Marianismo Beliefs, Intimate Partner Violence, and Psychological Distress Among Recently Immigrated, Young Adult Latinas

Abstract

Marianismo is a Latino cultural value that describes both positive and negative aspects of traditional Latina femininity. Marianismo emphasizes culturally valued qualities such as interpersonal harmony, inner strength, self-sacrifice, and morality. Endorsement of marianismo is hypothesized to correlate with individual economic, educational, and personal variables. Marianismo also is theorized to potentially influence attitudes about, experiences of, and responses to intimate partner violence (IPV) among Latina women. The present study examined whether endorsement of marianismo beliefs mitigated or exacerbated psychological distress after experiences of IPV in a sample of 205 recently immigrated Latina women, aged 18 to 23 years. Latina women experiencing higher levels of IPV and endorsing greater marianismo beliefs were hypothesized to indicate greater psychological distress. Unexpectedly, women who endorsed more Subordinate to Others/Self-Silencing to Maintain Harmony marianismo beliefs indicated more psychological distress (p = .05), greater symptoms of psychological distress (p = .01), and greater average distress (p = .03) when they also reported less IPV than peers. Implications for understanding Latinas’ responses to and reporting of IPV, as well as for culturally tailored counseling interventions for this underserved and understudied population, are discussed.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) affects approximately 30% of women living in the United States (Black et al., 2011). IPV is associated with numerous adverse psychological, physical, economic, and social consequences, including depression, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), contracting sexually transmitted infections, and isolation from friends and family (Stockman, Hayashi, & Campbell, 2015). Latinas living in the United States account for approximately 20% of reported IPV cases (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2010), although this group of women represents just 8% of the U.S. population (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015). Compared with non-Latina Whites, Latinas are more likely to experience severe negative consequences of IPV, such as increased risk for transmission of HIV or other sexually transmitted infections (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2018), depression, and PTSD (Klevens, 2007; Stockman et al., 2015). Latinas are also less likely than non-Latina Whites to have access to, seek, and receive adequate mental health care to treat the psychological effects of IPV (Arroyo, Lundahl, Butters, Vanderloo, & Wood, 2015; Rodríguez, Valentine, Son, & Muhammad, 2009).

IPV among U.S. Latinas can be understood from an ecological perspective (Perilla, 1999) as involving historical, social, and individual factors that increase the risk for experiencing violence. Among U.S. Latinas, risk factors associated with experiencing violence are younger age, being married, having immigrated to the United States, lacking legal documentation status, and being unemployed (Cheng & Lo, 2015; Cho, Velez-Ortiz, & Parra-Cardona, 2014; Cumings, Gonzalez-Guarda, & Sandoval, 2013). Having higher levels of education and being employed are associated with greater reporting of IPV (Cho et al., 2014), perhaps because Latinas with greater educational attainment and financial independence may be more knowledgeable of available legal protections and better able to support themselves financially (Hazen & Soriano, 2007). Finally, traditional Latino patriarchal social systems and societal values, including strict adherence to traditional gender roles, are theorized to create and perpetuate violence against Latina women (e.g., Perilla, Vásquez Serrata, Weinberg, & Lippy, 2012). Traditional values that emphasize men’s dominance and women’s submission may lead some Latinas to perceive violence as normative (e.g., Agoff, Herrera, & Castro, 2007; Perilla et al., 2012) or discourage Latinas from seeking help outside of the homes to preserve their family’s reputation and unity (Mayorga, 2012). Structural, economic, educational, and linguistic factors, along with endorsement of traditional Latino cultural values related to gender roles, are posited to jointly influence Latinas’ attitudes about, experiences of, and responses to IPV (Moya, Chávez-Baray, & Martinez, 2014; Reina, Lohman, & Maldonado, 2014; Stockman et al., 2015).

Empirical literature on IPV among U.S. Latinas (a) provides evidence for the aforementioned ecological perspective (Cho et al., 2014; Cumings et al., 2013) and (b) suggests that recently immigrated Latina young adults may be especially vulnerable to experiencing IPV and its negative mental health consequences, due to potentially endorsing traditional cultural beliefs more than U.S. born Latina young adults (Castillo, Perez, Castillo, & Ghosheh, 2010; Moreno, 2007). Recently immigrated Latina young adults also may experience additional risk factors of social isolation, economic difficulties, and language barriers associated with immigration (Marrs Fuchsel, 2014; Moya et al., 2014; Reina et al., 2014; Zadnik, Sabina, & Cuevas, 2014). These sociocultural barriers may make it difficult for recent Latina immigrants to form supportive social networks (Hurtado-de-Mendoza, Gonzales, Serrano, & Kaltman, 2014) or access culturally appropriate counseling services with providers who speak Spanish (Arroyo et al., 2015). Moreover, Latinas who are financially or legally dependent on their abusive partners may believe they do not have options for leaving their relationships (Reina et al., 2014). Fear of deportation, lack of knowledge of or access to help, and economic barriers also can preclude reporting IPV or seeking formal help among Latina immigrants (Reina et al., 2014; Zadnik et al., 2014). Furthermore, the strict gender role scripts inherent in the construct marianismo are posited to normalize and sustain violence against Latina women and thus affect their responses to IPV (Agoff et al., 2007; Cho et al., 2014; Mayorga, 2012; Perilla et al., 2012).

