansford, K. Deater-Deckard, & M. H. Bornstein (Eds.), Immi-grant families in contemporary society (pp. 30–50). New York, NY: GuilfordPress.

Menjívar, C. (2000). Fragmented ties: Salvadoran immigrant networks in America.Berkeley & Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.

Miranda, A. O., Bilot, J. M., Peluso, P. R., Berman, K., & Van Meek, L. G. (2006). Latinofamilies: The relevance of the connection among acculturation, family dynamics,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

Family Involvement and Depression across Latino Groups 169

and health for family counseling research and practice. Family Journal, 14(3),268–273.

Moscicki, E. K., Rae, D., Regier, D. A., & Locke, B. Z. (1987). The Hispanic health andnutrition examination survey: Depression among Mexican-Americans, CubanAmericans, Puerto Ricans. In M. Gaviria & J. D. Arana (Eds.), Health behavior:Research agenda for Hispanics (pp. 145–149). Chicago, IL: University of Illinoisat Chicago Circle.

Mueller, C. (2009). Protective factors as barriers to depression in gifted and nongiftedadolescents. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(1), 3–14.

Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (1994). An interactive model for the emergence of genderdifferences in depression in adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence,4(4), 519–534.

Ozer, E. M., Park, M. J., Paul, T., Brindis, C. D., & Irwin, C. E. Jr. (2003). America’sadolescents: Are they healthy? San Francisco, CA: University of California.

Parra-Cardona, J. R., Bulock, L. A., Imig, D. R., Villarruel, F. A., & Gold, S. J. (2006).Trabajando duro todos los días’’: Learning from the life experiences of Mexican-origin migrant families. Family Relations, 55(3), 361–375. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2006.00409.x.

Passel, J. (2005). Estimates of the size and characteristics of the undocumentedpopulation. A Pew Research Center Project. Washington, DC: Pew HispanicCenter.

Peña, J. B., Wyman, P. A., Brown, C. H., Matthieu, M. M., Olivares, T. E., & Hartel, D.(2008). Immigration generation status and its association with suicide attempts,substance use, and depressive symptoms among Latino adolescents in the USA.Prevention Science, 9(4), 299–310. doi: 10.1007/s11121-008-0105-x.

Pew Hispanic Center. (2009). Between two worlds: How young Latinos come of agein America. A Pew Research Center Project. Washington, DC: Pew ResearchCenter.

Pew Hispanic Center. (2010). Country of origin profiles. A Pew Research CenterProject. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center.

Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. G. (2006). Immigrant America: A portrait (3rd ed.).Berkeley & Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.

Portes, A., & Stepick, A. (1994). City on the edge: The transformation of Miami.Berkeley & Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.

Roberts, B., Frank, R., & Lozano-Ascencio, F. (1999). Transnational migrant commu-nities and Mexican migration to the US. Ethnic & Racial Studies, 22(2), 238–266.

Rodriguez, C. E. (2000). Changing race: Latinos, the census, and the history ofethnicity in the United States. New York, NY: New York University Press.

Rodriguez, N., Mira, C. B., Myers, H. F., Morris, J. K., & Cardoza, D. (2003). Familyor friends: Who plays a greater supportive role for Latino college students?Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 9(3), 236–250. doi: 10.1037/1099-9809.9.3.236.

Rodriguez, N., Mira, C. B., Paez, N. D., & Myers, H. F. (2007). Exploring the com-plexities of familism and acculturation: Central constructs for people of Mexicanorigin. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39(1–2), 61–77. doi: 10.1007/s10464-007-9090-7.

Romero, A. J., Robinson, T. N., Haydel, K. F., Mendoza, F., & Killen, J. D. (2004).Associations among familism, language preference, and education in Mexican-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

170 B. A. Dawson et al.

American mothers and their children. Journal of Developmental & BehavioralPediatrics, 25(1), 34–40.

Rumbaut, R. G. (1997). Paradoxes (and orthodoxies) of acculturation. SociologicalPerspectives, 40, 483–511.

Sabogal, F., Marín, G., Otero-Sabogal, R., & Marín, B. V. (1987). Hispanic famil-ism and acculturation: What changes and what doesn’t? Hispanic Journal ofBehavioral Sciences, 9(4), 397–412.

Sánchez, P., & Machado-Casas, M. (2009). At the intersection of transnationalism,Latina/o immigrants, and education. High School Journal, 92(4), 3–15.

Schafer, J. L. (1997). Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. London, UK: Chapman& Hall.

Schiefman, S., Van Gundy, K., & Taylor, J. (2001). Status, role, and resource expla-nations for age patterns in psychological distress. Journal of Health & SocialBehavior, 42(1), 80–96.

Schiller, N. G., Basch, L., & Blanc, C. S. (1995). From immigrant to transmigrant:Theorizing transnational migration. Anthropological Quarterly, 68(1), 48–63.

Singer, A. (2004). Welfare reform and immigrants: A policy review. Immigrants,welfare reform, and the poverty of policy. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

Smokowski, P. R., & Bacallao, M. (2006). Acculturation and aggression in Latinoadolescents: A structural model focusing on cultural risk factors and assets.Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34(5), 657–671.

