Transmission of Cultural Values among Mexican American Parents and their Adolescent and Emerging Adult Offspring

Abstract

The integration of the U.S. and Mexican culture is an important process associated with Mexican-origin youths’ adjustment and family dynamics. The current study examined the reciprocal associations in parents’ and two offspring’s cultural values (i.e., familism and respect) in 246 Mexican-origin families. Overall, mothers’ values were associated with increases in youths’ values five years later. In contrast, youths’ familism values were associated with increases in fathers’ familism values five years later. In addition, developmental differences emerged where parent-to-offspring effects were more consistent for youth transitioning from early to late adolescence than for youth transitioning from middle adolescence to emerging adulthood. Finally, moderation by immigrant-status revealed a youth-to-parent effect for mother-youth immigrant dyads, but not for dyads where youth were U.S.-raised. Our findings highlight the reciprocal nature of parent-youth value socialization and provide a nuanced understanding of these processes through the consideration of familism and respect values. As Mexican-origin youth represent a large and rapidly growing segment of the U.S. population, research that advances our understanding of how these youth develop values that foster family cohesion and support are crucial.

Cultural transmission, the process of carrying cultural information from one generation to the next or from one group to another group, has significant implications for the adaptation and persistence of a culture (Schönpflug & Bilz, 2009) and for relationship dynamics within families (Denniss, Basanez & Farahmand, 2010; Padilla, 2006). One group facing such a challenge is Mexican-origin families as this population is faced with the task of integrating and transmitting two cultures, Mexican and U.S. American culture. Mexican-origin individuals account for 65% of the Latino population growth from 2000 to 2010 (U.S. Census, 2011); thus, understanding the process of intergenerational cultural transmission among Mexican-origin families has significant implications for the adaptation and integration of a growing proportion of the U.S. population.

Transmission of Cultural Values in Mexican-origin Families

A key aspect of culture, transmitted from one generation to the next, is a culture’s value system (Schwartz, Unger, Zamboanga, & Szapocznik, 2010). Values provide a sense of meaning to everyday social relations as well as a framework from which to understand everyday life (Chase-Lansdale, Deangelo, & Palacios, 2007). They provide individuals with a sense of appropriate and inappropriate behaviors, guide future actions, and aid in the interpretation of present and past experiences (Roosa, Morgan-Lopez, Cree, & Spencer, 2002). Cultural values, in particular, are values specific to members of a group who hold similar ethnic backgrounds, historical experiences, or social experiences (Glass et al., 1986; Roosa et al., 2002).

Familism and respect are two salient values for Mexican-origin families residing in the U.S (Knight et al., 2010). Familism, individuals’ endorsement of the belief that family is a source of support and guidance and that family needs come before ones’ needs (Knight et al., 2010), is held with high regard in Mexican-origin families (Hurtado, 1995; Knight et al., 2010). In fact, previous research has noted that Mexican-origin individuals endorse familism values at higher rates than European Americans (Sabogal, Marin, Otero-Sabogal, Vanoss, Marin, & Perez-Stable, 1987) and Mexican immigrants endorse this value more than U.S.-born Mexican individuals (Knight et al., 2010). Within families, parents endorse familism more so than their children, who tend to be more acculturated than their parents (Bacallao & Smokosky, 2006).

Latino, and in particular Mexican, families are also characterized by strong age-related hierarchies, such that youth are expected to respect their elders (Halgunseth, Ispa, & Rudy, 2006; Harrison, Wilson, Pine, Chan, & Buriel, 1990). Similar to the findings for familism values, respect values have been more highly endorsed by Latino parents than European American parents (Okagaki & Frensch, 1998). Further, Reese (2002) reported that Mexican-immigrant parents feared that their children may lose the values of respecting ones’ elders. When exploring youth’s values, first generation immigrant youth of Mexican, Chinese, and Filipino descent report less willingness to disagree and engage in disagreements with parents than later generation youths (Fuligni, 1998).

Familism and respect values have been noted as important to Mexican-origin families residing in the U.S. (Knight et al., 2010), and for this reason it is important to understand the intergenerational transmission of these values. Further, although these two family oriented values have been strongly related in previous research (Schwartz, et al., 2010), each value captures distinct dimensions of family life such as the importance of a communalistic family perspective (i.e., familism) and the importance of an age-based hierarchy among family members (i.e., respect). Thus, understanding how familism and respect values are each transmitted across generations provides researchers with a nuanced understanding of how family values develop within Mexican-origin families. It is also important to examine transmission in mother-youth and father-youth dyads, as mothers have been identified as “carriers of culture” (Padilla, 2006), and thus, may play a larger role in the cultural transmission of familism and respect values as compared to fathers.