Marianismo

Marianismo beliefs prescribe various dimensions of Latina femininity and depict Latina women as nurturing, self-sacrificing, virginal, and emotionally stronger than men (Castillo et al., 2010). Marianismo beliefs dictate the roles Latinas play within their families and romantic relationships (Castillo et al., 2010) and are theorized to contribute to Latinas’ experiences of and responses to IPV. Theorists posit that marianismo beliefs normalize men’s power and control (Agoff et al., 2007; Perilla et al., 2012) and discourage Latinas’ help-seeking behaviors (Moya et al., 2014; Reina et al., 2014). Marianismo is conceptualized as comprising five dimensions of Latina femininity (Castillo et al., 2010) that may function independently and/or jointly to influence Latinas’ attitudes about, experiences of, and various responses to IPV (e.g., psychological distress). These five pillars of marianismo are Family Pillar, Virtuous and Chaste, Subordinate to Others, Silencing Self to Maintain Harmony, and Spiritual Pillar.

Family Pillar represents the belief that Latina women are the source of strength for their families and responsible for their family’s happiness, health, and unity (Castillo et al., 2010). This dimension represents Latina women’s script for enacting the traditional Latino value of familismo (Chavez-Korell, Beson-Flórez, Delgado Rendon, & Farías, 2014). The Family Pillar belief explicitly emphasizes responsibility of Latina women for maintaining their families’ reputation and keeping their families together. Via these values, Latinas are discouraged from sharing private family matters outside of the home in efforts to preserve family reputation and avoid shame (Mayorga, 2012). Indeed, Latinas are more likely to discuss experiences of IPV only with trusted others, such as friends or family, than report it to law enforcement or health care providers (Ocampo, Shelley, & Jaycox, 2007). Of concern, disclosing IPV to friends and family has been linked to increased risk for future assault among Latina IPV survivors (Cheng & Lo, 2015), suggesting that for these women, adherence to traditional values that discourage reporting IPV to professionals may have serious health implications.

The Virtuous and Chaste pillar reflects the belief that Latinas should be morally pure in thought and sexuality, remain virgins until marriage, and be faithful to their husbands (Castillo et al., 2010). The Virtuous and Chaste belief prescribes passivity in sexual interactions and has been linked to lower condom use intentions (Velazquez et al., 2017) and less frequent condom use (Deardorff et al., 2013). Higher endorsement of the Virtuous and Chaste belief is associated with increased risk for HIV/sexually transmitted infection (STI) contraction and progression via discouraging Latinas from talking with partners about their sexual health (Moreno, 2007). Because the Virtuous and Chaste belief suggests that honorable Latinas should remain with the person to whom they lose their virginity, high endorsement of this belief may influence women to stay with abusive partners despite abuse (Kulkarni, 2007). The aforementioned associations illustrate the potentially large negative impact of high endorsement of the Virtuous and Chaste belief for Latina IPV survivors.

The Subordinate to Others pillar embodies the belief that Latina women should show obedience and respect for traditional hierarchical gender power structures and behave in ways that others—particularly men—ask them to, even if they are reluctant to do so. This pillar represents rules for Latinas to enact the traditional value of respeto, which establishes family roles and enforces obedience (e.g., of children to elders and of women to men; Castillo Reyes, 2013). A normalization of men’s power and control may partially explain why Latinas have been found to be less likely to identify such dynamics as problematic in relationships (Perilla et al., 2012) or to recognize nonphysical abuse, such as coercive control, as IPV (Moya et al., 2014; Reina et al., 2014). Similarly, the Silencing Self to Maintain Harmony pillar reflects the belief that Latinas should withhold personal thoughts, beliefs, and needs (even as they relate to health or sex) to maintain conflict-free relationships. This dimension relates to the Latino value of simpatía, which encourages Latinas to avoid disagreement and assertiveness to maintain harmonious relationships (Castillo Reyes, 2013). Subordinate to Others and Silencing Self to Maintain Harmony beliefs are hypothesized to contribute to IPV among Latinas by encouraging submissiveness, self-silencing, and preservation of the family unit, often at the expense of individual well-being (Klevens, 2007; Rountree, Granillo, & Bagwell-Gray, 2016). These marianismo beliefs are also related to Latinas’ increased depression and anxiety (Nuñez et al., 2016) and have influenced Latina IPV survivors’ decisions to stay in abusive relationships (Moreno, 2007). Although control by a partner may not be self-identified as abuse, it is linked with depression among Latina IPV survivors (Bubriski-McKenzie & Jasinski, 2014), suggesting nonphysical abuse may still be detrimental to Latinas’ mental health. Indeed, in a qualitative study of Latina IPV survivors with depression, participants identified “keeping things inside” (i.e., self-silencing) as the perceived cause of their depression (Nicolaidis et al., 2011).