Smokowski, P. R., Chapman, M. V., & Bacallao, M. L. (2007). Acculturation risk andprotective factors and mental health symptoms in immigrant Latino adolescents.Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 16(3), 33–55.

Smokowski, P. R., Rose, R., & Bacallao, M. L. (2008). Acculturation and Latinofamily processes: How cultural involvement, biculturalism, and acculturationgaps influence family dynamics. Family Relations, 57(3), 295–308.

Song, S. (2009). Finding one’s place: Shifting ethnic identities of recent immigrantchildren from China, Haiti and Mexico in the United States. Ethnic & RacialStudies, 33(6), 1006–1031.

Staton, J. K., Jackson, R. A., & Canache, D. (2007). Dual nationality among Latinos:What are the implications for political connectedness? Journal of Politics, 69(2),470–482.

Stepick, A., & Stepick, C. D. (2002). Becoming American, constructing ethnicity:Immigrant youth and civic engagement. Applied Developmental Science, 6(4),246–257.

Suárez-Orozco, C. (2000). Identities under siege: Immigration stress and social mir-roring among the children of immigrants. In A. Robben & M. Suárez-Orozco(Eds.), Cultures under siege: Social violence & trauma (pp. 194–226). Cam-bridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Suárez-Orozco, C., Gaytán, F. X., & Kim, H. Y. (2010). Facing the challeges of educat-ing Latino immigrant origin students. In A. B. N. L. S. McHale (Ed.), Developmentof Hispanic children in immigrant families: Challenges and prospects (pp. 189–239). Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

Suárez-Orozco, C., Pimentel, A., & Martin, M. (2009). The significance of relation-ships: Academic engagement and achievement among newcomer immigrantyouth. Teachers College Record, 111(3), 712–749.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2

Family Involvement and Depression across Latino Groups 171

Suárez-Orozco, C., Rhodes, J., & Milburn, M. (2009). Unraveling the immigrantparadox: Academic engagement and disengagement among recently arrivedimmigrant youth. Youth & Society, 41(2), 151–185.

Suárez-Orozco, C., Suárez-Orozco, M., & Todorova, I. (2008). Learning a new land:Immigrant students in American society. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

Suárez-Orozco, C., Todorova, I., & Qin, D. B. (2006). The well-being of immigrantadolescents: A longitudinal perspective on risk and protective factors. In F. A.Villarruel & T. Luster (Eds.), The crisis in youth mental health: Critical issuesand effective programs: Disorders in adolescence. (vol. 2, pp. 53–83). Westport,CT: Praeger.

Suárez-Orozco, M. M., & Paez, M. (Eds.). (2002). Latinos: Remaking America (2nded.). Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.

Torres-Saillant, S., & Hernandez, R. (1999). The Dominican Americans. Westport,CT: Greenwood Press.

Twisk, J., & de Vente, W. (2002). Attrition in longitudinal studies: How to deal withmissing data. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 55(4), 329–337.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2008). Table 38. Social and economic characteristics of theHispanic population: 2007. In Statistical abstract of the United States: 2009(128th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/statab/www.

Vega, W. A., & Alegría, M. (2001). Latino mental health and treatment in the UnitedStates. Health issues in the Latino community (pp. 179–208). San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.

Vega, W. A., Khoury, E. L., Zimmerman, R. S., & Gil, A. G. (1995). Cultural conflictsand problem behaviors of Latino adolescents in home and school environments.Journal of Community Psychology, 23(2), 167–179.

Vega, W. A., Kolody, B., Valle, R., & Weir, J. (1991). Social networks, social support,and their relationship to depression among immigrant Mexican women. HumanOrganization, 50(2), 154–162.

Vega, W. A., Zimmerman, R. S., Warheit, G. J., Apospori, E., & Gil, A. G. (1993). Riskfactors for early adolescent drug use in four ethnic and racial groups. AmericanJournal of Public Health, 83(2), 185–189.

Vega, W. A., Zimmerman, R. S., Warheit, G. J., Khoury, E. L., & Gil, A. G. (1995).Cultural conflicts and problem behaviors of Latino adolescents in home andschool environments. Journal of Community Psychology, 23(2), 167–179.

Wheaton, A. (1999). The generation of organizational commitment in a cross-culturalcontext. Asia Pacific Business Review, 6(1), 73–103.

Xiaojia, G. E., Natsuaki, M. N., & Conger, R. D. (2006). Trajectories of depressivesymptoms and stressful life events among male and female adolescents indivorced and nondivorced families. Development & Psychopathology, 18(1),253–273.

Zayas, L. H., & Palleja, J. (1988). Puerto Rican familism: Considerations for familytherapy. Family Relations, 37(3), 260–264.

Zayas, L. H., & Pilat, A. M. (2008). Suicidal behavior in Latinas: Explanatory culturalfactors and implications for intervention. Suicide & Life-Threatening Behavior,38(3), 334–343.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [D

r Ros

e M

. Per

ez] a

t 08:

39 0

5 M

arch

201

2