Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Jul 24.
Published in final edited form as: Subst Use Misuse. 2020 Jul 24;55(13):2175–2183. doi: 10.1080/10826084.2020.1795684

Cultural Stress and Substance Use Risk among Venezuelan Migrant Youth in the United States

Christopher P Salas-Wright 1,2, Seth J Schwartz 2, Mariana Cohen 3, Mildred M Maldonado-Molina 4, Michael G Vaughn 5,6, Mariana Sanchez 7, José Rodriguez 8, Millan AbiNader 9, Rachel John 3, Kesia Oliveros 9, Patricia Andrade 10
PMCID: PMC7487208  NIHMSID: NIHMS1625384  PMID: 32703078

Abstract

Background.

Since 2015, more than 4 million Venezuelans have fled their once prosperous nation, prompting an ever-intensifying refugee crisis. Recent research with Venezuelan parents suggests that many are exposed to elevated migration-related stress, experience behavioral health problems, and express profound concern for their children’s post-migration wellbeing. We examine the relationships between stress, family functioning, and substance use risk with a cultural stress theoretical lens.

Methods.

Survey data were collected between November 2018 and June 2019 from 402 recently-arrived Venezuelan immigrant youth ages 10-17. Outcomes include perceived discrimination, negative context of reception, family support/communication, and substance use intentions and normative beliefs. Structural equation modeling was used to examine the relationships between variables.

Results.

Structural equation modeling results indicated that negative context of reception was associated with permissive substance use norms (via family communication; B = 0.070, p < .01) and intentions to use (via family support; B = 0.051, p < .01). Discrimination was not mediated by family functioning, rather it exerted a direct effect on substance use norms (β = 0.20, p < .01) and intentions (β = 0.33, p < .001).

Discussion.

We see clear evidence that negative context of reception and discrimination are related to substance use risk, both directly (in the case of discrimination) and indirectly (in the case of negative context of reception). Given the manifold stressors faced by Venezuelan immigrants both prior to migration and in the process of resettling in the US, it is critical that practitioners and policymakers support this rapidly-growing population.

Keywords: Immigrants, Asylum Seekers, Substance Use, Discrimination, Venezuela, Adolescents

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (2019) estimates that, since 2015, more than 4 million Venezuelans have fled their once prosperous nation, prompting an ever-intensifying refugee crisis. Although Colombia has received the bulk of Venezuelan migrants, tens of thousands have sought refuge in the United States (US), largely in South and Central Florida (Henderson, 2018). In recent years, Venezuela has been the leading source of asylum seekers in the US (see Figure 1), with more than two times as many asylum applications filed as any other nation and an estimated 200,000 Venezuelans awaiting decisions on pending asylum cases (Calzadilla & López, 2018; USCIS, 2019). As it stands, we are observing one of the greatest humanitarian crises of our lifetime, and yet our understanding of the experiences and behavioral health risks of Venezuelan crisis migrants remains very limited.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

The number of asylum applications filed between February 2018 and February 2010 based on public information available from US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) quarterly stakeholder reports. Data freely available via the USCIS website: https://www.uscis.gov/outreach/upcoming-national-engagements/outreach

At the heart of the Venezuelan diaspora are children and adolescents. Indeed, the Venezuelan crisis—marked by severe economic scarcity, food shortages, and extremely high rates of violence—has prompted the mass exodus of many families with dependent children (Caritas, 2018; Ozug et al., 2019). Prior research, conducted largely with Mexican and Cuban immigrant families in the US, has documented the ways in which migration can be profoundly stressful for youth (Schwartz et al., 2010, 2015). Stressors include challenges such as language limitations, friction between cultural worldviews, and exposure to cultural stressors such as discrimination and a negative context of reception (Kouider et al., 2014; Salas-Wright & Schwartz, 2019). Despite a large body of research indicating that, overall, immigrant youth use alcohol and drugs at lower rates than US-born youth (Salas-Wright et al., 2016), we nevertheless see compelling evidence that the stress of migration can place youth at risk for behavioral health problems, including mental health problems and substance use (Okamoto et al., 2009; Maynard et al., 2016; Schwartz et al., 2015; Wray-Lake et al., 2018). In the present study—one of the first to focus on Venezuelan migrant youth in the US—we examine the relationships between cultural stress, family functioning, and substance use risk among recently-arrived Venezuelan youth.