Transmission of Cultural Values During Adolescence and Emerging Adulthood

Within westernized societies, values are believed to be developed and internalized during adolescence (Kohlberg, 1976) and emerging adulthood (Arnett, 2000). During these developmental periods, increased cognitive skills and social role changes make the need to develop and internalize values a salient task towards establishing one’s identity as an autonomous adult (Harter, 1990; Marcia, 1994). Therefore, cultural development may become more complex and self-driven in adolescence and emerging adulthood (Schönpflug & Bilz, 2009). However, individuals in adolescence and emerging adulthood are theorized to differ in their parent-youth dynamics (Grusec & Hastings, 2007) and, as discussed below, parent-youth socialization may differ during these two developmental periods.

Research on socialization suggests there are two types of socialization processes (Berry, 2007; Grusec & Hastings, 2007). Vertical socialization, in which adults socialize youth, occurs as a function of adults being perceived as experts imparting knowledge onto youth. Horizontal socialization, in which peers teach peers, occurs when individuals are perceived to have equal power in the relationship and, therefore, can exchange, question, and create ideas together. In childhood and early adolescence there is an imbalance of authority between parents and youth (Grusec & Hastings, 2007), such that parents are the authority over their children. This is especially apparent within Latino families who are characterized as upholding strong age-based familial hierarchies, such that older family members have authority over younger family members (Fuligni, 1998). As youth transition into emerging adulthood, however, the balance of power between parents and their children may shift to a more egalitarian relationship where parents may see their adult children as peers (Glass et al., 1986; Pinquart & Silbereisen, 2004) and may be more likely influenced by their emerging adult children (McHale & Crouter, 2003). Research on European American families (Pinquart & Silbereisen, 2004; McHale & Crouter, 2003) has illustrated the presence of such a horizontal socialization pattern; however, one nationally representative sample of European American, African American, and Latino parents with young adult children showed that all parents reduced control and increased collaborative interaction styles with their children as youth transitioned into adult roles (Aquilino, 1997). Given previous research, it was hypothesized that mothers and fathers would show a vertical pattern of socialization in cultural values with their younger, adolescent, children and a horizontal pattern of socialization with their older, emerging adult, children.

Moderating Role of Parent-Youth Immigrant Status

Work on cultural transmission and value socialization suggests that value similarities between parents and children come about through a process called status inheritance (Glass et al., 1986). Research on status inheritance (Glass et al., 1986; Harris, 2002) suggests that when parents and children are raised in similar geographic and cultural environments, the external environment facilitates intergenerational similarity as there is consistency in parents’ own childhood experiences and the environment in which their offspring are raised. Parents who, on the other hand, grew up in one culture and are raising children in another culture have less external support in transmitting their cultural values to their offspring (Vollebergh et al., 2001). In Vedder et al.’s (2009) cross-sectional research on families residing in 10 different countries, native-born parents and youth reported more similarity in values as compared to immigrant parents and native-born youth, supporting the idea that growing up in similar environments is important to consider in the transmission of cultural values. Further, youth who are raised within a different culture from their parents’ culture of origin, as in the case of Mexican immigrant parents raising native-born youth in the U.S., may be more knowledgeable of the new culture; in this situation, parents may be faced with the less common occurrence of also being socialized by their offspring in the new cultures’ values and norms (Bacallao & Smokowsky, 2007). Drawing from research and theory, it was hypothesized that parents and youth who shared social experiences (i.e., immigrant-immigrant or U.S.-raised-U.S.-raised) would show a stronger parental influence over youths’ cultural values as compared to families who did not share similar parent-youth immigration experiences (i.e., immigrant parent with U.S.-raised youth) who may, in turn, show a stronger youth influence over parents’ cultural values.