Finally, the Spiritual Pillar belief positions Latina women as the spiritual leaders of their families, responsible for their spiritual growth and religious practice. Adherence to this dimension of marianismo is considered highly important to the Latina’s role as a good wife and mother (Castillo Reyes, 2013). However, failure to live up to expectations may result in psychological distress. The increased psychological burden of being responsible for their families’ well-being has been posited to explain the finding that Latinas’ higher endorsement of Spiritual Pillar is associated with increased anger, hostility, and anxiety (Nuñez et al., 2016).

Taken together, empirical evidence suggests that higher endorsement of marianismo beliefs for recent young adult Latina immigrants may exacerbate the psychological distress of experiencing IPV. Young Latina immigrants who are experiencing IPV and endorse marianismo beliefs across the five dimensions may see themselves as responsible for maintaining the unity, privacy, and sanctity of their families despite abuse by their partners. Believing they must keep their distress and needs to themselves, Latinas with higher (vs. lower) marianismo belief endorsement might feel disempowered or hopeless and experience greater psychological distress.

The Present Study

In the present study, we first examined whether the experience of IPV is positively associated with psychological distress among Latina young women during their initial year in the United States (Hypothesis 1 or H1) based on literature suggesting the strong positive link between the two experiences (Bubriski-McKenzie & Jasinski, 2014; Nicolaidis et al., 2011; Stockman et al., 2015). Second, we investigated whether endorsement of marianismo beliefs may moderate the relation between IPV and psychological distress. Based on the literature, we tested the following five moderation hypotheses: The five dimensions of marianismo beliefs endorsed by young adult Latinas are each hypothesized to independently moderate positive relations between IPV and psychological distress. Compared with their peers, Latina women experiencing higher levels of IPV and endorsing greater marianismo beliefs across the five theorized dimensions (Family Pillar [Hypothesis 2 or H2], Virtuous and Chaste [Hypothesis 3 or H3], Subordinate to Others [Hypothesis 4 or H4], Silencing Self to Maintain Harmony [Hypothesis 5 or H5], and Spiritual Pillar [Hypothesis 6 or H6]) are expected to indicate greater psychological distress.

Method

Recruitment and Procedure

Data for the present study were obtained from a larger study of social and cultural determinants of health among Latina adults during their initial years in the United States. The Institutional Review Board of a large public university in southeastern United States approved the study. Eligible participants were Latinas aged 18 to 23 years who immigrated to the United States from a Caribbean, Central or South American country within 36 months prior to assessment.

Respondent driven sampling (RDS) was utilized—a useful method for obtaining participants from hard-to-reach populations (e.g., immigrants, undocumented persons; Salganik & Heckathorn, 2004). RDS asks that each eligible participant (or seed) recruit three others in her social network who meet inclusionary criteria. Participants, who consent to participate, then refer three others. This procedure is followed up to five times, at which point a new seed begins (to avoid skewing the respondent sample with individuals who are too socially interconnected).

Seed participants were recruited through advertisements at community events, Latino health fairs, community-based agencies (e.g., legal aid agencies, language schools), and online postings. Interested participants were screened for eligibility and scheduled for an interview if eligible. One of four bilingual Latina research assistants obtained consent and conducted interviews in Spanish, either in university offices or a safe place of the participant’s choice.

Participants

The sample for the present study comprised 205 recent Latina young adult women who immigrated to Miami-Dade County, Florida, within 36 months prior to assessment. The sample of 205 women was selected from a larger sample of 530 women of the aforementioned study. The subsample of 205 consisted of women involved in a romantic relationship since arrival to the United States, thus making them eligible to answer questions about potential IPV experiences.

On average, participants in the subsample had resided in the United States for approximately 16 months (SD = 10.54 months). Participants’ ages ranged from 18 to 23 years (M = 21.17 years, SD = 1.83 years). The majority had completed a high school diploma (57%) or received a bachelor’s or trade school degree (30%). Slightly less than two thirds of the subsample reported being unemployed (61%), and among those who worked, hours per week varied greatly (M = 32.63, SD = 10.50). Overall, 77% of the subsample were unmarried, and 23% were married.