The Venezuelan Diaspora: Migration, Cultural Stress, and Substance Use Risk

The Venezuelan diaspora is punctuated by a plethora of stressful migration-related “push” factors, including exposure to severe economic scarcity, government repression, and exceedingly high levels of violence and crime in Venezuela (Faiola, 2018). Such stressors contribute to more general pressures related to migration and relocation, which we know are often psychologically taxing processes for children and families (Suárez-Orozco & Suárez-Orozco, 2009). Exposure to stressors often continues after migration to the US, as many Venezuelans face an uncertain future while they await asylum decisions and adapt to life in a society locked in bitter debate over immigration (especially Latin American immigration) and changing demographics (Felter & Renwick, 2018). Indeed, recent studies examining the experiences of Venezuelan immigrant adults suggests than many recently-migrated Venezuelans experience clinically-elevated levels of psychological distress and disconcerting levels of discrimination, and express concern for the welfare and post-migration adaptation of their children (Author’s own, under review; Schwartz et al., 2018).

Scholars have put forth several theories to understand behavioral health and substance use risk among immigrant youth. One particularly salient framework is Cultural Stress Theory, which focuses on how adverse migration-related experiences are related to disruptions in family functioning and, in turn, to risks for adolescent alcohol and drug use initiation as well as other behavioral health outcomes (Salas-Wright & Schwartz, 2019). This theory holds that negative culturally-related experiences such as discrimination (e.g., microaggressions, marginalization) and negative context of reception (e.g., the perception that the receiving society does not welcome immigrants) can compromise key aspects of family functioning (e.g., parent-child communication, family support). In turn, disrupted family functioning increases risk for internalizing/externalizing problems. Prior research has provided evidence as to the links between cultural stress, family functioning, and youth internalizing/externalizing among recently-arrived Cuban and Mexican immigrant youth in the US (Lorenzo-Blanco et al., 2016). Specifically, Lorenzo-Blanco et al. (2019) found that youth reports of cultural stress predicted lower family cohesion, parent involvement, and parental warmth, and that such compromised family functioning, in turn, predicted greater likelihood of substance use. This is also in keeping with other research among Latin American immigrant youth which underscores the critical importance of family cohesion and parental communication in relation youth problem behaviors. (see Marsiglia et al., 2009, 2014).

However, the degree to which Cultural Stress Theory may be applicable to Venezuelans and other crisis-migrant groups is uncertain. Indeed, as a crisis migration precipitated by a political, economic, and public safety collapse, the Venezuelan diaspora is characterized by a number of unique features. For one, emigration is a new phenomenon for Venezuelans. Indeed, Venezuela has long been—and was until the 21st century—a nation that received large numbers of immigrants (Durand & Massey, 2010). As a result, many Venezuelans are resettling in areas that did not have, until very recently, Venezuelan community networks. Second, at present, virtually everyone leaving Venezuela is fleeing the crisis, and this migration transcends levels of education and income such that, on average, Venezuelan emigres tend to be of higher socioeconomic status than most Latino immigrant groups (Pérez-Gómez, 2018). For instance, Schwartz et al., 2018 found that, among a community sample of Venezuelan immigrant adults, more than half reported having completed a college education. In the same breathe, data from the American Community Survey suggests that the median household income of Venezuelans ($56,000 annually) is slightly lower than that of immigrants overall ($60,000) (Gallardo & Batalova, 2020).

The Present Study

The aim of the present study is to examine the degree to which cultural stress and family functioning are related to key substance use outcomes among recently-arrived Venezuelan youth in the US. Consistent with cultural stress theorizing, we hypothesize that cultural stress is related to permissive substance use norms and intentions to use, both directly and via compromised family functioning. To our knowledge, despite the millions who have fled Venezuela in recent years, ours is one of the first studies to examine the migration-related experiences and behavioral health of Venezuelan youth in diaspora.

Methods

Sample and Procedures

This investigation utilized a cross-sectional survey of 402 recently-arrived (within three years at the time of survey) Venezuelan immigrant youth ages 10-17 residing in the US. Participants were recruited via partner organizations working with Venezuelan immigrant families in South and Central Florida and by word-of-mouth (i.e., WhatsApp chains, text messages) via the organizations’ extensive networks. Participants were encouraged to share information about the study with others and to provide contact information for eligible participants.

The research team conducted data security checks and discarded any surveys with an IP address indicating that the survey was completed outside of the US. We were not able to cross-check that all participants were, indeed, Venezuelan; rather, we simply asked about self-reported Venezuelan birth/citizenship as part of our initial screening questions. Further, although the IP addresses allowed us to determine US/non-US location for screening, we did not have institutional review board (IRB) approval to determine the precise location of eligible participants using IP addresses and use this information in our analyses. Among those completing screening questions (N = 552), 45 reported being older than 17, 2 reported they were not born in Venezuela, and 14 had lived in the US for longer than 3 years (2 youth were excluded for not meeting multiple criteria). Additionally, 89 cases were discarded based on non-US IP addresses both because these were not US immigrants (and therefore out of scope) and because our IRB did not allow us to examine non-US participants.