Current Study

To summarize, this study explored the bidirectional associations in cultural values among Mexican-origin parents and their adolescent and emerging adult children with longitudinal data spanning five years. The inclusion of mothers, fathers, and two offspring in each family provides a unique opportunity to explore how parents’ influence differs when children are at different stages in their life-course and to explore different patterns of influence in two values salient to this population: familism and respect. More specifically, two hypotheses were tested. First, based on developmental and family socialization perspectives suggesting parents’ influence differs by their offspring’s stage of development (Grusec & Hastings, 2007), parents were hypothesized to show a vertical socialization pattern with their younger, adolescent children and a horizontal socialization pattern with their older, emerging adult children. Second, based on research on status inheritance (Glass et al., 1986), families with similar parent-youth immigrant experiences (i.e., parent and youth who were U.S.-born/raised; parent and youth who immigrated after a critical age) were hypothesized to show a stronger parent influence over youth as compared to families who did not share similar parent-youth immigrant experiences (i.e., parent immigrated after a critical age and youth were U.S.-born/raised); the latter were expected to show a stronger youth influence over parents.

Method

Participants

Participants were mothers, fathers, younger siblings, and older siblings in 246 Mexican-origin families who were part of a longitudinal project on family socialization and adolescent development (Updegraff, McHale, Whiteman, Thayer, & Delgado, 2005). Given the goals of the study, to examine the role of family, cultural, and gender socialization processes, participating families met the following criteria: (a) mothers were of Mexican-origin; (b)target adolescents (i.e., 7^th graders) were living in the home with an older sibling and were not learning disabled; (c) biological mothers and biological or long-term adoptive fathers (i.e., minimum of ten years) lived at home; and (d) fathers worked at least 20 hrs/week. Although not required, most fathers (93%) were of Mexican descent.

Mexican-origin families with 7th graders were recruited from schools in a southwestern metropolitan area. Families’ names and contact information were obtained from junior high schools selected to represent a range of socioeconomic situations, with the proportion of students receiving free/reduced lunch varying from 8% to 82%. Of 421 families who were eligible, 284 (67%) agreed to participate, 95 (23%) refused, and we were unable to re-contact the remaining 42 families (10%). Interviews were completed by 246 families. Those who agreed but did not participate in the final sample (n = 38) were families that we were unable to locate or with whom we were unable to complete a home interview after repeated attempts.

At the onset of the study, mothers’ average age was 39 years (SD = 4.63) and fathers’ average age was 41 years (SD = 5.77). Most parents were born in Mexico (71% of mothers and 69% of fathers) and preferred to be interviewed in Spanish (66% of mothers, and 67% of fathers). Parents reported an average of 10 years of education (M = 10.33; SD = 3.73 for mothers, and M = 9.87, SD = 4.37 for fathers). Parents came from a range of socioeconomic levels, with the percentage of families meeting federal poverty guidelines (18.3%) being similar to two-parent Mexican-origin families in poverty in the county form which these families resided (i.e., 18.6%; U.S. Census, 2000). Median household income was $40,000 (range from $3,000 to over $250,000). Younger siblings (51% female) and older siblings (50% female) were 12.55 (SD = 0.60) and 15.49 (SD = 1.57) years of age, respectively. Most siblings were born in the U.S. (62%) and preferred to complete the interview in English (83%).

At Wave 2, five years after the initial wave of data collection, over 75% of the families participated (n = 185). Those who did not participate could not be located (n = 44), had moved to Mexico (n = 2), or refused to participate (n = 15). When comparing the non-participant families at Wave 2 (n = 61) with the participant families (n = 185), the non-participant families reported significantly lower income (M = $37,632; SD =$28,606 for non-participant families and M = $59,517; SD = $48,395 for participant families) and lower maternal education (M = 9.48; SD = 3.45 for non-participant families and M = 10.62; SD = 3.80 for participant families) at Wave 1.

Procedure

At each phase, families participated in structured in-home interviews lasting two to three hours. Interviews were conducted separately with each family member using laptop computers. Bilingual interviewers read the questions aloud due to variability in participants’ reading levels. Families received a $100 (W1) and $125 (W2) honorarium for the participation of all four family members in the home interview.

Measures

All measures were forward and back-translated into Spanish for local Mexican dialect (Foster & Martinez, 1995). All final translations were reviewed by a third native Mexican American translator and discrepancies were resolved by the research team. Cronbach’s alphas for all measures were acceptable for English- and Spanish-speaking participants; thus, for efficiency all alphas are reported for the overall sample rather than separately by language.

Socioeconomic status (Wave 1)

Parents reported on their educational levels and their annual incomes. Families’ socioeconomic status (SES) was measured by standardizing the log of household income (to correct for skewness), mothers’ education level, and fathers’ education level (Updegraff, McHale, Whiteman, Thayer & Crouter, 2006). The three variables were then averaged to create SES, with higher scores indicating higher SES. Cronbach’s alpha was .78. SES was included in all models to account for income and education differences in missing data.