In terms of ethnic classification, the most prominent ethnic group was Cuban at 42%, followed by Colombian (11.2%), Nicaraguan (6.8%), Honduran (6.3%), Venezuelan (6.3%), Peruvian (5.9%), Ecuadorian (3.4%), Mexican (2.9%), and Panamanian, Dominican, and Chilean (2.4% each). Approximately, 87% were documented immigrants, and 13% were undocumented.

Measures

Study measures were all administered in Spanish. Measures were either validated in Spanish in previous research or were translated into Spanish for the present study. English versions of each measure went through a process of translation/back translation, modified direct translation, and checks for semantic and conceptual equivalence to ensure accurate translation from English to Spanish (Behling & Law, 2000). For modified direct translations, a review panel consisting of individuals from various Latino subgroups representative of the Miami-Dade County population was employed to account for potential within-Latino-group variability.

Demographics.

We obtained demographic information for participants’ country of origin, age (years), time in the United States (months), employment status (0 = unemployed, 1 = employed), marital status (1 = single, 2 = married/partnered), education level (1 = less than high school, 2 = high school diploma or equivalent, 3 = trade school, 4 = bachelor’s degree, 5 = postgraduate), and immigration documentation status. Participants were asked to report their current documentation status in the United States via a total of 14 possible categories, including temporary or permanent resident; tourist, student, or temporary work visa; undocumented; and expired visa, asylum, and temporary protected immigrant. These categories were then recoded into a dichotomous variable (1 = documented, 0 = undocumented) immigration status for analyses.

IPV.

The Women’s Experience with Battering (WEB; Smith, Earp, & DeVellis, 1995) is a 10-item measure that assesses women’s experiences of loss of power and control to an abusive partner within 30 days prior to assessment. Participants rated how strongly they agreed with each statement as it referred to their current relationship on a 6-point Likert-type scale (1 = disagree strongly to 6 = agree strongly). Mean scores were computed for each participant, with scores greater than or equal to two indicating some exposure to IPV. An example item is, “My partner could scare me without touching me with his hands.” The WEB has demonstrated evidence of reliability and validity in samples of battered and non-battered women (Smith et al., 1995). The present study sample yielded an internal consistency estimate of alpha = .95.

Participants also completed questions from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey (CDC, 2001) regarding their exposure to physical, sexual, emotional, and psychological abuse. The BRFSS consists of five questions with a dichotomous response format (i.e., yes/no) that assess women’s exposure to physical abuse, forced sexual intercourse, unwanted sexual contact, fear due to a partner’s anger or threats, and put-downs, name calling, or controlling behavior. Given low rates of endorsement of measure items in this sample, results of the BRFSS provided descriptive information about participants’ experiences of abuse. Responses on the BRFSS (CDC, 2001) indicated that 10 participants (4% of sample) reported experiencing some form of sexual abuse by a partner, 16 (8%) reported some form of physical abuse, five (2%) reported feeling afraid for their safety, and 29 (14%) reported verbal or emotional abuse.

Psychological distress.

The validated Spanish version of the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI; Derogatis & Fitzpatrick, 2004) is a 53-item self-report symptom inventory that assesses the extent to which participants have been bothered (0 = not at all to 4 = extremely) in the past week by various symptoms of psychological distress (e.g., “Feelings of worthlessness”). The BSI includes nine clinical subscales and three global indices of distress. The present study used the three global indices of distress: the Global Severity Index (GSI), Positive Symptom Total (PST), and Positive Symptom Distress Index (PSDI). The GSI measures overall psychological distress and represents the average score across all items, with higher scores indicating more problematic functioning. The PST represents the number of symptoms endorsed across the entire measure and is calculated by tallying items with a score of one or higher. The PSDI represents the average level of distress across endorsed items and is calculated by dividing the GSI by the PST.

Evidence for test–retest reliability exists for the GSI (α = .90), PST (α = .80), and PSDI (α = .87; Derogatis & Fitzpatrick, 2004). In addition, the subscales that comprise the BSI have been found to demonstrate adequate to good internal consistency (Derogatis & Fitzpatrick, 2004). The BSI as a whole demonstrates evidence of high convergent validity with measures such as the SCL-90-R (with subscale correlations ranging .92–.99). The Spanish version of the BSI has been found to demonstrate evidence of construct validity with Latino samples (Hoe & Brekke, 2009). In the present study, the GSI yielded an internal consistency estimate of alpha = .99. Individual clinical scales yielded alphas ranging from .84 to .97.

Traditional Latina gender role beliefs.