All participants completed the survey on smart phones, tablets, and laptop/desktop computers and received a $20 gift card (delivered via email) for completing the survey. All data was collected in Spanish between November 28th, 2018 and July 7th, 2019 using Qualtrics® Survey Software. Survey items were translated, back translated, and checked for accuracy by community partners and recently-arrived Venezuelan youth. Based on feedback from community partners and Venezuelan immigrant youth, only a limited number of measures were used in order to minimize participant burden. The study was reviewed/approved by the IRB at the lead author’s home university. Youth participated only after providing assent and parental informed consent.

Measures

Cultural Stress.

We examined two domains of cultural stress: negative context of reception and perceived discrimination. Negative context of reception and perceived discrimination are two of the primary constructs at the heart of cultural stress theory (Salas-Wright & Schwartz, 2019). Discrimination refers to being intentionally and directly mistreated because of one’s ethnic, racial, or cultural background (Sue et al., 2007). Distinct from discrimination, negative context of reception is a broader construct capturing an individual’s perception of how a receiving community/society perceives immigrants and the opportunity structures available to them (Author’s own, in press; Portes & Rumbaut, 2014). Notably, context of reception has shown incremental validity in predicting behavioral health outcomes beyond the effects of discrimination (Schwartz et al., 2014).

The 6-item Negative Context of Reception Scale (α = .87) (Schwartz et al., 2014) was used to measure perceived negative context of reception. Items refer to a feeling of being unwanted or “shut out” because of one’s nationality or ethnicity. Sample items include “People from my country are not welcome here” and “People here often criticize Venezuelans.” (1 = completely disagree, 5 = completely agree). We also used a single item from the Perceived Discrimination Scale (Phinney, Madden, & Santos, 1998) which asked youth: “How often do people your age treat you unfairly or negatively because you are Venezuelan?” (1 = never, 5 = daily). This abbreviated measure was used at the behest of community partners/youth who underscored the importance of a short survey for this population. In our analyses, this single-item measure is treated as a continuous variable, although we recognize this is a matter of some dispute among scholars (e.g., Gaito, 1980; Norman, 2010).

Family Functioning.

Two scales were used to examine family functioning, both of which are used as part of the Health Behavior of School Aged Children (HBSC) study. The 4-item short version of the clear communication scale from the Family Dynamics Measure-II (α = .79) (Lasky et al., 1985) was used to measure family communication. Sample items include “In my family, we ask questions when we don’t understand each other” and “I think the important things are talked about” (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Four items from the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (α = .70) (Zimet et al., 1988) were used to examine family support. Sample items include “My family really tries to help me” and “I get emotional help/support I need from my family” (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree).

Substance Use Risk.

Two scales were used to examine youth substance use risk in the domains of substance use norms (i.e., youth perceptions that substance use is an acceptable or unacceptable behavior for people their age) and intentions. These constructs have been shown to be important predictors of use and both are commonly used in Latino-focused substance use prevention studies (Hecht et al., 2003; Kulis et al., 2005). A three-item scale measuring alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana use views (α = .84) was used to examine substance use norms. Youth were asked, “Is it okay for someone your age to use alcohol / tobacco / marijuana?” (1 = definitely not, 4 = definitely yes). A three-item scale querying youth about alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana use (α = .67) was used to examine substance use intentions. Youth were asked, “If you had the opportunity this weekend would you use alcohol / cigarettes / marijuana?” (1 = definitely not, 4 = definitely yes). We also measured past-month alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana use (0 = no, 1 = yes); however, our primary analyses focus on the measures of substance use risks due to the relatively low rates of substance use in the sample, especially among younger respondents.

Sociodemographic Factors.

Sociodemographic factors include age (continuous; 10-17), gender (male = 1, female = 0), grade (continuous; 5-12), the HBSC measure of perceived family economic status (“How well off do you think your family is?”; 1 = not at all well off, 5 = very well off), and years in the US.

Analytic Procedures

Statistical analyses were carried out in several steps using Stata 16 MP. First, we provided descriptive statistics for the full sample in terms of key sociodemographic factors, cultural stress, family functioning, and substance use norms and intentions (see Table 1). We also provided basic descriptive statistics for past-month substance use; however, these variables were not used as outcomes in our primary analyses due to their relatively low base rates in the study population, which resulted in unstable estimates for subgroups and model instability. The use of substance use risk variables (i.e., norms, intentions to use), which we know are strongly linked with later substance use and serve as important intervention targets (Stephens et al., 2009), allowed for stable regression models.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics of Recently-Arrived Venezuelan Immigrant Youth with Example Prompt and Response Options