Parent-youth immigrant status

Mothers reported if they, the younger sibling, and the older sibling were born in the U.S. (coded as 0) or Mexico (coded as 1), and fathers reported their own country of birth. Further, immigrant parents reported their length of U.S. residence at Wave 1 and immigrant youth reported on their length of U.S. residence at Wave 2. The length of U.S. residence was subtracted from each family member’s corresponding age to calculate each family member’s age at immigration to the U.S. Based on prior research (Rumbaut, 1997; Stevens, 1999), age 6 was considered the critical age of immigration for youth as they would have entered the school system at the same time as their U.S.-born peers, and age 12 was considered the critical age for parents as they would have experienced some schooling within the U.S. system.

The parent-youth immigrant status measure was created such that dyads in which both parents and youth were born in the U.S. or immigrated before their corresponding critical period were given a score of 1 = U.S.-raised (n = 170 for Mother-youth, and n = 156 for father-youth dyads). Dyads in which each person immigrated to the U.S. after their critical period (i.e., age 6 for youth and age 12 for parents) were given a score of 2 = immigrant (n = 108 for Mother-youth, and n = 108 for father-youth dyads). Dyads where youth were born in the U.S. (or immigrated before the critical period) and parents immigrated after their critical period were given a score of 3 = mixed-status (n = 212 for Mother-youth, and n = 224 for father-youth dyads). One-way ANOVAs indicated mother-youth dyads differed in their socioeconomic status (U.S.-raised M = .62, SD = .64; mixed-status M = −.22, SD = .70; immigrant M = −.58, SD = .71), F (2, 487) = 119.92, p < .001, and years lived within the U.S. (U.S.-raised M = 33.14, SD = 7.37; mixed-status M = 13.48, SD = 4.69; immigrant M = 4.01, SD = 2.96), F (2, 487) = 2002.85, p < .001. Similarly, father-youth dyads differed in their socioeconomic status (U.S.-raised M = .67, SD = .58; mixed-status M = −.20, SD = .72; immigrant M = −.55, SD = .73), F (2, 485) = 121.47, p < .001, and years lived within the U.S. (U.S.-raised M = 32.63, SD = 6.28; mixed-status M = 17.46, SD = 6.22; immigrant M = 7.87, SD = 7.26), F (2, 485) = 955.50, p < .001.

Cultural values (Wave 1 and 2)

The Mexican American Cultural Values Scale was used to measure parents’ and youths’ familism (16 items) and respect (8 items) values in Waves 1 and 2 (Knight et al., 2010). Items for the familism subscale were comprised of three foci, exploring the role of family as a source of support (6-items; “It is always important to be united as a family”), obligation (5-items; “A person should share his/her home with relatives if they need a place to stay”) and reference (5-items: “It is important to work hard and do your best because your work reflects on the family”). The respect subscale focused on the importance of respecting one’s parents (4-items; “No matter what, children should always treat their parents with respect”) as well as other adults (4-items; “Children should always be polite when speaking to any adult”). Both subscales were scored on a 5-point scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) and items were averaged so high scores indicated a high endorsement of the cultural value measured. Cronbach’s alphas for familism values were .80 and .77 for mothers, .85 and .83 for fathers, .90 and .88 for older siblings, and .86 and .86 for younger siblings, for Wave 1 and 2 respectively. Cronbach’s alphas for respect values were .68 and .70 for mothers, .69 and .73 for fathers, .84 and .84 for older siblings, and .79 and .81 for younger siblings, for Wave 1 and 2 respectively.

Results

To explore the bidirectional associations between parents’ and their offspring’s cultural values, a series of autoregressive cross-lag panel models (Cole & Maxwell, 2003) were estimated in Mplus 6.11 (Múthen & Múthen, 2011) separately for mother-youth and father-youth relationships and each cultural value (i.e., familism, respect). First, an overall model was estimated including the following paths: (a) parents’ (i.e., mothers’, fathers’) and youths’ cultural values at Wave 1 to cultural values at Wave 2 (referred to as stability effects), (b) parents’ cultural values at Wave 1 to youths’ values at Wave 2 (referred to as parent influence effects), and (c) youths’ cultural values at Wave 1 to parents’ cultural values at Wave 2 (referred to as youth influence effects), (d) stage of development/sibling position (0 = younger sibling and 1 = older sibling) and parent-youth immigrant status (immigrant: 0 = mixed-status and 1 = immigrant; U.S.-raised: 0 = mixed-status and 1 = U.S.-raised) as main effects, and (e) youth gender (0 = female, 1 = male) as a control variable. All models included correlations between the exogenous variables (i.e., youths’ gender, sibling position, parent-youth immigrant status, and parents’ and youths’ cultural values at Wave 1) and within time error correlations for the endogenous variables (i.e., parents’ and youths’ cultural values at Wave 2).