The Marianismo Beliefs Scale (MBS; Castillo et al., 2010) is a 24-item instrument that measures a participant’s endorsement of traditional Latina gender roles across the five pillars of marianismo: Family Pillar (five items), Virtuous and Chaste (five items), Subordinate to Others (five items), Silencing Self to Maintain Harmony (six items), and Spiritual Pillar (three items). Participants are instructed to indicate the degree to which they agree with each statement on a 4-point Likert-type scale (1 = disagree strongly to 4 = agree strongly). A sample item is, a Latina woman “should not raise her voice to men.” Scores for each pillar were calculated by averaging participants’ responses to items within that subscale. Evidence for the multidimensional construct validity of the MBS has been established through exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (Castillo et al., 2010; Miville, Mendez, & Louie, 2017). Divergent and convergent validity of the MBS has been demonstrated via small to moderate positive correlations with measures of acculturation, and moderate positive correlations with measures of other traditional Latino values (such as familismo), respectively (Castillo et al., 2010). The MBS has been found to demonstrate evidence of adequate to good internal consistency in samples of Latina immigrants and nonimmigrants, with Cronbach’s alpha values for individual pillars ranging from .76 to .85 (Castillo et al., 2010). Internal consistency estimates for each of the marianismo pillars in the present sample ranged from .88 to .96.

Analyses

The analytic plan consisted of three major steps. First, all continuous variables were analyzed for violations of assumptions of normality following guidelines suggested by Kline (2010), using absolute values of 3.0 and 8.0 for assessing skewness and kurtosis, respectively. Second, bivariate correlations were computed to assess for multicollinearity, following the recommendation by Tabachnick and Fidell (2013) that correlations between predictor variables should be less than .70 to avoid problems associated with multicollinearity. No variables exceeded this threshold, except for a high correlation (r = .88) between the Subordinate to Others and Silencing to Maintain Harmony marianismo belief subscales. To avoid misleading findings due to multicollinearity, a mean score of these two subscales was calculated for each participant, which yielded an internal reliability coefficient of alpha = .97. To our knowledge, this is the first study using this combined variable, although Castillo Reyes (2013) also reported high correlations between these two subscales (r = .96). We refer to the new variable as Subordinate/Self-Silencing and use it in all subsequent analyses. Means, standard deviations, and correlations are presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations of Study Variables.

Variable		M, Mdn, or %	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13
1.	Age	21.17	1.84	—
2.	Time in the United Statesa	Mdn = 12	—	−.10	—
3.	Education level	49.5% completed high school	—	.35*	−.14*	—
4.	Employment statusb	65% unemployed		.10	−.03	.24*	—
5.	Marital statusc	77% unmarried	—	.19*	−.06	−.04	−.16*	—
6.	Documentation statusd	87.5% documented	1.32	.14	.03	.05	.03	.00	—
7.	IPV	1.69	0.82	.02	.02	−.09	−.10	.12	−.01	—
8.	Family Pillar	3.35	0.45	.06	.00	.07	.04	−.06	−.08	−.04	—
9.	Virtuous and Chaste	2.92	0.59	−.13	−.05	−.07	.11	−.14*	.03	−.07	.33*	—
10.	Subordinate/Self-Silencing	2.04	0.64	−.12	−.04	−.16*	−.05	−.13	.01	−.01	−.05	.41*	—
11.	Spiritual Pillar	2.78	0.65	.05	−.07	−.07	−.08	−.04	−.05	−.05	.40*	.43*	.38*	—
12.	GSI	0.36	0.46	.00	.08	−.07	.07	−.06	−.11	.34*	.10	−.01	−.21*	−.18*	—
13.	PST	11.35	11.71	−.01	.08	−.04	.05	.07	−.07	.34*	.05	−.01	−.22*	−.22*	.93*	—
14.	PSDI	1.36	0.51	.08	−.01	−.05	.11	.09	.15	.18*	.11	.01	−.06	.02	.71**	.46*

Note. IPV = intimate partner violence; GSI = Global Severity Index; PST = Positive Symptom Total; PSDI = Positive Symptom Distress Index.

^aIn months.

^b0 = unemployed, 1 = employed.

^c0 = single, 1 = married.

^d0 = undocumented, 1 = documented.

^*p < .01.

^**p < .001.

Finally, we used path analysis to test the resulting four moderation hypotheses using Mplus Version 7.0 (Muthén & Muthén, 2012). The four moderation hypotheses were tested while controlling for all hypothesized covariates (i.e., age, time in the United States, education level, employment status, marital status, immigration documentation status). Predictor and moderator variables (i.e., the four marianismo beliefs) were centered prior to analyses to reduce potential multicollinearity in testing moderation (Frazier, Tix, & Barron, 2004). Three measures of psychological distress (i.e., the BSI GSI, PST, and PSDI) were the dependent variables. Two goodness-of-fit indices were used to evaluate the moderation model fit: the comparative fit index (CFI) and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA; Hu & Bentler, 1999). Criteria for acceptable fit have ranged from CFI > .90 and RMSEA < .10 to the more conservative criteria of CFI > .95 and RMSEA < .06 (Hu & Bentler, 1999).