Full Sample of Youth (N = 402)
M SD Range
Demographic Factors
Age 14.37 1.75 (10-17)
Gender -- -- --
 0. Girl (%) 43.53 175 --
 1. Boy 56.47 227 --
Grade 8.41 1.69 (5-12)
Family Economic Status 2.45 0.77 (1-5)
Time in US 2.12 0.84 (1-4)
 1. 2018-2019(%) 25.13 99 --
 2. 2017 42.13 166 --
 3. 2016 28.17 111 --
 4. 2015 4.57 18 --
Cultural Stress
Negative Context 2.26 0.76 (1-5)
Discrimination 1.69 0.94 (1-5)
Family Functioning
Communication 4.13 0.63 (1-5)
Support 4.52 0.29 (1-5)
Substance Use Risk
Norms 1.53 0.61 (1-4)
Intentions 1.28 0.42 (1-4)
Open in a new tab

Next, we used structural equation modeling (SEM) to examine the theorized relationships between variables based on Cultural Stress Theory while controlling for sociodemographic factors. The strength of SEM is that it allows researchers to specify and test the goodness of fit (GOF) between sample data and theoretical models designed to depict the theorized relationships between observed and latent variables (Schumacher & Lomax, 2016). In examining the GOF of hypothesized and modified structural equation models, we reference commonly-used GOF statistics, including the Model Chi-Square Statistic (χ2; p > 0.05, however, χ2 is impacted by sample size), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA; < .08), Comparative Fit Index (CFI; ≥ .90), and Tucker Lewis Index (TLI; ≥ .90), and the Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR; < .08) (Kline, 2015). Although the data utilized in this study are cross-sectional and therefore cannot be used to infer causal relationships or mediation, we examined indirect effects. We computed the magnitude and significance of the indirect effects using the sem and, in turn, estat teffects commands in Stata 16. This approach is in keeping with the procedures outlined by Baldwin (2019) in a recent psychometric manual for Stata users. All measures described above were utilized in the SEM analyses; no additional constructs were examined in preliminary analyses.

Results

Descriptive Statistics

Table 1 presents descriptive statistics for the study sample. Beginning with sociodemographic factors, the mean age for study respondents was 14.4 years (SD = 1.75), and a narrow majority of respondents were male (56.5%). The mean grade level was 8th grade (SD = 1.69), and the mean perceived family economic status was 2.45 (between “not very well off” and “average” when asked “How well off do you think your family is?”; SD = 0.78). The mean year of arrival was 2017 (M = 2.12, SD = 0.84). 2017 was also the most common year of arrival (42%) followed by 2016 (28%) and 2018/2019 (25%).

In terms of cultural stress, the mean score for negative context of reception was 2.26 (between “disagree” and “neither disagree nor agree” that Venezuelans are not well received). The mean score for discrimination was 1.69 (between “never” and “at least once per year” reporting unfair/bad treatment based on nationality; SD = 0.94). With respect to family functioning, the mean scores for family communication (M = 4.13, SD = 0.63) and support (M = 4.52, SD = 0.29) indicate that, on average, youth reported elevated levels of healthy communication and support (between “agree” and “completely agree”). Youth who reported that their family’s economic situation was “average” or better reported higher levels of family communication (t = 2.14, p < .05) and a less negative context of reception (t = 3.75, p < .001) as compared to their peers who perceived family financial hardship.

In terms of substance use risk, the mean values for normative beliefs (M = 1.53, SD = 0.61; between “definitely not okay” and “not okay” to use) and intentions (M = 1.28, SD = 0.42; between would “definitely not” and “probably not” use if given the opportunity) were both low overall. Mean values were highest for alcohol-specific normative beliefs (M = 1.72, SD = 0.74) and intentions (M = 1.51, SD = 0.74). Supplemental tests indicated that permissive beliefs (1.39 versus 1.66; t = 4.59, p < .001) and intentions to use (1.23 versus 1.32; t = 2.31, p < .05) were lower among youth ages 10 to 12 compared to those ages 13 or older.

Structural Equation Modeling to Examine Theoretical Model

After creating a zero-order correlation matrix (see Table 2), SEM was conducted to test the theoretical model rooted in Cultural Stress Theory. Specifically, two sequential steps were carried out in conducting the structural equation analyses. First, the proposed model was tested and evaluated in terms of GOF and, as necessary, adjusted on the basis of empirically derived modification indices and theoretical coherency. Second, a modified SEM was examined and assessed in terms of model fit and individual parameter coefficients. As shown in Table 3, the GOF for the proposed model indicated less than good fit. As such, several modifications were suggested to improve the overall fit. For instance, modification indices suggested that several error terms needed to be correlated. As such, the error terms for several items in each of the latent variables were allowed to correlate (e.g., “It’s hard for me to succeed in school because I am Venezuelan” and “Teachers treat Venezuelan youth differently than youth from other countries”). All GOF statistics for the modified model indicate acceptable model fit.

Table 2.

