Table 3.

Main and Moderated Effects of Familismo on Mexican American Child Functioning

	Adaptive				Externalizing				Internalizing
	(P)		(T)		(P)		(T)		(P)		(T)
	Estimate (SE)	p	Estimate (SE)	p	Estimate (SE)	p	Estimate (SE)	p	Estimate (SE)	p	Estimate (SE)	p
Model 1
Familismo	1.77 (1.22)	.15	−2.32 (1.11)	.04	−0.08 (1.20)	.95	−0.66 (1.00)	.51	0.30 (1.43)	.83	−0.02 (1.00)	.99
Model 2
Male × Familismo	0.95 (2.58)	.71	4.90 (2.34)	.04	4.30 (2.52)	.09	0.87 (2.13)	.68	3.70 (2.92)	.21	−2.31 (2.13)	.28
Poverty × Familismo	−3.94 (3.12)	.21	−7.56 (2.90)	.01	−3.14 (3.04)	.30	1.30 (2.60)	.62	−1.91 (3.56)	.59	1.05 (2.64)	.69
Model 3
Am Identity× Familismo	−2.67 (1.69)	.12	0.86 (1.52)	.57	−1.20 (1.68)	.47	0.90 (1.40)	.52	−0.98 (1.99)	.62	0.04 (1.38)	.98
Eth Identity× Familismo	−7.90 (7.37)	.28	−6.35 (6.69)	.34	4.48 (7.31)	.54	3.58 (6.05)	.55	1.90 (8.66)	.83	7.31 (6.08)	.23
Eng Comp× Familismo	−2.08 (2.76)	.45	−4.32 (2.52)	.09	0.30 (2.73)	.91	2.04 (2.32)	.38	2.98 (3.24)	.36	0.20 (2.30)	.93

Note. (P) = Parent rating; (T) = Teacher rating. Am=American; Eth=Ethnic. Eng Comp=English language competence. Gender and poverty status were dichotimized variables (coded as 0/1). All other continuous predictors were centered at the mean. Model 1 did not control for demographic factors, but similar results were found when including demographic factors as covariates. Model 2 also included main effects of poverty, child gender, and familismo (estimates not shown). Model 3 also included main effects of maternal US American identity, maternal ethnic identity, maternal English language competence, and familismo (estimates not shown).