Results

Preliminary Descriptive Findings

Approximately 67% of participants reported experiencing some level of psychological IPV as measured by the WEB (Smith et al., 1995).

The estimated path model provided a saturated fit to the data (CFI = 1.00, RMSEA = .00) as the number of free parameters exactly equaled the number of known values, indicating a model with zero degrees of freedom. According to our five hypotheses, we expected a direct positive association between IPV and the three indicators (i.e., the BSI GSI, PST, and PSDI) of psychological distress (H1). Next, each of the four dimensions of marianismo (Family Pillar [H2], Virtuous and Chaste [H3], Subordinate to Others/Self-Silencing [H4], and Spiritual Pillar [H5]) was expected to moderate the relations between IPV and the three indicators of psychological distress, while accounting for covariates (age, time in the United States, education level, employment status, marital status, immigration documentation status). H1 was supported by IPV directly relating with the GSI (β = .76, p < .05), the PST (β = .79, p < .05), and the PSDI (β = .64, p = .01). H4 was partially supported: Subordinate/Self-Silencing moderated relations between IPV and all three psychological distress outcomes, but not in the hypothesized direction. Subordinate/Self-Silencing moderated the relation between IPV and overall distress (i.e., the GSI; β = −.46, p = .05; see Figure 1), distress symptom total (i.e., PST; β = −.51, p = .01; see Figure 2), and distress intensity (i.e., PSDI; β = −.74, p = .03; see Figure 3). In all three interactions between the Subordinate/Self-Silencing dimension and IPV, Latinas who reported relatively lower levels of IPV reported more psychological distress compared with their peers when they more strongly endorsed the Subordinate/Self-Silencing belief. H2, H3, and H5 were not supported. Overall, predictors in the model accounted for 28.9% of the variability in the GSI, 28.8% of the variability in PST, and 20.4% of the variability in the PSDI.

Figure 1.

Moderating role of Subordinate to Others/Silencing Self beliefs on relation between IPV and overall psychological distress.

Note. IPV = intimate partner violence; GSI = Global Severity Index.

Figure 2.

Moderating role of Subordinate to Others/Silencing Self beliefs on relation between IPV and reported symptoms of psychological distress.

Note. IPV = intimate partner violence; PST = Positive Symptom Total.

Figure 3.

Moderating role of Subordinate to Others/Silencing Self beliefs on relation between IPV and average intensity of psychological distress.

Note. IPV = intimate partner violence; PSDI = Positive Symptom Distress Index.

Discussion

The present study investigated relations among marianismo, IPV, and psychological distress in a sample of recently immigrated young adult Latinas. Findings are consistent with literature (see Miville et al., 2017, for a review) that supports marianismo as directly and indirectly linked with a variety of health outcomes for Latinas (e.g., IPV, emotional and personality functioning, sexual risk). Furthermore, findings support the notion that marianismo should be treated as a multidimensional construct to elucidate its complexity: the Subordinate/Self-Silencing marianismo belief moderated the relation between IPV and psychological distress (H4), whereas the other three marianismo beliefs did not. Results suggest that potential risk or protective effects of marianismo may be context-dependent and vary depending on the outcome, as concluded in past research (e.g., Castillo et al., 2010; Miville et al., 2017; Nuñez et al., 2016).

Subordinate/Self-Silencing Belief as a Moderator

Consistent with previous research (e.g., Agoff et al., 2007; Moreno, 2007; Nuñez et al., 2016) and the ecological model of IPV, more endorsement of the Subordinate/Self-Silencing belief (H4) indirectly affected significant direct relations (H1) between IPV and each of the three indicators of psychological distress. As expected, based on H1, women who experienced relatively more IPV reported more psychological distress than women experiencing less IPV, regardless of their level of endorsement of Subordinate/Self-Silencing beliefs. However, women who experienced relatively less IPV and endorsed greater Subordinate/Self-Silencing beliefs tended to report increased psychological distress (H4). Subordinate to Others and Silencing Self to Maintain Harmony beliefs are characterized by the idea that Latinas must show obedience to patriarchal power structures, obliging men’s desires and withholding their opinions (Castillo et al., 2010). These marianismo beliefs are theorized to relate with increased distress due to the potential negative psychological impact of suppressing emotions, enduring suffering in isolation, and being unequivocally submissive to the needs of men. In past research, greater endorsement of Subordinate and Self-Silencing beliefs have related with increased depression, anxiety, and cynical hostility (Nuñez et al., 2016). Whereas women who report greater IPV tend to experience more psychological distress regardless of their endorsement of Subordinate/Self-Silencing beliefs, Latina women who report less IPV and also less endorsement of these beliefs than peers seem protected against the negative psychological distress associated with more endorsement of these marianismo beliefs. Although the present sample is distinct from past samples in (a) age, (b) recent arrival to United States, and (c) heterogeneity of Latina ethnicities, this finding is consistent with research that found greater endorsement of Subordinate and Self-Silencing beliefs was associated with increased psychological distress (Nuñez et al., 2016).

In the case of the GSI and PST, the most psychological distress was reported by women with less endorsement of the Subordinate/Self-Silencing belief who experienced more IPV (H4). Because these women endorse beliefs such as Latinas should not be subordinate to men, or should not have to respect a man’s opinion if they do not agree, more than their counterparts in the present sample (Castillo et al., 2010), experiencing IPV may be especially distressing for them. On the contrary, it may be that women who strongly endorse the Subordinate/Self-Silencing belief reported less distress from higher levels of IPV due to the normalization of violence and control associated with a subordinate, silent social position (Agoff et al., 2007). That is, internalization of gender role beliefs has been linked with normalization of violence and control in romantic relationships (e.g., Agoff et al., 2007). It may be that Latinas who strongly endorse the Subordinate/Self-Silencing belief and experience higher levels of IPV are simply less likely to report psychological distress because the Subordinate/Self-Silencing pillar reflects the idea that Latina women must be self-silencing to maintain harmony and remain obedient or submit to control of others, especially men. Latinas who more strongly endorse this value might be hesitant to express their psychological distress directly in a research study, and potentially because of the higher risk for violence they may face when experiencing higher levels of IPV.

Family Pillar, Virtuous and Chaste, and Spiritual Pillar Beliefs

Despite some findings suggesting that Family Pillar (H2), Virtuous and Chaste (H3), and Spiritual Pillar (H5) beliefs relate to negative psychological outcomes for Latina adults in past studies (e.g., Miville et al., 2017; Nuñez et al., 2016), endorsement of these beliefs did not influence the relations between IPV and psychological distress in the present sample. Although these findings are contrary to hypotheses, they provide support for the multidimensional and context-dependent nature of marianismo, as well as the distinct relations of specific marianismo beliefs to various health outcomes. It may not be traditional values per se, but the clashing of one’s traditional values with incongruent values in a new society, in relation to the specific variable(s) under study, that determine how cultural values influence mental health outcomes for Latina immigrants. Indeed, Alvarez and Fedock (2016) note that future investigations should take into account the nuanced connections among cultural values, acculturation, and Latinas’ responses to IPV. It may be that for newly arrived Latina immigrants who are experiencing IPV, endorsement of marianismo beliefs does not cause internal or external conflicts beyond those caused by IPV. Future research should examine potential moderating roles of individual marianismo dimensions on specific, theoretically relevant outcomes in this population.

Implications for Research and Practice

The findings of the present study have important implications for clinicians working with young Latina immigrants to the United States. Despite recent meta-analytic findings suggesting that gender role attitudes are changing for Latinas, with younger and more educated Latinas less likely to endorse traditional (vs. more egalitarian) gender role beliefs (Miville et al., 2017; Velazquez et al., 2017), our findings suggest that the construct of marianismo is relevant for young adult, recent Latina immigrants to the United States. The women in our sample endorsed relatively high levels of marianismo beliefs across the four dimensions, with subscale scores averaging approximately three on a scale ranging from one to four. Although egalitarian gender role beliefs are associated with acculturation to U.S. society (Velazquez et al., 2017), it is important to note that acculturation and enculturation are distinct processes and not poles on a continuum (Schwartz, Unger, Zamboanga, & Szapocznik, 2010). Recently immigrated Latinas may acculturate to U.S. society to a degree while remaining enculturated to their heritage culture, which may diminish or reinforce traditional gender role beliefs. Mental health practitioners should attend to relevant cultural beliefs to facilitate service access and utilization for this vulnerable population, particularly in light of the severe consequences of IPV (Alvarez & Fedock, 2016).

As members of a rapidly growing population that experience disproportionately negative effects of IPV (e.g., Stockman et al., 2015) and tend to underutilize services (Arroyo et al., 2015; Rodríguez et al., 2009), Latina immigrants to the United States have a marked need for culturally congruent services and interventions. Despite trends in professional psychology toward culturally competent practice and research, significant gaps remain in empirical knowledge regarding Latina cultural beliefs and values and their relations with health outcomes, such as IPV and psychological distress. This is of concern, as some researchers suggest that Latina IPV survivors may not utilize services because they are incongruent with traditional Latino cultural values (Edelson, Hokoda, & Ramos-Lira, 2007; Perilla et al., 2012). Specifically, Perilla, Lavizzo, and Ibañez (2007) argued that interventions that encourage autonomy and independence may distress and alienate traditional Latinas. In qualitative studies of Latinas’ experiences of IPV (Perilla et al., 2012; Reina et al., 2014), participants identified treatment goals that diverge from Western ideals of independence. Namely, women in these studies reported that rather than wanting to leave their partners, they wanted to stop the violence, improve their relationships, and help their partners learn how to be more supportive husbands and fathers (Perilla et al., 2012).

Although some researchers suggest that Latinas under report IPV (Edelson et al., 2007), when given the opportunity to respond to questions about IPV with a continuous versus dichotomous response format, roughly 68% of the present sample reported experiencing IPV in the past 30 days (as indicated by the WEB), compared with between 2% and 14% (as indicated by the BRFSS). These findings highlight the importance of using measures that capture the range and nuances of Latinas’ experiences of IPV. Findings also stress the need for continued research on IPV among recent, young adult Latina immigrants to the United States, and on factors such as marianismo that may influence Latinas’ responses to and reports of IPV (Ahrens, Isas, & Viveros, 2011). Interventions for Latina IPV survivors must acknowledge cultural factors that influence trust and reporting, and address the extent to which these factors may necessitate treatment modifications.

Limitations

The present study has a number of limitations that can inform future research and practice. First, it is important to acknowledge that the use of self-report data to assess IPV in a sample that culturally endorses self-silencing practices is limited. While care was taken to discuss and ensure confidentiality, provide bilingual Latina interviewers, and conduct interviews in safe places chosen by participants, it is difficult to determine whether reported levels of distress and abuse were representative of participants’ actual experiences. Future studies might examine self-report data obtained in questionnaires versus interviews to see whether levels are comparable. Second, although efforts were made to recruit Latinas from various subgroups, some Latino ethnic groups (e.g., Cubans, Colombians) are more represented than others (e.g., Mexicans, Dominicans) due to their representation in Miami-Dade County (Osterholt, Gomez, & Woerner, 2016). Thus, the present study’s sample reflected the demographics of Southern Florida but not necessarily the larger United States. Third, to answer interview questions about experiences of IPV (i.e., WEB, BRFSS), participants had to indicate having been in a romantic relationship since their arrival to the United States. While limiting reports in this way ensure homogeneity of responses, this format does not capture past experiences of IPV that might still influence psychological health. Finally, the high correlation between Subordinate to Others and Silencing Self to Maintain Harmony in the present study calls into question the validity of the five-factor structure proposed by Castillo and colleagues (2010). Although this is the first study to our knowledge to combine the two dimensions into a single variable, these subscales were found to correlate at .96 among Mexican Latina college students (Castillo Reyes, 2013), suggesting these two dimensions might be better understood as a single construct. Also, the MBS was developed with Latinas of mostly Mexican origin. Future research should examine the MBS factor structure and measurement equivalence across Latina ethnic groups to test whether marianismo is conceptualized similarly and whether the original five-factor structure of the MBS is invariant.

Our study highlighted the consequences of IPV in the lives of Latina young adults and the moderating role of the Subordinate/Self-Silencing belief on their mental health during the initial year in the United States. Our findings contribute to the increasingly nuanced body of literature on gender roles and cultural beliefs, IPV, and psychological health among Latina immigrants to the United States. Specifically, findings provide counseling psychologists with additional information about the degree to which certain gender role and cultural beliefs may be salient to recent Latina immigrants and interact with their experiences to affect health.

Biographies

Nicole Da Silva, BA, is a fourth-year doctoral student in the counseling psychology PhD program in the Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology, Division of Counseling Psychology, at the University at Albany, State University of New York. Her research interests center around the influences of sociocultural factors on mental health and service utilization among Latinos. She is particularly interested in the relations between cultural values and gender roles on health outcomes for Latina adults.

Toni R. Verdejo, MS, is a graduate of the mental health counseling program, Division of Counseling Psychology at the University at Albany, State University of New York. Her research interests include health disparities among Latinxs, intimate partner violence among Latinas, and the influence of Latina gender roles on psychological distress. She is also a therapist supervisor for children and families in the New York City area.

Frank R. Dillon, PhD, is an associate professor of counseling psychology at Arizona State University. His research focuses on health disparities and mental health issues affecting racial, ethnic, and sexual minority groups in the United States. A principal theme of his scholarship is elucidating cultural and social determinants of substance use disorders and HIV risk behaviors.

Melissa M. Ertl, BA, is a counseling psychology PhD student at University at Albany, State University of New York, with research interests on health risk behaviors and health disparities among Latina young adults.

Mario De La Rosa, PhD, is a professor in the Robert Stempel College of Public Health and Social Work and Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine at Florida International University. He is the founding director of the university’s Center for Research on U.S. Latino HIV/AIDS and Drug Abuse and is an expert in the areas of Latino substance abuse, substance use as a risk factor for HIV/AIDS, violence, and cross-cultural issues. Currently, his research focuses on the sociocultural factors influencing substance abuse and HIV risk behaviors among adult Latina immigrants as well as the impact of pre-immigration factors on the alcohol use behaviors of recent, young adult Latino immigrants.