Correlation Matrix for Study Variables

Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. Age 1.000
2. Gender (Male = 1) 0.039 1.000
3. Grade 0.898*** 0.021 1.000
4. Family Affluence −0.021 −0.062 −0.034 1.000
5. Time in US 0.001 −0.061 0.002 0.028 1.000
6. Negative Context −0.082 −0.067 −0.029 −0.150** −0.002 1.000
7. Discrimination 0.030 0.067 0.051 −0.015 −0.026 0.384*** 1.000
8. Family Support −0.102 −0.100* −0.125* 0.042 0.055 −0.211*** −0.214*** 1.000
9. Family Communication −0.137** −0.079 −0.132** 0.044 0.018 −0.183*** −0.149** 0.535*** 1.000
10. Substance Use Norms 0.249*** 0.115* 0.223*** −0.046 0.020 0.139** 0.260*** −0.310*** −0.370*** 1.000
11. Substance Use Intentions 0.180*** 0.106* 0.153** 0.135** 0.135 0.105* 0.340*** −0.290*** −0.280*** 0.439 1.000
Open in a new tab

Note: Correlation coefficients in bold is statistically significant at p < .05 or lower.

Table 3.

Goodness of fit results from proposed and modified structural equation models

Fit Indices Proposed Modified
χ2 (df) 721.169 (212) 443.298 (204)
RMSEA (90% CI) 0.081 (0.075-0.088) 0.057 (0.050-0.064)
CFI 0.833 0.921
TLI 0.803 0.904
SRMR 0.099 0.051
Open in a new tab

Note: Coefficient in bold is statistically significant at p < .05 or lower

Figure 2 presents the standardized SEM model for the relationship between cultural stress, family functioning, and substance use risk for Venezuelan immigrant youth. Negative context of reception predicted family support (β = −0.24, B = −0.27 [SE = .080], p = .001) and communication (β = −0.23, B = −0.21 [SE = .067], p = .002). In turn, family support predicted substance intentions (β = −0.24, B = −0.13 [SE = .060], p = .027) but not norms (β = −0.06, B = −0.04 [SE = .063], p = .529). Family communication predicted substance use norms (β = −0.35, B = −0.27 [SE = .08.], p = .001), but did not predict substance use intentions (β = −0.03, B = −0.02 [SE = .078], p = .823). Examining the asymmetric distribution of products tests (Leth-Steensen & Gallitto, 2016) indicated a significant indirect effect between negative context and substance use norms (via family communication; B = 0.070, 95% CI = 0.023-0.116, p = .003) and a significant indirect effect between negative context of reception and intentions (via family support; B = 0.051, 95% CI = 0.011-0.093, p = .013). Discrimination exerted a direct effect on both substance use norms (β = 0.20, B = −0.04 [SE = .063], p = .001) and intentions (β = 0.33, B = 0.15 [SE = .032], p < .001) while no direct effect was observed between negative context of reception and norms or intentions. Substance use norms significantly predicted substance use intentions (β = 0.24, B = 0.21 [SE = .066], p < .001). Age and gender were not significantly associated with either of the substance use risk variables and were trimmed from the final model; however, family socioeconomic status (β = 0.17, B = 0.10 [SE = .033], p = .0012) and time spent in the US (β = 0.17, B = 0.09 [SE = .030], p = .002) were directly and positively linked with substance use intentions. Sociodemographic associations were not depicted in Figure 2 for purposes of simplicity and interpretability.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Structural equation model (SEM) for the relationship between cultural stress, family functioning, and substance use risk for recently-arrived Venezuelan youth ages 10 to 16. All coefficients shown are standardized beta values with unstandardized coefficients reported in text. Age, gender, grade level, family socioeconomic status, and time spent in the US were included in the SEM model as control variables. Beta values in bold are significant at p < .05 or lower. *p < .05, *p < .01, ***p < .001. χ2 (df) = 423.934 (203), RMSEA = 0.055 (90% CI for RMSEA = 0.047-0.062, p = .136), CFI = 0.927, TLI = 0.911, SRMR = 0.049.

Supplemental Analyses: Youth Ages 13-16

Given the relatively lower levels of substance use risk (i.e., conservative substance use norms, low intentions to use) among youth ages 10-12, we executed a supplemental SEM with only youth ages 13 and older (n = 343). An evaluation of GOF statistics revealed acceptable model fit (i.e.,, χ2 = 423.3 [204], RMSEA = 0.059 [0.051-0.067], CFI = 0.913, TLI = 0.893, SRMR = 0.054). Moreover, all paths among youth ages 13-16 were substantively comparable to the full analyses of youth ages 10-16 in terms of direction and significance. Specifically, negative context of reception was associated with family communication (B = −0.24, B = −0.25 [SE = 0.083], p = .001) and support (B = −0.26, B = −0.33 [SE = 0.096], p < .001). In turn, family support was associated with substance use intentions (B = −0.25, B = −0.133 [SE = 0.061], p = .022) and family communication (B = −0.34, B = −0.25 [SE = 0.081], p = .001) was associated with substance use norms. Direct paths were observed from discrimination to substance use norms (B = 0.19, B = 0.097 [SE = 0.034], p = .003) and intentions (B = 0.34, B = 0.16 [SE = 0.035], p < .001) and between substance use norms and intentions (B = 0.23, B = 0.21 [SE = 0.074], p = .002)