Within each model an estimator of Type = Complex with Cluster = Family ID was used to correct the standard errors within the data to account for the nested nature of including data from two siblings within each model. The Full Information Maximum Likelihood (FIML) estimator with family SES at Wave 1 included as an auxiliary variable was used to account for SES differences in participating and non-participating families when estimating missing data. Each model was just identified so all model fit statistics indicated perfect fit (χ² (0) = 0.00, CFI = 1.00, RMSEA = 0.00); therefore, the significance level of the R-squared statistic was used to indicate if each model accounted for a significant amount of variance in parents’ and youths’ Wave 2 cultural values.

To test the moderating role of stage of development/sibling position and parent-youth immigrant status, a series of multi-group auto-regressive cross-lag models were estimated by assessing differences between adolescent and emerging adult siblings, and then assessing differences by parent-youth immigrant status. Moderation was tested by constraining paths one at a time and comparing the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) between a model where paths were constrained to be equal across groups and a model where paths were free to vary across groups. If the CFI differed by more than .01, the test indicated a constrained model resulted in poorer fit and moderation was assumed (Chen & Rensvold, 2002). Descriptive statistics are displayed separately for mother-youth and father-youth dyads (Table 1).

Table 1.

Correlations, Means, and Standard Deviations for Younger (Below the Diagonal) and Older (Above the Diagonal) Siblings by Parent Dyad (i.e., Mother vs. Father)

Mother-Youth
	1.	2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.	9.
1. Youth Familism –W1	-	.36	.06	−.05	.82	.29	.02	−.01	−.02
2. Youth Familism –W2	.21	-	.07	−.04	.43	.81	.08	.04	−.05
3. Parent Familism –W1	.04	.26	-	.46	.07	.08	.63	.34	−.02
4. Parent Familism –W2	.15	.20	.47	-	−.05	−.04	.30	.60	−.04
5. Youth Respect –W1	.79	.06	.06	.22	-	.47	.07	.01	.04
6. Youth Respect –W2	.21	.73	.18	.17	.15	-	.15	.08	.02
7. Parent Respect –W1	.02	.18	.63	.29	.07	.21	-	.43	.00
8. Parent Respect –W2	.11	.03	.34	.59	.12	.07	.44	-	.10
9. Adolescents’ Gender	.02	−.09	.01	.12	−.01	−.14	.00	.23	-
Younger Sibling
Mean	4.26	4.13	4.43	4.40	4.21	4.01	4.34	4.41	0.49
(SD)	(0.52)	(0.48)	(0.39)	(0.37)	(0.58)	(0.54)	(0.48)	(0.45)	(0.50)
Older Sibling
Mean	4.23	4.13	4.43	4.40	4.11	4.06	4.34	4.40	0.50
(SD)	(0.60)	(0.51)	(0.39)	(0.37)	(0.70)	(0.60)	(0.48)	(0.45)	(0.50)
Father-Youth
	1.	2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.	9.
1. Youth Familism –W1	-	.35	−.02	−.13	.82	.29	−.08	.06	−.02
2. Youth Familism –W2	.21	-	−.05	.05	.42	.81	.00	.17	−.05
3. Parent Familism –W1	.06	.20	-	.75	.05	.01	.65	.44	.05
4. Parent Familism –W2	−.07	.16	.75	-	−.03	.04	.49	.66	−.01
5. Youth Respect –W1	.79	.07	.03	−.05	-	.47	.01	.12	.04
6. Youth Respect –W2	.20	.73	.10	.01	.16	-	.04	.24	.02
7. Parent Respect –W1	.01	.07	.65	.50	.02	.08	-	.42	−.02
8. Parent Respect –W2	.01	.17	.45	.67	−.02	.03	.42	-	−.05
9. Adolescents’ Gender	.02	−.10	.13	.08	−.01	−.14	.12	.05	-
Younger Sibling
Mean	4.26	4.13	4.46	4.45	4.21	4.01	4.39	4.40	0.49
(SD)	(0.52)	(0.48)	(0.42)	(0.41)	(0.58)	(0.54)	(0.47)	(0.44)	(0.50)
Older Sibling
Mean	4.23	4.13	4.46	4.44	4.11	4.06	4.39	4.40	0.50
(SD)	(0.60)	(0.51)	(0.42)	(0.40)	(0.70)	(0.60)	(0.47)	(0.44)	(0.50)

Note. Based on the FIML sample size of n = 246, correlations with an absolute value > .13 are significant at p < .05

Familism Values

The overall models testing the bidirectional associations between mother-youth and father-youth familism values appear in Figure 1. Each model accounted for a significant amount of variance in parents’ (Mother R² = .11, p < .000; Father R² =.10, p < .000) and youths’ (Mother R² = .23, p < .000; Father R² =.57, p < .000) familism values at Wave 2. In mother-youth dyads, there was a significant parent influence effect, such that mothers’ higher endorsement of familism values at Wave 1 was associated with youths’ higher familism values at Wave 2 (after accounting for stability from Wave 1 to 2). For father-youth dyads, a significant youth influence effect emerged, such that youths’ lower endorsement of familism values at Wave 1 was associated with fathers’ higher endorsement of familism values at Wave 2.

Figure 1.

Significant estimates for the overall model of mother- and father-youth familism and respect values

Note. Estimates for the mother-youth models are outside of the parenthesis (Estimates for the father-youth models are inside of the parenthesis). *p < .05, **p < .01, *** p < .001

Stage of development/sibling position moderation

Next, a multigroup model was estimated to address our first hypothesis. A significant stage of development/sibling position moderation emerged for mother-youth dyads (Figure 2), Δ CFI = .03, such that the positive parent influence effect described previously emerged as significant for the adolescent/younger siblings but not for emerging adult/older siblings. For father-youth dyads, a significant stage of development/sibling position moderation emerged (Figure 2), ΔCFI = .02, such that a positive parent influence effect was significant for adolescents/younger siblings, but not for emerging adults/older siblings. Also, although it was not a focus of the study, a second significant stage of development moderation emerged for youths’ stability effects, ΔCFI = .02, such that emerging adults’ stability effects were significant but adolescents’ were not.

Figure 2.

Significant estimates for the mother- and father-youth familism values as moderated by stage of development

Note. Adolescent/younger sibling estimates are outside of the parenthesis (emerging adult /older sibling estimates are inside of the parenthesis). A dashed line indicates significant moderation. ^†p < .08 *p < .05, **p < .01, *** p < .001

Parent-youth immigrant status moderation

Multi-group models for parent-youth immigrant status were estimated to address our second hypothesis, but there were no significant parent-youth immigrant status moderation in the mother-youth or father-youth models.

Respect Values

The overall models testing the bidirectional associations between mother-youth and father-youth respect values appear in Figure 1. Each model accounted for a significant amount of variance in parents’ (Mother R² = .14, p < .000; Father R² =.11, p < .000) and youths’ (Mother R² = .22, p < .000; Father R² =.16, p < .000) respect values at Wave 2. A significant parent influence effect emerged for mothers, such that mothers’ higher endorsement of respect values at Wave 1 was associated with youths’ higher endorsement of respect values at Wave 2. Among father-youth dyads, no significant cross-lag effects emerged.

Stage of development/sibling position moderation

No significant stage of development/sibling position moderation emerged in the mother-youth or father-youth models.

Parent-youth immigrant status moderation

In addition to the parent-influence effect present in the mother-youth overall model, a significant immigrant status moderation emerged in the mother-youth multiple-group model (Figure 3), ΔCFI = .02, suggesting a negative youth influence effect for immigrant dyads where immigrant youths’ lower endorsement of their respect values was associated with an increase in their immigrant mothers’ endorsement of their respect values, five years later. This association was not significant for the mixed-status dyads or the U.S.-raised dyads. Although not hypothesized, a second parent-youth immigrant status moderation emerged for mothers’ stability effects, ΔCFI = .02, such that mothers from U.S. raised dyads reported the most stability in values across Wave 1 to Wave 2, mothers from the immigrant dyads showed moderate stability effects, and mothers from the mixed-status dyads reported non-significant stability effects. There were no significant immigrant status moderation effects for father-youth dyads.

Figure 3.

Significant estimates for the mother-youth respect values as moderated by mother-youth immigrant status

Note. Estimates for the U.S.-raised dyads are outside of the parenthesis; estimates for the immigrant dyads are inside of the parenthesis; estimates for the mixed-status dyads appear in bold. A dashed line indicates significant moderation. ^†p < .08 *p < .05, **p < .01, *** p < .001

Discussion

The process of cultural transmission has significant implications for family dynamics, given that similarities in cultural orientations have been associated with more family cohesion (Denniss et al., 2010; Padilla, 2006). For Mexican-origin families, who are facing the task of integrating and adapting to two cultures, cultural transmission can be a highly salient family process. Our study extends prior research on cultural transmission in several ways. First, by using a longitudinal within-family design, we examined cultural values across a five-year period encompassing two developmental periods: early to late adolescence (for younger siblings) and middle adolescence to emerging adulthood (for older siblings). Second, we examined whether similarities and differences in parents’ and youths’ immigrant histories, one important aspect of within-group variability in this cultural context, altered the associations among family members’ values over time. Third, the roles of both mothers’ and fathers’ values were explored, expanding beyond the more typical focus on mothers and relative neglect of fathers in ethnic minority families in the U.S. (Parke & Buriel, 2006). Together, our findings highlight complex within-family cultural dynamics and reveal variations between youth at different stages of development, in different family cultural contexts as defined by the combination of parents’ and youths’ immigrant status, and between mothers and fathers.

Moderating Role of Stage of Development

The lack of attention to developmental perspectives and limited longitudinal data in the existing literature means we know very little about value transmission among family members. Our study took a first step in this direction by studying youth transitioning from early to late adolescence, their older siblings transitioning from middle/late adolescence to emerging adulthood, and their parents. Consistent with our hypotheses based on socialization research (Grusec & Hastings, 2007), the mother-to-youth vertical socialization pattern for familism and respect values was evident for early adolescent youth (younger siblings), but not for mid/late adolescent youth (older siblings). It is possible that early adolescent youth perceived their mothers’ socialization attempts as experts imparting knowledge for them to acquire, and thus willingly assimilated similar cultural values. In contrast, mid/late adolescent youth may not be as compliant with mothers’ values as they may be striving to establish their autonomy and develop their own cultural values (Aquilino, 1997). It is important to note that mid/late adolescents’, but not early adolescents’, familism values were significantly stable across waves; thus, mothers’ influence may not have been apparent for mid/late adolescents because their values were quite stable during this period.

For fathers, stage of development also moderated familism values. In this case, fathers and early adolescent youth showed a reciprocal socialization pattern as fathers’ higher familism values were associated with increases in early adolescent youths’ familism values five years later, in addition to the previously described youth-to-father influence effect. For father-mid/late adolescent dyads, the youth-to-father influence effect remained consistent and no other association emerged. The moderating effect of stage of development, where fathers’ influence was present for adolescents but not emerging adults, is consistent with research suggesting that adolescents’ need for autonomy makes them less willing to integrate fathers’ values when they are transitioning through middle/late adolescence to emerging adulthood (Aquilino, 1997). The results also provide support to the idea that youth play an active role in family dynamics (McHale & Crouter, 2003) and support the notion that values remain malleable in adulthood (Pinquart & Silbereisen, 2004).

Moderating Role of Parent-Youth Immigrant Status

Informed by research on status inheritance (Glass et al., 1986), the moderating role of parent-youth immigrant status was explored with the expectation that a stronger parent-influence would emerge in families who shared social/immigrant experiences (i.e., immigrant-immigrant or U.S.-raised-U.S.-raised) as compared to families who did not share social/immigrant experiences (i.e., immigrant parents with U.S. raised youth). We found evidence that parent-youth immigrant status moderated patterns of youth influence on mothers’ respect values. Specifically, when immigrant youth reported a lower endorsement of respect values, immigrant mothers reported a higher endorsement of the same values, five years later. This pattern was not present for mixed-status or U.S. raised dyads. It is possible that mothers in immigrant dyads, who have recently immigrated to the U.S. (four years prior to the study’s onset), may be more sensitive to youths’ lower endorsement of their cultural values. Therefore, mothers may increase their endorsement of their values regarding respect in hopes of increasing their cultural socialization efforts. This youth-oriented socialization pattern was not present for the more established immigrant dyads (mixed-status) who may have experienced the flux of integrating the Mexican and American culture into their family dynamics when they first migrated to the U.S. (14 years prior to the study’s onset); and it was not present for the U.S.-raised dyads where parent and youth were primarily raised within the same cultural context and potentially raised to endorse similar values (Glass et al., 1986). Given that acculturation gaps amongst family members have been associated with less optimal individual and family adjustment (Telzer, 2010), to identify one of the processes through which acculturation gaps can occur and to identify a group at risk for developing parent-youth acculturation gaps is an important step towards developing interventions that may help to foster more family and cultural cohesion among Mexican immigrant families.

It is also notable that this youth-oriented socialization process only emerged for respect values, and not for familism values. It is possible that respect values may be highly salient to mothers as such values are strongly linked to day-to-day parent-child interactions, and may be closely associated with youths’ increasing attempts to gain behavioral autonomy during their transition from adolescence to adulthood (Aquilino, 1997). Thus, the disconnect between mothers’ and youths’ respect values may be highly salient to mothers as it may reflect youths’ cultural orientations and youths’ transition into adulthood.

Roles of Mothers and Fathers in the Transmission of Cultural Values

Women are described as the “carriers of culture” (Padilla, 2006) in Latino families. Our results are consistent with the salience of mothers’ values in early to late adolescence, a period when youth begin the important process of developing their own value system (Kohlberg, 1976; Arnett, 2000). That is, mothers’ stronger values when youth were in early adolescence were associated with higher levels of familism in late adolescence (i.e., five years later). These findings emerged after accounting for stability in adolescents’ and their mothers’ cultural values. A similar pattern emerged for U.S.-born youth’s respect values, such that mothers’ higher values were linked to youth’s stronger value five years later.

In contrast to research on mothers, considerably less is known about the influence of fathers in ethnic minority families in the U.S. (Parke & Buriel, 2006). Our findings suggest that it is also important to consider the role of fathers in the transmission of cultural values in adolescence and emerging adulthood. Findings for father-youth associations were specific to familism values. Among youth transitioning from early to late adolescence, the pattern of intergenerational associations was reciprocal in that fathers’ familism values in early adolescence were linked to youth’s values in late adolescence and youth’s values in early adolescence were linked with fathers’ values five years later. For offspring transitioning from middle adolescence to emerging adulthood, we found only that youth’s values in middle adolescence were linked with fathers’ values. That is, fathers’ values when offspring were in middle adolescence were not associated with offsprings’ values in emerging adulthood. Evidence that adolescents’ and emerging adults’ values were associated with fathers’ values is consistent with socialization perspectives that suggest that father-youth relationships are more egalitarian, peer-like, and leisure-oriented than mother-youth relationships (Coltrane & Adams, 2008; Parke & Buriel, 2006), and thus, may be structured to facilitate reciprocal and youth-driven socialization patterns.

Study Limitations and Future Directions

The present study had limitations that provide useful directions for future research in this area. First, although the comparative approach of the current study design (i.e., comparing youth transitioning from early to late adolescence to those transitioning from mid/late adolescence to emerging adulthood) allowed us to compare patterns of socialization at different developmental transitions, future research will benefit from examining changes in socialization strategies by increasing the time span of the study to follow parent-youth socialization patterns across three or more time points and thus model changes over time within the same dyads. A second limitation of the study is related to the examination of only two cultural values, and focusing exclusively on values specific to Mexican culture; an important next step will be to include values more strongly endorsed by American culture to explore how youth may “bring home” American culture to their parents, a process argued by the cultural-brokering literature (Bacallao & Smokowsky, 2007). Also, by only focusing on family-oriented cultural values it was not possible to see how parents and youth influence one another in values related to other domains (e.g., work, school), and as a consequence, fathers’ role in value socialization may have been underestimated. Including values from multiple domains will increase our understanding of mothers’ and fathers’ unique and complimentary roles in value socialization.

Conclusion

The current study contributes to research on the development of youths’ cultural values through an examination of within-family associations over time and across two developmental transitions. Our findings highlight the reciprocal nature of parent-youth value socialization and provide a nuanced understanding of these processes through the consideration of familism and respect values, the bidirectional associations among parents and two siblings experiencing different developmental transitions, and different family contexts as defined by the combination of parents’ and youths’ immigrant statuses. As Mexican-origin youth represent a large and rapidly growing segment of the U.S. population (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011), and are a group characterized by substantial within-group variability (Baca Zinn & Wells, 2000), research that advances our understanding of how these youth develop and adapt within the U.S. is crucial.