Discussion

Although several million Venezuelans have left their country since 2015, ours is among the first studies to examine the rates of migration-related cultural stress among Venezuelan migrant youth and to examine the relationship between cultural stress and substance use risk. We found compelling evidence that perceived negative context of reception—the perception that Venezuelan immigrants are not welcome in the US—and discrimination based on nationality are related to substance use risk among recently-arrived Venezuelan youth. More precisely, and in keeping with prior research with other Latin American immigrant youth (Lorenzo-Blanco et al., 2016), negative context of reception was associated with both compromised family communication and support which, in turn, were associated with permissive normative beliefs and substance use intentions. In contrast, perceived discrimination was not found to be related to family functioning, but was directly related to substance use risk.

Findings from the present study have several potential implications. First, although the mean rates of negative context of reception and discrimination suggest that overall levels of cultural stress are relatively low (perhaps a function of many youth living in South Florida, which is uniquely welcoming context for Latin American immigrants [see Aranda et al., 2014]), it is clear that an important subset of youth are experiencing problems as a result of their Venezuelan immigrant identity. For instance, nearly one in five Venezuelan youth (19%) affirmed feeling that they did not have the same opportunities as “people from other countries,” and 18% agreed with the statement that people “regularly criticize Venezuelans”. Many more expressed ambivalent attitudes about the context of reception for Venezuelan migrants in the US. It is incumbent upon community leaders in Central and South Florida, and throughout the country, to provide a hospitable welcome to Venezuelans seeking safe haven in the US. Second, it is clear that family functioning is a critically important construct in terms of substance use risk among Venezuelans and other Latin American immigrant populations. We would do well to adapt and implement evidence-based interventions, such as Familias Unidas (Coatsworth, Pantin, & Szapocznik, 2002), to address the unique needs of Venezuelan and other crisis migrant youth and their families. Finally, there is recent evidence that an important subset of recently-arrived Venezuelan youth are engaged in or at risk of substance use initiation (Salas-Wright, Vaughn, Goings, et al., 2019). Given evidence that substance use risk tends to increase with greater duration in the US (Salas-Wright et al., 2014) we would do well to waste no time in implementing preventive interventions with this new population.

Study Limitations

Findings from the present study should be interpreted in light of several limitations. First, all data examined were based on adolescent self-report. As such, there exists the possibility that youth may have under or over-reported substance use risk or other variables. Second, these cross-sectional data provide only a snapshot of the lives of Venezuelan migrant youth and do not provide any information on potential causal relationships or trajectories over time. Third, our measures face some limitations as—despite having been previously used in studies with Spanish-speaking youth—they have not been systematically validated for use with Venezuelan youth. Fourth, our measure of discrimination is based on only one item based on feedback from community partners and Venezuelan youth (who emphasized the importance of a brief survey). Indeed, it is possible that the lack of association between discrimination and family functioning was due to the use of only a single item. The two aforementioned points also raise questions regarding the finding that levels of negative context of reception and discrimination were relatively low. Was this due to measurement issues as our measures have not been validated for Venezuelans? Was this a function of the geographic location of the youth? These remain open questions to explore systematically in future research. Fifth, although we recruited youth in collaboration with partner organizations, our sample was not obtained using methods designed to produce a representative sample of Venezuelan youth in the US. Finally, our study does not provide information on the pre-migration experiences of youth, with regard to prior substance use or exposure to psychosocial stressors. The inclusion of such variables in future research would be beneficial, particularly in light of recent research which suggests that pre-migration factors are related to behavioral health (Romano, Sanchez, De La Rosa, & Ertman, 2019; Salas-Wright, Vaughn, Cohen, & Schwartz, 2019).

Conclusions

The present study provides new evidence on cultural stress and substance use risk among recently-arrived Venezuelan youth in the US. We see clear evidence that negative context of reception and discrimination are related to substance use risk, both directly (in the case of discrimination) and indirectly (in the case of context of reception). Given the manifold stressors faced by Venezuelan immigrants both prior to migration and in the process of resettling in the US, it is critical that practitioners, community leaders, and policymakers support this rapidly-growing population to address the challenges of migration-related cultural stress and the risks such stress pose for adolescent substance use. To be sure, prospective studies conducted with multiple groups of Latin American youth in the US—and research with representative samples of Venezuelan immigrant youth in particular—are needed to allow us to fully understand the generalizability of these results. The critical next step in the research process is to conduct rigorous prospective studies with representative samples of Venezuelan youth in the US and beyond.

Acknowledgments

Research reported in this publication was supported in part by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under Award Number R25 DA030310 (PI: James Anthony). The first author also received support from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) via K01 AA026645.The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NIDA, NIAAA, or the NIH.

Footnotes

The authors have no conflicts to disclose.

References

  1. Aranda EM, Hughes S, & Sabogal E (2014). Making a life in multiethnic Miami: Immigration and the rise of a global city. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  2. Author’s own (under review). Experiencias de migración venezolana en Colombia y Estados Unidos.
  3. Baldwin S (2019). Psychological statistics and psychometrics using Stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press. [Google Scholar]
  4. Calzadilla T, & López JF (2018, October). Venezuelans break record for U.S. asylum petitions, but few are approved. Retrieved in July, 2019 from: https://www.univision.com/univision-news/latin-america/venezuelans-break-record-for-us-asylum-petitions-but-few-are-approved
  5. Caritas (2018). Venezuela crisis 2018. Retrieved in July, 2019 from https://www.caritas.org/2018/09/venezuela-crisis-2018/
  6. Coatsworth JD, Pantin H, & Szapocznik J (2002). Familias Unidas: A family-centered ecodevelopmental intervention to reduce risk for problem behavior among Hispanic adolescents. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 5(2), 113–132. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Durand J, & Massey DS (2010). New world orders: Continuities and changes in Latin American migration. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 630(1), 20–52. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Felter C, & Renwick D (2018). The U.S. immigration debate. Retrieved in July, 2019 from: https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-immigration-debate-0
  9. Faiola A (2018, March). The crisis next door: Mass exodus of desperate Venezuelans is overwhelming neighboring countries. Retrieved in July, 2019 from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/world/wp/2018/03/02/feature/i-cant-go-back-venezuelans-are-fleeing-their-crisis-torn-country-en-masse/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.14480f3e6a68
  10. Gaito J (1980). Measurement scales and statistics: Resurgence of an old misconception. Psychological Bulletin, 87(3), 564–567. [Google Scholar]
  11. Gallardo LH, & Batalova J (2020). Venezuelan immigrants in the United States. Retrieved in May, 2020 from: https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/venezuelan-immigrants-united-states
  12. Hecht ML, Marsiglia FF, Elek E, Wagstaff DA, Kulis S, Dustman P, & Miller-Day M (2003). Culturally grounded substance use prevention: An evaluation of the keepin’it REAL curriculum. Prevention Science, 4(4), 233–248. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Henderson T (2018). Venezuelan immigrants get Trump sympathy but not status. Retrieved in July, 2019 from: https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2018/10/02/venezuelan-immigrants-get-trump-sympathy-but-not-status
  14. Kline RB (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed). New York, NY: Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
  15. Kouider EB, Koglin U, & Petermann F (2015). Emotional and behavioral problems in migrant children and adolescents in American countries: a systematic review. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 17(4), 1240–1258. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Kulis S, Marsiglia FF, Elek E, Dustman P, Wagstaff DA, & Hecht ML (2005). Mexican/Mexican American adolescents and keepin’it REAL: An evidence-based substance use prevention program. Children & Schools, 27(3), 133–145. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Lasky P, Buckwalter KC, Whall A, Lederman R, Speer J, McLane A, ... & Rees BL (1985). Developing an instrument for the assessment of family dynamics. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 7(1), 40–57. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Leth-Steensen C, & Gallitto E (2016). Testing mediation in structural equation modeling: The effectiveness of the test of joint significance. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 76(2), 339–351. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Lorenzo-Blanco EI, Meca A, Piña-Watson B, Zamboanga BL, Szapocznik J, Cano MA, Des Rosiers SE, Córdova D, Romero AJ, Unger JB, Soto DW, Villamar JA, Pattarroyo M, Lizzi KM, & Schwartz SJ (2019). Longitudinal trajectories of family functioning among recent immigrant Latino families: Links with cultural stress, emotional well-being, and behavioral health. Child Development, 90, 506–523. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Lorenzo-Blanco EI, Meca A, Unger JB, Romero A, Gonzales-Backen M, Piña-Watson B, ... & Villamar JA (2016). Latino parent acculturation stress: Longitudinal effects on family functioning and youth emotional and behavioral health. Journal of Family Psychology, 30(8), 966. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Norman G (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(5), 625–632. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Marsiglia FF, Nagoshi JL, Parsai M, & Castro FG (2014). The effects of parental acculturation and parenting practices on the substance use of Mexican-heritage adolescents from Southwestern Mexican neighborhoods. Journal of Ethnicity in Substance Abuse, 13(3), 288–311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Marsiglia FF, Parsai M, & Kulis S (2009). Effects of familism and family cohesion on problem behaviors among adolescents in Mexican immigrant families in the southwest United States. Journal of Ethnic & Cultural Diversity in Social Work, 18(3), 203–220. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Okamoto J, Ritt-Olson A, Soto D, Baezconde-Garbanati L, & Unger JB (2009). Perceived discrimination and substance use among Latino adolescents. American Journal of Health Behavior, 33, 718–727. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Ozug M, Cala C, & Shapiro A (2019, April). Chronicles of a Venezuelan exodus: More families flee the crisis on foot every day. Retrieved in July, 2019 from https://www.npr.org/2019/04/04/709193469/chronicles-of-a-venezuelan-exodus-more-families-flee-the-crisis-on-foot-every-da
  26. Pérez Gómez A (2018). ¿Por qué los venezolanos se sienten más discriminados en Colombia que en Estados Unidos? Retrieved in July, 2019 from: https://www.razonpublica.com/index.php/internacional-temas-32/11342-por-qu%C3%A9-los-venezolanos-se-sienten-m%C3%A1s-discriminados-en-colombia-que-en-estados-unidos.html
  27. Phinney JS, Madden T, & Santos LJ (1998). Psychological variables as predictors of perceived ethnic discrimination among minority and immigrant adolescents1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(11), 937–953. [Google Scholar]
  28. Portes A, & Rumbaut RG (2014). Immigrant America: A portrait (4th ed). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. [Google Scholar]
  29. Romano E, Sánchez M, De La Rosa M, & Ertman B (2019). Determinants of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs among Latino immigrants in Miami-Dade county, Florida. Journal of Ethnicity in Substance Abuse, 18(3), 359–373. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Salas-Wright CP, & Schwartz SJ (2019). The study and prevention of alcohol and other drug misuse among migrants: Toward a transnational theory of cultural stress. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 17(2), 346–369. [Google Scholar]
  31. Salas-Wright CP, Vaughn MG, Clark TT, Terzis LD, & Córdova D (2014). Substance use disorders among first-and second-generation immigrant adults in the United States: evidence of an immigrant paradox?. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 75(6), 958–967. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Salas-Wright CP, Vaughn MG, Cohen M, & Schwartz SJ (2019). The Sequelae of Premigration Hunger Among Venezuelan Immigrant Children in the US. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2019.10.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Salas-Wright CP, Vaughn MG, Goings TC, Oh S, Marsiglia F, Cohen M, ... & Schwartz S (2019). Disconcerting levels of alcohol use among Venezuelan immigrant adolescents in the United States. Addictive Behaviors. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2019.106269 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Salas-Wright CP, Vaughn MG, Schwartz SJ, & Córdova D (2016). An “immigrant paradox” for adolescent externalizing behavior? Evidence from a national sample. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 51(1), 27–37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Schumacker RE, & Lomax RG (2016). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (4th ed.) New York, NY: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  36. Schwartz SJ, Salas-Wright CP, Pérez-Gómez A, Mejía-Trujillo J, Brown EC, Montero-Zamora P, ... & Javakhishvili N (2018). Cultural stress and psychological symptoms in recent Venezuelan immigrants to the United States and Colombia. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 67, 25–34. [Google Scholar]
  37. Schwartz SJ, Unger JB, Baezconde-Garbanati L, Zamboanga BL, Lorenzo-Blanco EI, Des Rosiers SE, ... & Piña-Watson BM (2015). Trajectories of cultural stressors and effects on mental health and substance use among Hispanic immigrant adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 56(4), 433–439. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Schwartz SJ, Unger JB, Lorenzo-Blanco EI, Des Rosiers SE, Villamar JA, Soto DW, ... & Szapocznik J (2014). Perceived context of reception among recent Hispanic immigrants: Conceptualization, instrument development, and preliminary validation. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 20(1), 1–15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Schwartz SJ, Unger JB, Zamboanga BL, & Szapocznik J (2010). Rethinking the concept of acculturation: implications for theory and research. American Psychologist, 65(4), 237–251. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Stephens PC, Sloboda Z, Stephens RC, Teasdale B, Grey SF, Hawthorne RD, & Williams J (2009). Universal school-based substance abuse prevention programs: Modeling targeted mediators and outcomes for adolescent cigarette, alcohol and marijuana use. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 102(1–3), 19–29. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Suárez-Orozco C, & Suárez-Orozco MM (2009). Children of immigration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  42. Sue DW, Capodilupo CM, Torino GC, Bucceri JM, Holder A, Nadal KL, & Esquilin M (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice. American Psychologist, 62(4), 271–286. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (2019). Asylum division quarterly stakeholder meeting. Retrieved in July 2019 from: https://www.uscis.gov/outreach/upcoming-national-engagements/outreach
  44. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) (2019, June). Refugees and migrants from Venezuela top 4 million: UNHCR and IOM. Retrieved in July, 2019 from: https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/news/press/2019/6/5cfa2a4a4/refugees-migrants-venezuela-top-4-million-unhcr-iom.html
  45. Zimet GD, Dahlem NW, Zimet SG, & Farley GK (1988). The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(1), 30–41. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES