¡sÍ se puede! cultural factors as predictors of …
TRANSCRIPT
¡SÍ SE PUEDE! CULTURAL FACTORS AS PREDICTORS OF RESILIENCE AMONG
MEXICAN FARMWORKERS
By
KARLA TRINIDAD BLANCO
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Educational Leadership, Sport Studies and Educational/Counseling Psychology
DECEMBER 2017
© Copyright by KARLA TRINIDAD BLANCO, 2017 All Rights Reserved
© Copyright by KARLA TRINIDAD BLANCO, 2017 All Rights Reserved
ii
To the Faculty of Washington State University: The members of the Committee appointed to examine the dissertation of KARLA
TRINIDAD BLANCO find it satisfactory and recommend that it be accepted. ____________________________________ Brian W. McNeill, Ph.D., Chair
____________________________________ Brian F. French, Ph.D.
____________________________________ Sarah Ullrich-French, Ph.D.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Dr. McNeill, thank you for your collaboration and guidance in making this dream happen
(my telenovela continues!). Dr. French, from the first time I took a class with you I knew you
were part of my team, gracias! Dr. Ullrich-French, thank you for the supportive talks and for
listening to my struggles. I also appreciate Dr. McCubbin’s continued efforts and guidance in
making sure I finish.
To my husband (mi Viejo), we have spent most of our lives together and I have become a
better person because of you. Thank you for the endless conversations and listening to my
complaints and pains of graduate school. Your support and love were instrumental in completing
my degree. I hope that we get a chance to relax and have fun now that I am finally done, te amo!
To my beautiful children, Mayra, Jr., and Alexys. You have been my fuel, inspiration,
and consistent motivation to get this done. Thank you for always supporting this dream and for
your understanding of my absence in this process. There is nothing in the world I am prouder of
than being your mom. You help me stay grounded, to feel loved, and to live life with a purpose. I
love you eternally!
¡Papa Pacho y Mama Trini sé que están en el cielo siempre cuidándome y espero que
estén orgullosos de mí, así como yo soy de ser su hija, los extraño mucho! Mama Aida, por usted
soy una mujer fuerte. Le agradezco todos los sacrificios que ha hecho en su vida por mí y por
nuestra familia. Es un honor tenerla como madre. A mi feo, no cambiaría por nada el tenerte
como hermano. ¡Desde pequeño siempre has sido mi cómplice y un apoyo incondicional, mil
gracias! A mis hermanas, sobrinos y sobrinas, espero que nunca se les olvide que a pesar de todo
los quiero mucho. También quiero agradecerle a mi suegra por siempre apoyarme y por
iv
demostrarme que la familia es lo más importante. Gracias suegro, cuñado y cuñada por ayudarme
por todos estos años.
To Maggie, para mí siempre has sido una amiga increíble y una fuerza para que yo siga
adelante. ¡Gracias por tu apoyo constante! Rafa, no hay palabras para describir lo importante que
ha sido tu apoyo en mi vida and academic journey. Thank you for helping me believe in my
dreams, enjoy life, and for never leaving me alone (¡que no se equivoquen!). A mi futuro doctor
Jairo, gracias por ser mi niñero, confidente y apoyo, ¡TQUC! Paty, gracias por tus porras y por
regalarme esa sonrisa que me ha hecho sentir tu cariño. A mi comadrita chula, como me dijiste,
“it takes a village to build a doctor” and this day would not be possible without your support,
gracias! Laura recuerda que todo lo que quieras lograr es posible y con un buen equipo, gracias
por ser parte del mío! Josué, ya salí del matadero, ahora te toca a ti! Rubria, Antonio, y Lunita a
ver si ahora si se me hace visitarlos. Estoy muy agradecida con ustedes. Vanessa and Simone,
thank you ladies for your constant words of encouragement, long talks and for being part of my
team.
When I was in high school and recently arrived to the U.S., Chief Quinlan and Coronel
Shaw noticed my potential and pushed me to be the best. Chief and Miss Laura, know that all the
thanksgiving dinners you used “to win” in raffles and gave them to my family have never been
forgotten. Thank you for teaching me about the importance of paying it forward.
As an undergraduate student, I received the mentorship of multiple individuals who
always believed in me and I am extremely thankful to have them in my corner. To my San Diego
State family, particularly Veronica (“la jefa”), Michelle, Dr. Pozos, Thelma, and Jaye (yes, I am
including you in this group) and my peers (Diana, Juanita, Dalia, Mary, Nelly, and Ian) you
made my undergraduate career much more rewarding and valuable. You are strong models to
v
follow, thank you! Dr. Thierry Devos, you ignited my passion for research and were the first
person to believe in my potential as researcher, I finally finished! Dr. Roberto Velásquez (aka,
the Aztec warrior), gracias por siempre echarme porras y por su inmenso cariño, lo quiero
mucho! The support of the SDSU McNair Achievement Program and Minority Biomedical
Research Support Programs and their staff were instrumental in pursuing a graduate education, it
is an honor for me to be one of your scholars, gracias!
At WSU, I was fortune to have a strong supportive network of peers and staff. To my
doctoral friends and peers, graduate school would not have been as doable without having you
around. To my awesome cohort Sam, Melanie, Timoteo, and Kristin thank you for being there
for me, especially when coursework was tough and felt I could barely make it through. David
and Thao, thank you for your willingness to help in such crucial time for me to finish my “little
paper.” Kelly and Dr. Erdman, thank you for keeping me focused! Dr. Herrera and Lucila Loera,
thank you for always listening to me, especially when I was struggling the most. You are great
examples of powerful Latinx, gracias!
I am also immensely grateful to all of the WSU MSS, New Student Programs, Student
Support Services, CAMP, and the University College staff. My research, academic and
professional work is partly a result from working with all of you, gracias! Therese King, thank
you for helping me flourish professionally and for always being there for me. Dr. Alderete and
Mrs. Sue Alderete, your support will never be forgotten.
To my former clinical supervisors and new colleagues Greg, Brian, Martha, Sharon,
Steve, Marti, Chuck, and Radhika this would never have happened without you! Candi and Jenn,
thank you for taking care of me and always motivating me to continue. My Vandal family also
includes a group of successful Latinx individuals whom in the short time since I met them have
vi
been an integral part of my life and success, gracias Evelina, Victor, Jesse, Cristina, Nayeli, and
George. Me siento afortunada de empezar mi carrera con ustedes a lado de mí.
There is no doubt that the help and support of Mr. RB and Mrs. Linda Smith were
integral an part of this accomplishment, thank you my angels! I would also like to thank all
students I have worked with (too many to mention individually, but you know who you are). You
kept reminding me of the importance to finish this degree. También quiero agradecerle a todas la
personas y organizaciones que me ayudaron a obtener participantes para mi investigación.
Especialmente a la señora Eva, Socorro, Berta, Maggie, Jonny y a Rolando. Definitivamente me
hubiera tardado más en graduarme sin su ayuda. Finalmente me gustaría agradecerles de Corazón
a los campesinos que estuvieron dispuestos a pasar tiempo conmigo y completar mi encuesta
There are more names to include in my acknowledgements but I will never submit my
document to the graduate school if I mention everyone who is part of my team. ¡Mil gracias a
todos, lo logramos!
vii
¡SÍ SE PUEDE! CULTURAL FACTORS AS PREDICTORS OF RESILIENCE AMONG
MEXICAN FARMWORKERS
Abstract
by Karla Trinidad Blanco, Ph.D. Washington State University
December 2017
Chair: Brian W. McNeill
Most scientific literature on Mexican farmworkers has examined the impact of
occupational hazards such as physical illness from exposure to pesticides and substance use due
to separation from their families (Ward, 2010). However, the resilience of Mexican farmworkers,
which enables them to overcome and manage the negative impacts of their occupation, has been
consistently ignored. In research examining resilience, Mexican cultural values such as
familismo/familism and enculturation seem to provide an extended social network of support that
increases people’s ability to cope with obstacles and hardships in life (Parra-Cardona, Bulock,
Imig, Villarruel, & Gold, 2006). The effects of familismo/familism has not been explored within
the Mexican farmworkers. Thus, in attempting to shift the paradigm from a deficit perspective to
a strength-based lens, this study focused on examining the effects of cultural factors of
familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality, and acculturation on the resilience among
Mexican farmworkers. Participants included (N= 151) individuals who identified as Mexican or
Mexican-American farmworkers, and were asked to complete a survey which was verbally
administered or self-completed in Spanish. The seven-part included: 1) A demographic
questionnaire, 2) the Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-II (ARSMA-II), 3) the
Latino Values Scale (LVS), 4) the Daily Spiritual Experience Scale (DSES-S in Spanish), 5) the
Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA), 6) the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale-10 (CD-RISC-
viii
10CA), and 7) the Quality of Life Assessment (WHOQOL-BREF). In this investigation, results
indicated the cultural values of familismo/familism and spirituality were related to resilience.
Furthermore, acculturation was negatively related to resilience. In other words, the higher the
level of acculturation, the lower level of resilience. In terms of well-being, this study showed a
relationship between gender and well-being, that is males in this study showed lower levels of
well-being when compared to their female counterparts. Furthermore, spirituality was also
significantly related to well-being. More specifically, when Mexican farmworkers in this study
endorsed higher levels of spirituality, they also endorsed higher levels of well-being.
Surprisingly, gender, immigration status, and enculturation were not significantly related to
resilience. Similarly, immigration status and levels of familismo/familism, enculturation, and
acculturation did not show a significant relationship with well-being.
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................. iii
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. vii
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ xii GENERAL INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................1 MANUSCRIPT I .............................................................................................................................3 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................4
Methodology ........................................................................................................................7 Sociodemographic Information ...........................................................................................7 A portrait of Mexican Farmworkers in the United States ....................................................8 Physical Health ...............................................................................................................9 Psychological Health .....................................................................................................10 Familismo ..........................................................................................................................14
Empirical Research of Familismo .................................................................................17
Measures of Familismo ..................................................................................................20 Attitudinal Familismo Scale .......................................................................................20 Pan-Hispanic Familism Scale ....................................................................................21 Latino Values Scale .....................................................................................................21 Enculturation ......................................................................................................................25 Enculturation Measures .................................................................................................30 Bidimensional Acculturation Scale for Hispanics ......................................................31 Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-II ...............................................31 Resilience ...........................................................................................................................32
x
Theoretical Framework: Relational and Resilience Theory of Ethnic Family Systems ..................................................................................................................36 Resilience Measures ...........................................................................................................40 10-Item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale .................................................................40 Resilience Scale for Adults ............................................................................................41 Escala de Mediación con Mexicanos/Scale of Reslience in Mexicans .........................41 State of the Current Research ...........................................................................................42 Limitations and Future Directions ....................................................................................44
MANUSCRIPT II ..........................................................................................................................46
Introduction .......................................................................................................................47
Purpose of the Current Study .............................................................................................56
Method ...............................................................................................................................56 Participants and Procedures ........................................................................................56 Instruments ....................................................................................................................59
Statistical Analyses .............................................................................................................64 Data Screening ....................................................................................................................65 Results .................................................................................................................................65
Discussion ..........................................................................................................................72
Conclusions and Future Directions ....................................................................................76 General Discussion ...........................................................................................................78
References ..........................................................................................................................80 Appendix A: Demographic Questionnaire in Spanish .......................................................90 Appendix B: Latino Values Scale (LVS) in Spanish .........................................................91 Appendix C: Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans –II (ARSMA-II)
xi
in Spanish ...........................................................................................................................92 Appendix D: The Daily Spiritual Experience Scale in Spanish (DSES-S) .......................95
Appendix E: Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA) in Spanish .............................................96
Appendix F: Connor-Davison Escala de Adaptación (CD-RISC-10CA) ............................99
Appendix G: The World Health Organization Quality of Life in Spanish (WHOQOL-
BREF in Spanish) ............................................................................................................100
Appendix H: Demographic Questionnaire .......................................................................102
Appendix I: Latino Values Scale (LVS) ..........................................................................103 Appendix J: Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-II (ARSMA-II) .....................................................................................................................104 Appendix K: The Daily Spiritual Experience Scale (DSES) ...........................................106
Appendix L: Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA) ..............................................................107
Appendix M: Connor-Davidson Scale 10 (CD-RISC-10) ................................................109
Appendix N: The World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF)) ........110
xii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Sample Demographic Characteristics .............................................................................58 Table 2: Correlation Matrix for Variables Used in the Current Study ..........................................66 Table 3: Descriptive of Variables ..................................................................................................66 Table 4: Summary of Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Outcomes in the Final Block .............................................................................................................67
xiii
DEDICATION
I dedicate this dissertation to my kids, Mayra, Jr., and Alexys. You have been my backbone in
getting this done. This one is yours!
1
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
This general introduction provides a summary of the two manuscripts that follow. The first manuscript is a comprehensive, critical review of the existing literature examining the
following: 1) the psychological and physical impact of the work Mexican farmworkers engage
in, 2) the ways in which familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality and acculturation impact
the resilience among Mexican people, and 3) the utilization of the Relational and Resilience
Theory of Ethnic Families Systems (R&RTEFS) as a framework to examine resilience among
ethnic communities.
Most current research examining the lives of Mexican individuals comes from a deficit
model. The R&RTEFS (McCubbin & McCubbin, 2013) provides a strength-based lens focusing
on the resilience, durability, and survival of ethnic families. McCubbin and McCubbin (2013)
emphasize the significance of contextual changes in the lives of ethnic families and their ability
to adapt and transform accordingly because of their strong family connection. Although the
R&RTEFS has not been used to examine Mexican communities, given its inclusion of
indigenous perspectives and highlighted importance of interpersonal relationships, the
R&RTEFS is a suitable framework to examine resilience in Mexican farmworkers. More
specifically, the R&RTEFS can be used as a theoretical guide to examine the linkage between
stressors Mexican farmworkers experience, their ability to adapt and manage accordingly, and
the cultural factors involved in resilience.
Cultural factors such as familismo/familism, enculturation, acculturation, and spirituality
have shown to play a significant role in the lives of Mexicans. Familismo/familism is
consistently highlighted in the empirical research as the primary cultural factor that allows
Latinas/os and Mexican people to overcome hardship (Calzada, Tamis-LeMonda, & Yoshikawa,
2
2012). The significance of family and sense of community is embedded within the Mexican
community, and may foster an individual’s ability to cope with adversity in their life (Alderete et
al., 2000; Parra-Cardona et al., 2006; Snipes et al. 2007). In addition, enculturation or adherence
to the culture of origin, has been shown as a strong cultural value among the Mexican
population. Enculturation provides a sense of belonging and identity that reduces the
psychological impact of stress (Cano & Castillo, 2015). Enculturation also decreases the
frequency of substance use among Mexican farmworkers (Ramos, Manongdo, & Cruz-Santiago,
2010) and has been shown to improve academic performance and graduation rates among
Mexican American undergraduates (Ojeda et al., 2011a).
When examining Mexican peoples’ ability to cope, an optimistic attitude, and strong
religious ties help to promote resilience. For instance, Morgan Consoli and Llamas (2013)
argued that cultural values such as religion and traditional gender roles positively impact
Latina/o undergraduate students’ level of resilience. Furthermore, in the face of negative life
challenges, religion/spirituality has been found to be a protective factor (Morgan Consoli, 2011)
that helps individuals remain physically and spiritually healthy (McNeill, 2001).
Manuscript two empirically tests the cultural predictors involved in resilience among
Mexican farmworkers. More specifically, the present investigation sought to examine how
Mexican cultural factors such as familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality, and
acculturation relate to the resilience in Mexican farmworkers.
MANUSCRIPT ONE
¡Sí Se Puede! Examining Resilience Factors and Enculturation among Mexican Farmworkers
A Comprehensive Literature Review
Karla Trinidad Blanco
Washington State University
4
Introduction
Latina/o workers, especially farmworkers, are some of the strongest and most resilient of
all blue-collar workers today. They can tolerate a great deal of physical and psychological stress,
often on a continuous basis, and work under some of the most difficult and dangerous of labor
and social conditions including exposure to pesticides (Grzywacz et al., 2010b; Grzywacz et al.,
2013). According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, the
agricultural/forestry/fishing sector accounts for the highest rate of occupational deaths across all
industries in the United States (2012). Furthermore, the report indicated that approximately 115
children die in the farm workplace each year. Despite these harsh working conditions, Latina/o
farmworkers, especially Mexican farmworkers continue to harvest the land.
With recent discussions about immigration reform in this country, including a pathway to
legal residency and the fact that there will be a need for farmworkers for the foreseeable future,
the psychological study of Mexican farmworkers is even more timely and relevant. For example,
the National Center for Farmworker Health, Inc. (NCFH) reported that 72% of all farmworkers
in the United States are foreign born and 62% of them were born in Mexico (2012). Unless there
are dramatic and unexpected changes in educational and work demographics, a significant
number of Mexican immigrants will continue to work in the farm industry through the year 2050
(NCFH, 2012). By this date, it is estimated 29% of the population in the United States will be of
Latina/o descent (Taylor & Cohn, 2012). Therefore, having a better understanding of the
experiences of Latinas/os, particularly the Mexican population in the United States, is essential.
Unfortunately, Mexican farmworkers experience many stressors that could pose a threat
to their ability to surpass obstacles, which can ultimately impact their resilience. As we try to
understand the life of Mexican farmworkers, we must be aware of the stressors they may
5
experience. These stressors include medical, social, and/or psychological challenges. From a
medical standpoint, Mexican farmworkers may have pre-existing and untreated medical
conditions caused by farm work such as lower back injuries, pesticide intoxication, respiratory
and visual problems (Kamel & Hoppin, 2004). Some of the social stressors include, poverty,
transportation, housing problems, as well as an undocumented legal status; thus, having to live
an invisible life due to the fear of deportation to Mexico. The majority of Mexican farmworkers
also have difficulties in obtaining an education and may not know how to speak English.
Depending on their immigration status, many of them suffer from isolation or lack of family
presence in the U.S. since many leave their spouses, children, and other family members in their
country of origin. Other stressors may include the trauma experienced in leaving Mexico and
coming to this country (especially without proper documentation), and initial and ongoing
separation from one’s family and community. Despite the presence of these stressors, Mexican
farmworkers have the ability to manage, tolerate, and overcome them.
The vast majority of the empirical literature thus far focuses on the negative
physiological impact that Mexican farmworkers experience. Although it is important to examine
and understand the physiological, social, and psychological strains in the experiences of
farmworkers, it is also noteworthy to investigate their positive attributes, which contribute to
their success despite the work environment and cultural challenges. Therefore, in attempting to
shift the paradigm, it will be important to understand the concept of resilience in a population
like farmworkers, who despite the challenges faced, continue to be a strong workforce
imperative to the economic success of the United States.
A comprehensive review of the research literature in the social and behavioral sciences
indicates that different aspects of Mexican farmworkers’ mental health status have been
6
examined including the high prevalence of psychiatric conditions in farmworkers (Alderete,
Vega, Kolody, & Aguilar-Gaxiola, 2000), results of cognitive testing (Grzywacz et al., 2009),
lack of social support on mental health status (Grzywacz et al., 2006), heightened levels of
acculturative stress, depression, and anxiety (Hovey & Magaña, 2002), higher suicide among
Latina farmworkers, the effects of specific psychosocial stressors (Hovey & Magaña, 2003),
negative effects of racism and discrimination (Maldonado, 2006), depression and physical
disability (Mazzoni, Boiko, Katon, & Russo, 2007), and evaluation- and definition of stress
(Snipes, Thompson, O’Connor, Godina, & Ibarra, 2007). Thus, the research literature has mostly
focused on such negative aspects as the stress, pressure, social strain, and vulnerabilities that
Mexican immigrants face daily. As a result, while numerous psychosocial stressors have been
identified in the research literature for Mexican farmworkers, it is still not clear how they
psychologically survive such an ordeal, or in other words, their coping patterns, behaviors, or
attitudes that account or help define resilience in such unique population.
To address the scientific gap in the literature regarding resilience factors that help
Mexican farmworkers survive such detrimental environmental influences, this review will
critically examine Mexican farmworkers’ risk and resilience factors, and how the cultural
processes may impact their psychological well-being. First, a review of demographic information
and risk factors will be presented. Second, studies examining the role of familismo/familism and
enculturation and measures of these processes will be presented and reviewed as they relate to
the resilience of Mexican farmworkers. Third, this review includes the examination of the
Relational and Resilience Theoretical Framework of Ethnic Family Systems (R&RTEFS;
McCubbin & McCubbin, 2013) and its application to the resilience of Mexican farmworkers.
7
Finally, conclusions will be based on the available current literature, with implications, and
recommendations for future research.
Methodology
To thoroughly evaluate and include all the relevant empirical findings into this literature
review, the focus was on examining the following three main areas of research: familismo,
enculturation, and resilience i.e., McCubbin and McCubbin (1988), and Morgan Consoli,
Gonzalez, & Lopez, 2012). The limited research in these areas influenced the decision to
broaden the search to include Latinos, Hispanics, and Mexicans rather than just solely focusing
in Mexican Farmworkers. Once the journal abstracts were read, the empirical articles included in
this review were those that specifically used Mexican and Mexican farmworkers participants.
The database PsycINFO was used to locate peer-reviewed journal articles in the year of 2016.
The journals with the majority of the research pertinent to the risk and resilience factors among
Mexicans was found in the Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, Journal of Cultural
Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, the Journal of Rural Health, the Journal of
Counseling Psychology, and the Journal of Latina/o Psychology. Additionally, nonpartisan
research centers such as the PewResearch Center, the Pew Hispanic Center, and the National
Center for Farmworker Health were used to include demographic information and statistics
specifically to Mexicans and Mexican Farmworkers. In total, 92 peer reviewed articles and
books across keywords were included in the current review.
Sociodemographic Information
Prior to discussing Mexican farmworkers’ resilience and their cultural factors, it is
important to distinguish terminology within this ethnic group. The terms Latina/o and Hispanic
are often used as synonyms; however, it is imperative to mention the sociopolitical context
8
involved in using these terms. Hispanic is a gender-neutral term that seems to benefit Spanish
colonial heritage while minimizing the contributions of indigenous people of Latin America.
Latino on the other hand, refers to the population who come from and/or can trace their ancestry
to the continent of Latin America, which includes Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean, and
South America and is more inclusive of the indigenous population (Liang, Salcedo, Rivera, &
Lopez, 2009). Despite Latino being a more comprehensive term, Gloria and Segura-Herrera
(2004) argued it is important to include women; therefore, scholars who are familiar with this
context use Latina/o, which appears to be the preferred self-referent term by people from
different parts of Latin America, and refers to people who have ancestral heritages across
Mexico, Central and South America (Kim, Soliz, Orellana, & Alamilla, 2009). Thus, throughout
this literature review, the term Latina/o will be used.
A Portrait of Mexican Farmworkers in the United States. The term farmworker
includes migrant and seasonal temporary workers whose skills are utilized to plant, maintain,
harvest, and process crops for consumption (Maureen, Williams, & Avery, 2008). Migrant
farmworkers move constantly throughout the U.S. or their countries of origin, as they are mainly
dependent on farming seasons (Maureen, et al., 2008), and the U.S. agricultural industry would
not survive without the labor of all farmworkers (Connor, Layne, & Thomisee, 2010). The
NCFWH (2012) estimates that there are over 3 million migrant and seasonal farmworkers in the
United States who help drive a multi-billion dollar U.S. agricultural industry. Furthermore, the
NCFWH reported that 84% of farmworkers in the United States speak Spanish, 78% are foreign
born, and 75% of those who are foreign born were born in Mexico, and the remainder from
Central and South America. Although it is difficult to provide a precise number of the existing
9
Mexican farmworker population, from the reported figures, it can be estimated that there are
more than 1.4 million Mexican migrant and seasonal farmworkers in the United States.
Agricultural work is usually in rural communities, which are predominantly attractive to
new immigrants, particularly Mexican immigrants who are less educated and need employment
regardless of the low wages to support their family. Thus, most Mexican farmworkers live in
low-income communities where medical, psychological, and other services are difficult to access
(McCurdy et al., 2015).
Physical Health
Studies have shown that Mexican farmworkers experience health stressors associated
with farmworker life. For example, Magaña and Hovey (2003) concluded rigid work demands
(i.e., working long hours, and having no days off, and poor housing conditions were significantly
correlated with high levels of anxiety symptoms. Furthermore, experiencing rigid work demands
and low income were significantly correlated with high levels of depressive symptomology.
Poor housing conditions possess a significant stressor for farmworkers, which impacts
their physical health. According to Arcury, Jacobs, and Ruiz (2015), farmworkers have limited
housing options mostly located within close proximity to the fields they work in. Their housing
location often results in living in housing properties with high exposure to pesticides,
contaminated water, and physical hazards such as electrical risks and falls.
Furthermore, Marsh, Milofsky, Kissam, and Arcury (2015) indicated farmworkers living
conditions further exacerbate health risks due to the noisy and being crowed into small housing.
Additionally, Marsh and colleagues (2015) found that the isolation experienced by farmworkers
also increases their health risks as they have limited access to health care, healthy food, and
physical activity.
10
Psychological Health
Ramos, Su, Lander, and Rivera (2015) explored the stressors that contribute to depression
among Latina/o farmworkers in rural Nebraska. Two hundred migrant farmworkers (185 males,
15 females) between the ages of 19 to 70 (average 33 years), mostly born in Mexico or of
Mexican descent (92.9%, 5.1 from Central America, and 2% identified as other Latina/o
subgroup) comprised the total sample for this study. Ramos and colleagues (2015) created a
Migrant Farmworker Health Survey which contained 103 questions in the following five main
areas: 1) demographics, 2) current health status, 3) stress which was measured by the Migrant
Farmworker Stress Inventory (MFSI); 4) depression which was assessed by the Center for
Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale and 5) substance use which was assessed by
the Rapid Alcohol Problems Screen-Quantity Frequency (RAPS4-QF). Results indicated 61 of
the participants (30.5%) endorsed high levels of stress in the MFWSI, particularly in terms of
being away from home, working under poor working conditions, and receiving low wages. Other
stressors identified by the farmworkers included social difficulties in understanding English,
unavailability of Spanish language radio/TV, and lack of access to adequate health care.
Moreover, almost half of the farmworkers (45.8%) were depressed due to the economic and
logistics or health stressors experienced by their farm working life.
Further expanding the existing psychosocial stressors Mexican farmworkers experience,
Grzywacz et al. (2006) found language barriers and separation from the family to be the two
most commonly reported hardships and stressors irrespective of whether family lived in or
outside of this country. Grzywacz and colleagues (2006) noted some of the farmworkers from
Mexico reported the separation from family can be described as if their “body is in the United
States and their mind and heart are in Mexico” (p. 87). Such findings may be highlighting the
11
devotion and importance Mexico and its culture represents for Mexican farmworkers. In another
study, Grzywacz et al. (2010b) explored the depressive symptoms experienced by Latina/o
(mostly Mexican, 94.8%) farmworkers. In total, 275 farmworkers (91.3% male) over the age of
30 participated in this investigation. Eighty five percent of the participants reported that their
permanent residence was in Mexico, 51.9% had less than 6 years of formal education, 88.5%
were migrant farmworkers and over 90% lived in housing provided by the growers. In terms of
marital status, 35 farmworkers were not married, 184 were married away from their partner, and
67 were married and their spouse lived with them. The data was collected once a month, for the
four months in the farming season. The highest symptoms of depression were endorsed by the
unmarried farmworkers, while those were married and living with their spouse showed the
lowest. Furthermore, higher concerns for being separated from their family and occupational
stressors elevated farmworkers’ depressive symptomology (Grzywacz et al., 2010b). Thus,
Mexican farmworkers may experience higher levels of depression depending on the presence of
the family around them or being geographically separated from them.
Farmworkers who have been separated from their family have also been linked to
experiencing higher disadvantages then those who have family with them. For instance, Ward
(2010) found Mexican farmworkers who were separated from their families were less likely to be
legally documented, were more likely to follow the harvest, and experienced poorer housing
conditions. Additionally, Mexican farmworkers who migrated were more likely to be required to
pay for their own equipment and transportation. Having these extra expenses resulted in poorer
working conditions and a decrease in their already minimal salary. Another statistical difference
found by Ward (2010) was in terms of education. Mexican farmworkers who were separated
from their families showed lower educational attainment, encountered greater difficulties in
12
accessing health care, and had the lowest level of utilization of government aid than those who
were with their families. Ward’s findings indicate the challenges experienced by Mexican
farmworkers such as poorer housing conditions, low wages, and access to medical care are
further exacerbated by being separated from their family (2010). All of the occupational stressors
aforementioned have been demonstrated to increase the likelihood of experiencing psychological
distress such as depression and anxiety (Grzywacz et al., 2010b; Parra-Cardona et al., 2006;
Snipes et al., 2007), which have also been linked to higher substance use.
For example, to increase the understanding of substance use among Mexican migrant
farmworkers Garcia (2007) conducted two ethnographic studies. The first study focused on
exploring the problems with the consumption of alcohol leading to detrimental behaviors that
negatively impacted Mexican farmworkers’ work and their encounters with the law. The second
study investigated Mexican farmworkers’ drug use. The two studies were used to describe the
association between situational factors with drinking and using drugs, and to explore background
information such as educational level and risk factors that were more likely to impact the
substance use of Mexican farmworkers (Garcia, 2007). The participants in these studies were
Mexican migrants who harvest mushrooms in southern Pennsylvania (precise number of
participants was not disclosed). Most of the participants were in their 20s through 40s, and lived
in grower housing (6 to 42 men in each housing unit) for months or years at a time. Results
indicated some of the men were occasional, recreational, or heavy drinkers. However,
approximately 80% of the men in this study engaged in binge drinking in any given weekend.
When examining the contributing reasons for their alcohol consumption, Mexican farmworkers
drank because of situational and background factors such as poor housing conditions, social
isolation, and peer pressure (Garcia, 2007). Other factors such as family history, previous history
13
of alcohol consumption, as well as cultural norms of drinking in Mexico and a subculture of
drinking in their workplace further lead Mexican farmworkers to binge drink. Garcia (2007)
found Mexican farmworkers have an easy access to drugs such as marijuana, cocaine, crack, and
amphetamines. For some farmworkers, having easier access to illicit substances increased their
likelihood of using drugs to deal with the stressors of having a farm working life such as living in
overcrowded spaces, and being separated from their families. Garcia (2007) argues the migrant
(who migrate alone) status of Mexican farmworkers places them at higher risks for utilizing
substances because they are away from their communities and their families for years. Moreover,
living mostly with other males who are also alone can make Mexican farmworkers susceptible to
peer pressure to consume drugs and alcohol. Although many factors contribute to the
psychological distress experienced by Mexican farmworkers, substance use further intensifies
depression symptoms among this population.
Kim-Godwin, Maume, and Fox (2014) explored the predictors of depression and intimate
partner violence (IPV) among migrant and seasonal farmworkers in rural Southeastern North
Carolina. Their investigation utilized a sample of 291 migrant and seasonal farmworkers who
completed a demographic questionnaire, the Intimate Violence Tendency Scale (HITS), the
Migrant Farmworkers Stress Inventory (MFSI), the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression
Scale, and the Alcohol CAGE/4M (all measures were completed in Spanish). The majority of the
respondents were of Mexican descent (93.4), male (53%), and married (57%) with an average
age of 30 years old or younger (57%, range 16-68 years old, mean = 31.5 years old, 95% CI –
30.3, 32.7). Almost three out of four participants were first generation immigrants with an
average time living in the U.S. of six and a half years (range 0-49, 95% CI= 5.8, 7.4). Structural
Equation Modeling methodology was used to examine the associations among Latina/o
14
farmworkers and mental health in this study. Approximately 25.6% of the farmworkers endorsed
elevated levels of stress, about 20% of them experienced at-risk levels of Intimate Partner
Violence (IPV), and 39% reported alcohol abuse or dependency. The findings by Kim-Godwin et
al. (2014) suggest women were more likely to report IPV tendency than men and both, stress and
IPV were significantly and positively associated as predictors of depression.
As demonstrated by this literature review process, the limited scientific research
conducted with the Mexican farmworker population cannot be overlooked. Furthermore, the
majority of this line of research has been focused on negative factors that contribute to medical
illness, psychological disorders, and the effects of pesticides in the lives of many farmworkers
throughout the nation. Interestingly, for Mexican farmworkers, it appears occupational stressors
such as poor working conditions and being away from their family can result negative outcomes
such as depression, anxiety, and substance use. Thus, it has become extremely important to
additionally investigate cultural factors such as familismo/familism and cultural identity in order
to have a deeper understanding of how more positive factors may impact the psychological well-
being of Mexican farmworkers in this country.
Familismo
According to Luna et al. (1996), the term familismo/familism was first discussed in the
social sciences literature over 60 years ago to characterize the commitment of Latinas/os to their
family and their family relationships. Over the years, academic researchers have noted that
within Latina/o culture, there are both implicit and explicit definitions of what constitutes a
family, how the family is to function, expectations of how each family member behaves
including roles and responsibilities, and how socialization and education is conducted, especially
toward children (Calzada, Tamis-LeMonda, & Yoshikawa, 2012; Luna et al., 1996).
15
Familismo/familism is believed to be the most crucial and influential factor in the daily lives of
Latinas/os (Calzada, Tamis-LeMonda, & Yoshikawa, 2012); therefore, culturally sensitive
psychological approaches, treatment, and research that include familismo/familism are more
appropriate when examining the experiences of Latinas/os including Mexicans.
Within the multiple operational definitions of familismo/familism, its main essence is that
familismo is a core collectivistic value that has existed in the Latina/o culture for hundreds of
years where the family always comes before the self or individual to the point that one’s
behavior is a reflection of the entire family (Bacallao & Smokowski, 2007; Steidel & Contreras,
2003) and individuals see their family as an extension of themselves (Garza & Watts, 2010).
Furthermore, family interdependence is such a critical aspect of Latinas/os that tasks related to
parenting, education, and socialization are extended to key family members like aunts, uncles,
and grandparents (McNeill et al., 2001).
Family interdependence was found in the empirical study by Parra‐Cardona et al. (2006).
In this research, Parra-Cardona and colleagues (2006) conducted a qualitative study with 13
women of Mexican origin who were gathered from a subsample of a longitudinal study. The 13
women identified themselves or their partners as migrant workers, and had participated in the
three years of the data collection. Parra and colleagues (2006) used grounded theory methods to
gain a deeper understanding of the challenges associated with migrant life by conducting semi-
structured interviews every year, for three years. The authors used open-ended questions that
explored the migrant lifestyle and experiences over time. A bilingual woman who was a former
farmworker conducted all of the interviews in Spanish. Two Anglo-female doctoral students
conducted the English interviews. The preferred language of the participants to have the
interview was not reported. A bilingual faculty researcher checked the accuracy of the interviews
16
but no indication of completing a back-to-back translation was provided. Qualitative analyses
were conducted and concluded that oftentimes, when facing adverse conditions, Mexican parents
will consider their children to be an “inspiration” in order to overcome obstacles and barriers.
That is, Mexican parents will place their children above all else and work as hard as possible to
see that their children are able to succeed in life and to improve the family.
Furthermore, Bacallao and Smokowski (2007) observed that a logical extension of
familismo/familism is when family members who are bilingual, and who can navigate through
the world of mainstream society should step up and help others in the community. This sense of
service to the community is steeped in the belief the community is also a part of the familia
(family) and thus part of the collective (Parra-Cardona et al., 2006). While some research
suggests this concept may become less salient after both immigration and several generations,
familismo continues to be considered a coping mechanism for Latinas/os and a part of what can
help to overcome adversity, thus leading to resilience (Alderete et al., 2000; Parra-Cardona et al.,
2006; Snipes et al. 2007).
There seems to be a general understanding within the scientific community that
familismo/familism is a multidimensional construct that is composed of at least the following
three dimensions: structural, behavioral, and attitudinal operating within the extended family
(Bacallao & Smokowski, 2007; Sabogal, Marín, Otero-Sabogal, VanOss, & Perez-Stable, 1987;
Valenzuela and Dornbusch, 1994). Broadly defined, the structural dimension refers to the
meaning of an individual’s behavior according to spatial and social boundaries, which is
dependent upon the individual’s family members. In other words, there is a reciprocal
relationship that is inherent in the concept of familismo/familism (Valenzuela & Dornbusch,
1994). The behavioral dimension refers to the behaviors associated with the individual’s feelings
17
and attitudes about and toward the family (Sabogal et. al., 1987). Lastly, the attitudinal
dimension is referred to as an individual’s strong identification and attachment to the nuclear and
extended families, which is a trademark of familismo/familism (Bacallao & Smokowski, 2007).
That is, in Latino families, the extended family is simply the continuation of the nuclear family
with boundaries being defined quite differently than those defined by other cultural groups. For
example, in Latino culture, the role of parenting and discipline is also a part of other key family
members and crosses across generations (McNeill et al., 2001). Overall, most of the scientific
research is based on the attitudinal aspect of familismo/familism since it is the component that
encompasses an individual’s strong identification and attachment to their family. Consequently,
Bacallao and Smokowski (2007) further expanded the meaning of familismo/familism as the
attitudes, both spoken and unspoken, behaviors, cognitions and beliefs, and family structures,
which is a more inclusive definition.
Empirical Research
It is important to note the research specifically examining familismo/familism among
Mexicans/Mexican/Americans is limited to college student populations (~27 peer-reviewed
articles in PsycINFO) and most of this line of investigations examine academic performance,
motivation or achievement (Niemeyer, Wong, & Westerhaus, 2009; Ojeda, Navarro, & Morales,
2011b; Piña-Watson, Ojeda, Castellon & Donrhecker, 2013; Piña-Watson, López, Ojeda, &
Rodriguez, 2015), parental practices (Niemeyer et al., 2009; Sotomayor-Peterson, Figueredo,
Christensen, & Taylor, 2012; Durand, 2011) or risk behaviors (Brabeck & Guzmán, 2008; Allen,
2015; Guilamo-Ramos, Bourist, James, Lesesne, & Ballan, 2009; Lorenzo-Blanco, Unger, Ritt-
Olson, Soto, & Baezconde-Garbanati, 2011).
Only empirical articles studying familismo/familism among Mexicans were selected for
18
this part of the review. For example, Piña-Watson and colleagues (2015) found
familismo/familism was significantly correlated with academic motivation, which is in line with
other research examining the role of this key concept within the Mexican culture regarding
education (Esparza & Sánchez, 2008; Niemeyer et al., 2009; Ojeda et al., 2011b). Another study
was conducted by Ojeda et al. (2011b) to examine the mediating role of parental encouragement
in the relationship between familismo/familism and college persistence intentions. Their results
indicated parental encouragement significantly mediated the relation between familismo/familism
and college persistence intentions. In fact, parental encouragement explained 53% of the
variance in the indirect relation between familismo/familism and college persistence intentions.
Ayón and Aisenberg (2010) conducted one of the few studies examining
familismo/familism specifically among a Mexican community sample. The focus of Ayón and
Aisenberg’s work was to investigate the relationship between parents and child welfare workers
while considering cultural values such as familismo/familism and personalismo (personal
goodness and getting along with others) and the expectations from one another (2010). The
sample consisted of 19 parents (16 mothers, 3 fathers, 16 families total) who were between the
ages of 18 to 48 years old and had an open case with a child welfare department. Ayón and
Aisenberg (2010) examined the generational status of the participants in this study as 10 parents
were born in Mexico and nine were born in the U.S. The authors conducted 60-90 minute semi-
structured interviews (English or Spanish, depending on participants’ preference) with Mexican
parents and child welfare workers in an agency in Southern California. The interview questions
dealt with describing the participants’ relationship with the child welfare workers and the
integration of cultural values with each other and the respect felt in their relationship and
demographic information. Ayón and Aisenberg (2010) found Mexican parents in this study
19
showed a strong value of familismo/familism with their connection and commitment to their
family and their well-being. In terms of personalismo, the results obtained showed Mexican
parents felt more comfortable and respected by the social workers that took the time to get to
know them, and disclosed personal information to them. Once again, familismo/familism was
revealed as an integral cultural value among Mexicans parents. Additionally, personalismo
helped Mexican families to feel comfortable and understood by social workers thus, government
agencies such as the child welfare system.
Yet, while familismo/familism has its virtues, it may also be problematic in many
Mexican families. For example, as more generations of Mexicans acculturate to mainstream
cultural values, there is likely to be an inherent clash between familismo/familism and more
contemporary views of the family structure (Rodriguez, Mira, Paez, & Myers, 2007). In many
families where familismo/familism is highly visible, the issue of boundaries being broken or not
respected can be a problem as can the idea of being disciplined by aunts and uncles, and even
grandparents or abuelitos, instead of one’s parents. In addition, families with strong
familismo/familism can have a greater tendency toward enmeshment and over-dependence
instead of interdependence. Taken one-step further, familismo/familism can also cause significant
risk in the Mexican family, especially in members who experience psychological distress when
they perceive family burden and conflict (Alegría et al., 2007; Hernández, García, & Flynn,
2010; Rodriguez et al., 2007).
Overall, familismo/familism has been found to be a core value within the Latino
population and specifically within people of Mexico or Mexican descent. The reviewed articles
in this section highlighted particular nuances of familismo/familism such as, the importance of
family interdependence, having a strong sense of community, and placing children at the
20
forefront of the family (Parra-Cardona et al., 2006). Familismo/familism also plays a role within
the academic motivation of Mexican high school students (Piña-Watson et al., 2015), which may
be partly due to witnessing the struggles faced by their parents, extended family, and community.
The clear majority of the research conducted about familismo/familism focuses on the
academic achievement of Latinas/os, especially in the literature that is specifically examining the
Mexican population. There is no doubt this line of research is important to fill in the gaps about
the low educational attainment within the Mexican population; however, it has come at the cost
of failing to further understand other sectors of the Mexican population such as farmworkers who
are the backbone of the agricultural U.S. economy and sacrifice themselves to provide better
opportunities for their families. In fact, no studies have been conducted exploring the role of
familismo/familism with Mexican farmworker populations. Since familismo/familism can lead to
a more positive outlook of life and overcoming adversity experienced by Mexicans (Morgan
Consoli & Llamas, 2013), it may also play a role in Mexican farmworkers, a population that has
been exploited in the United States. Thus, to better understand resilience within the Mexican
farm working community, it is imperative to include empirical measures of familismo/familism
in research.
Measures of Familismo. As mentioned earlier, operationalizing familismo/familism has
been a challenge in the scientific community. As a result, recent measures have been developed
to assess Latina/o Familismo/familism such as the Attitudinal Familism Scale, the Pan-Hispanic
Familism Scale and the Latino Values Scale.
Attitudinal Familism Scale. Steidel and Contreras (2003) developed an 18-item
multidimensional Attitudinal Familism Scale (AFS) to examine familismo/familism. The AFS
showed strong criterion validity and reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha= .83, Gamst, Liang, & Der-
21
Karabetian, 2011). However, the sample size consisted of mainly Puerto Rican participants
(86.7%) and none were from Mexican descent. Due to the heterogeneity of the Latino cultures, if
the Attitudinal Familism Scale is used with a Mexican sample, it should be first validated with
this population.
Pan-Hispanic Familism Scale. Another recent measure of familismo/familism is the
Pan-Hispanic Familism Scale (P-HFS). This scale measures attitudinal aspects of
familismo/familism, that is, individuals’ attitudes about the importance of the family in their
lives. The P-HFS is measured in a 5-point Likert Scale format ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly agree). Good factorial invariance was found suggesting that attitudinal
familismo/familism is a core value of Latinas/os residing in this country despite their country of
origin. That is, it appears that past Latina/o immigrants maintain familismo/familism in this
country over time regardless of their Latino nationality. Although this study highlights
familismo/familism as a core value to Latina/os, it is disregarding its multidimensionality (i.e.,
behavioral dimension). Consequently, the P-HFS only provides a unidimensional view of the
Latinas/os without assessing the P-HFS’s convergent validity with other measures. For example,
in order to gain a deeper understanding of the Latina/o population, it is recommended that
familismo/familism measures be tested with other important aspects in Latina/o life such as
enculturation (Kim & Abreu, 2001; Kim et al., 2009).
Latino/a Values Scale. According to Kim et al. (2009), the Pan-Hispanic Familism
Scale and the Attitudinal Familismo/familism Scale are limited with regard to not providing a
comprehensive understanding of Latino cultural values. Thus, Kim et al. (2009) developed a
measure called the Latino/a Values Scale (LVS) in order to measure individuals’ adherence to
the values of the Latino culture or what is also called enculturation. The researchers conducted
22
three separate studies to develop the instrument from item development to item selection and
thorough factor analysis to examine reliability.
In the first study, participants were 147 Latinos/as and 32 White American first
generation college students who rated a list of 120 Latino cultural values. These cultural values
presented as items were rated using a 4-point Likert scale format (1 = strongly disagree, 4 =
strongly agree). Of these, 35 items received the highest ratings of the participants. In the second
study, the investigators used confirmatory factor analysis to examine the four cultural
dimensions that were found in the first study: 1) LVS-Cultural Pride, 2) LVS-Simpatía
(congeniality), 3) LVS-familismo (familism), and 4) LVS-Espiritismo (spiritualism).
In the second study, the 35-item LVS was then administered to 231 Latina/o college
students (170 women, 61 men) to examine the factor structure of the scale based on the results
from Study 1. The participant’s age ranged from 18 to 60 years old from across all grade levels
(22 freshmen, 37 sophomores, 71 juniors, 68 seniors, and 27 graduate students). One hundred
and sixty-one of those participants self-identified as Mexican or Mexican American, while the
rest from various Latino countries. In terms of generational status since immigration, 49
participants identified as first-generation, 159 second-generation, and 11 third-generation while
the other 11 were from subsequent generations. In addition to the LVS, participants were asked
to complete the Self-Construal Scale (SCS) to measure participants’ views about themselves in
relation to others, the Cultural Identification Scale (CIS) to measure respondents’’ cultural
identification with the Latina/o and Anglo cultures, and the Social Desirability Scale to assess
participants’’ level of social desirability. Kim and colleagues (2009) also decided to have
participants respond to a single-item measure of adherence to traditional Latina/o cultural values
(“Using the scale below, please circle the number that represents the degree to which you follow
23
the traditional cultural values of ethnic background”, which was also included in Study 1.
Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to examine the efficacy of the LVS four-
component structure (cultural pride, simpatía, familismo/familism, and espiritismo) found in
Study 1. Construct validity was significantly supported resulting in an internal validity of .85.
The coefficient alphas were found as followed: LVS-Cultural Pride (.85), LVS-Simpatía (.46),
LVS-Familismo (.68), and LVS-Espiritismo (.50). Congruent with the results found in Study 1,
the low coefficients of internal reliability for the LVS-Simpatía and the LVS-Espiritismo were
found; therefore, Kim et al. (2009) recommended against the use of these scales in future
research. Concurrent validity was also found by using bivariate correlation coefficients between
the LVS, the LVS-Cultural Pride, the LVS-Familismo and the SCS-Interdependent, SCS-
Independent, CIS-Latino/a, CIS-Anglo, and the single-item measure of adherence to cultural
values. Thus, a 24-item, four-component, simple structure was the final product of the LVS. The
results obtained significant positive correlations between the three LVS scores and the scores
from the CIS-Latino/a and the single-item measure of adherence to the traditional Latina/o
cultural values and between the LVS and the LVS-Familismo scores and the SCS-Interdependent
score. Furthermore, a significant negative correlation was found between the LVS-Cultural Pride
and the CIS-Anglo. However, there were no significant correlations between the LVS-Cultural
Pride and the SCS-Interdependent scores, between the three LVS scores and the SCS-
Independent score or the LVS and the LVS familismo scores and the CIS-Anglo score.
Additionally, no significant correlations were found when comparing the Social Desirability
Scale score with the LVS, the LVS-Cultural Pride, and the LVS-Familismo scores (Kim et al.,
2009).
Lastly, in the third study, Kim et al. (2009) utilized test-re-test reliability to examine the
24
stability of the LVS, LVS-Cultural Pride, and LVS-Familismo across a two-week period. To
complete this study, Kim and colleagues (2009) utilized a subsample of 40 students (29 women
and 11 men), with 65% of them identifying as Mexican or Mexican-American. The internal
consistency in the 2-week test-re-test study yielded the following: 1) LVS α = .78, LVS-Cultural
Pride α = .75, and LVS- Familismo α = .75. Concurrent, discriminant, and factorial validity were
assessed and demonstrated an acceptable fit of the data. More specifically, concurrent validity
provided significant bivariate correlations among the LVS, LVS-Cultural Pride, and LVS-
Familismo scores and other dimensions of enculturation, which included 1) a single-item
measuring adherence to traditional Latina/o cultural values, the 2) Latina/o Orientation Subscale
(LOS, which Kim and colleagues changed the original use of Mexican in the ARSMA-II to
Latina/o in this study) score of the ARSMA-II. Discriminant validity was partially shown by
comparing the LVS scores with the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale and the Social Desirability
Scale scores.
Taking all of Kim et. al’s (2009) studies together, the Latina/o Values Scale showed a
significant improvement in the measurement of familismo/familism while providing appropriate
statistical analyses and appropriate sample sizes and demographic variables. Furthermore, the
LVS can be used congruently with other appropriate measures of enculturation such as the
Mexican Orientation Subscale (MOS) of the ARSMA-II to better explore and provide an
inclusive worldview of Mexican/Mexican Americans’ experience.
In conclusion, familismo/familism is a multidimensional construct and should not be
measured unidimentionally. Although Steidel and Contreras (2003) developed a scale with
strong criterion validity and reliability, their Attitudinal Familism Scale can only be utilized
within the Puerto Rican population. Additionally, the Attitudinal Familism Scale’s
25
unidimentionality would make it impossible to measure the structural and the behavioral aspects
of familismo/familism. Similarly, the Pan-Hispanic Familism Scale disregards the behavioral
aspects of familismo/familism. Another drawback of the Pan-Hispanic Familism Scale is the
ethnicity of the population was not included in their article thus, researchers who want to
incorporate it in their studies have to assume the Latino population is homogenous, which is the
opposite of what has been recommended in the scientific community (McNeill et al., 2001).
Finally, the best measure of familismo/familism thus far seems to be the Latino/a Values
Scale due to its thorough statistical analyses, multiple studies conducted to develop the final
scale, and appropriate sample sizes and demographic variables used. Although, the Latina/o
Values Scale was not developed specifically for the Mexican farmworker population, it
incorporated other measures that have been specifically made for the Mexican population.
Enculturation
For many decades, the scientific community has developed research of cultural
dimensions such as acculturation (Cano, et al., 2015; Yoon, Langrehr, & Ong, 2011; Yoon, et al.,
2012). Within the literature, acculturation refers to the psychological and social changes that
groups and individuals experience when they enter a new and different cultural context (Cuéllar,
Siles, & Bracamontes, 2004), and is considered a multidimensional process of adapting to the
host majority culture (Berry, 1980). Consequently, acculturation has been a key concept in trying
to understand the lives of many immigrants that come into the U.S. It has been associated with
the psychological, behavioral, and health outcomes including, acculturative stress, educational
achievement, and depression (Cuéllar, Arnold, & Maldonado, 1995). However, for many people
who migrate into the U.S., it becomes imperative to retain some aspects of their culture such as
language, values, and beliefs in order to flourish in such a new environment. Thus, the term
26
enculturation has rapidly become an area of focus in the scientific community and it is defined as
the retention of cultural socialization to one’s culture of origin (Berry, 1994; Jones & Mortimer,
2014; Kim & Abreu, 2001). According to Schwartz, Unger, Zamboanga, and Szapocznik (2010)
the process of enculturation develops over time and can be measured independently from
acculturation. Within the Mexican population, enculturation has been explored in domains such
as psychological treatment preferences (Hirai, Vernon, Ropan, & Clum, 2015) levels of
psychological distress (Cano & Castillo, 2015), college efficacy (Ojeda et al., 2011a) and
substance use (Ramos, Manongdo, & Cruz-Santiago, 2010). Therefore, a review of the literature
specifically focusing in the Mexican population’s enculturation processes and associations will
be provided in this section.
A recent study by Hirai et al. (2015) examined the levels of acculturation and
enculturation, stigma toward psychological disorders, and treatment-seeking preferences among
a Mexican American undergraduate sample. Their sample consisted of 267 (206 females, 61
males) Mexican American, bilingual students ages 18 to 57 years old. Participants were given a
demographic questionnaire, the Beliefs towards Mental Illness Scale (Hirai & Clum, 2000), the
Stephenson Multigroup Acculturation Scale a 32-item measure used to assess various aspects of
acculturation and enculturation (Stephenson, 2000) and the Treatment Seeking Behavior Scale
(Hirai & Clum, 2000). In terms of enculturation, the results suggest that higher levels of
adherence to ethnocultural values were significantly associated with elevated stigma toward
psychological disorders regardless of educational levels. Furthermore, enculturation was
significantly correlated with preference for religious psychological treatments or no treatment as
opposed to receiving westernized mental healthcare practices.
27
Cano and Castillo (2015) examined the role of enculturation and acculturation on Latina
undergraduate students’ levels of distress. Their sample was composed of both undergraduate
and graduate students (141 and 73 respectively) ages 18 to 35 years old. Over 65% of the
students identified as Mexican American or Mexican and 61% of them were second generation
or higher in the U.S. A battery of assessments was used which included a demographic
questionnaire, the Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-II (to measure behavioral
acculturation, behavioral enculturation, and White attitudinal marginalization) and the Outcome
Questionnaire 45 (OQ-45) which measures level of distress. Low income, low behavioral
enculturation, and high White attitudinal marginalization were statistical significant predictors of
the distress experience by undergraduate and graduate Latinas.
Changing the focus of the scientific literature to a different sample, Ramos et al. (2010)
studied the effects of acculturation, enculturation, and inner-city risk factors with Mexican origin
mothers (77%) and youth (93 dyads). The participants in this study were recruited from a public
high school in an urban Midwestern city with a predominantly Latino community (approximately
63% of the population are Latina/o or Hispanic). The mothers in this study were low-income
(family income of $14,500) and a mean household size of five members. The majority of the
mothers were married (71%); however, it was difficult to recruit fathers in this study because of
their low attendance to school functions where the recruitment took place. Respondents were
given a battery of measurements, which they could complete at home or on site and in their
preferred language. At the end, 24 mothers opted for the Spanish measure. In contrast, 65 youth
preferred the English version of the assessment.
Both onsite and off-site measures utilized in this study were as follows: 1) substance use-
measured by a composite variable of lifetime alcohol, tobacco and marijuana use, 2)
28
linguistic/behavioral acculturation and enculturation- measured by the Bidimensional
Acculturation Scale, (BAS; Marin & Gamba, 1996), 3) inner-city stressors- measured by the
Multicultural Events Scale for Adolescents (MESA; Gonzales, Tein, Sandler, & Friedman,
2001), 4) family cohesion as measured by the cohesion subscale of the Family Environment
Scales (FES; Moos & Moos; 1986), and 5) the adapted version of the Parental Monitoring
Questionnaire (Small & Kerns, 1993; Small & Luster, 1994). Multiple hierarchical regression
analyses were conducted. In regard to enculturation, no statistical significance was found in the
substance use of adolescents with youth-parent level of acculturation/enculturation. Mother-
youth pairs’ acculturation and enculturation levels were significantly related to the substance use
of the adolescents in this study. These results indicate that the enculturation levels of parent-
youth dyads may place Latina/o adolescents in at risk of utilizing substances. More specifically,
when both mother and youth experienced higher levels of enculturation, the adolescents
experienced greater levels of substance use. Higher substance use in the Mexican and Mexican
American adolescents in this study may be in part due to other related stressors such as
acculturative stress, and social isolation that were not measured by Ramos et al. (2010).
Enculturation has also been examined to predict Latino students’ college self-efficacy.
Ojeda, Flores, and Navarro (2011a) studied the relationship between enculturation and strong
beliefs about self-efficacy and achievement in college among Mexican American college
students. Ojeda et al., (2011a) conducted their research among a Hispanic Serving Institution
with a total of 457 Mexican American students (58% female, 42% male). In terms of the
enculturation results in this study, Ojeda and colleagues (2011a) found that positive feelings
were strongly related to enculturation, meaning that when Mexican American students showed
higher levels of positive feelings, greater feelings of connection with their Mexican culture are
29
experienced. Furthermore, enculturation positively related to college self-efficacy.
Consequently, it seems important to adapt to the customs, beliefs, and values of the Mexican
culture while navigating a higher education environment that serves such an underrepresented
community (Ojeda et al., 2011a). Conversely, no relationship was found between enculturation
and outcome expectations, academic goal progress, or academic satisfaction. This may be a
result of Mexican American college students viewing educational goals as part of the mainstream
society.
In 2009, Davidson and Cardemil suggested enculturation may negatively impact the
relationship between highly enculturated parents with their acculturated children, and thus
experiencing inevitable conflict among them. For example, a Latino/a parent whose beliefs
about parenting parallel to those from their native culture can cause problems since these beliefs
may be contrasting to the practices in the United States. The differences in parenting between the
mainstream and the Latino cultures may open up the potential for miscommunication and a
misunderstanding or intergenerational stress or strain. Despite the possible negative effects,
Davison and Cardemil (2009) state that acculturation and enculturation are dynamic processes;
therefore, it will be wise to examine these concepts as moderating variables within Mexican
farmworkers.
In sum, the literature specifically measuring the concept of enculturation within the
Mexican population is sparse despite the recent efforts to examine people’s adherence to their
Mexican culture. However, in light of the research explored in this section, it appears that
enculturation is a significant process experienced by many Mexicans and Mexican Americans
regardless of their generational levels. On the basis of these findings, it seems reasonable to
assume that similar results would be found in the Mexican community samples such as
30
farmworkers who may show higher rates of enculturation than the Mexican college population.
Thus, it is imperative to utilize culturally sensitive measures to assess the enculturation processes
of people who migrate into the United States.
Enculturation Measures. Exponents of bidimensional or multidimensional models of
acculturation and enculturation propose that both ethnocultural processes are independent of one
another. Consequently, an individual can be highly functional in only one culture, in both culture
or in neither (Schwartz et al., 2010). A major contributor to this theory is John W. Berry (1980)
who is known for his development of a model of acculturation. Berry’s theory of acculturation
states that an individual may retain their culture of origin while encountering a new and different
one (Berry, 1980). Within Berry’s model, the later dimensions intersect and the following four
acculturation categories can be experienced: 1) Assimilation where an individual chooses to
“walk away” from their culture while “joining” a new culture, usually the dominant mainstream
culture, 2) Separation where individual resists integrating to the new or host culture and instead
choosing to stay within their heritage culture; 3) Integration where an individual manages to
integrate and identify well to both cultures, 4) Marginalization where the individual decides to
reject both the heritage and mainstream cultures.
Since the 1980s, researchers have been fascinated with the complexity of acculturation
and enculturation processes and have attempted to evaluate it by devising measures that separate
individuals into levels of acculturation toward mainstream American culture (acculturation)
and/or adherence to their ethnic culture (enculturation). In this section, the two most used and
important measures of enculturation will be evaluated; however, because of the relationship
between enculturation and acculturation, existing scales measure both concepts within the same
structure with different subscales for each. Thus, assessments reviewed in this section will
31
measure both ethnocultural processes, while priority will be given to the subscales related
specifically with enculturation.
Bidimensional Acculturation Scale for Hispanics. Marín and Gamba devised the
Bidimensional Acculturation Scale for Hispanics (BAS) in 1996 (Marín & Gamba, 1996). The
primary aim of this scale was to measure acculturation toward the non-Hispanic culture and
enculturation toward the Latino/Hispanic. Marín and Gamba (1996) examined the validity of the
BAS with a sample of 254 Latinas/os (79.5% were from Central America and 24% were born in
Mexico) living in San Francisco, California. Seventy-four percent of the respondents in this
normative sample chose to answer the questionnaire in Spanish and 26% in English. The
researchers obtained a reliability Cronbach’s Alpha of .90 for the Hispanic domain and a .96 for
the Anglo-American domain. A high convergent validity was shown by strong correlations
between the BAS domains (Hispanic= -.64, and Non-Hispanic= .79) and the Short Acculturation
Scale for Hispanics (SASH) cultures (Marín & Gamba, 1996). Construct validity was assessed
and results showed high correlations with generation status, length of residence in the U.S., level
of education, and age at the time of immigration into the U.S. The evaluation of the
psychometric properties of the BAS indicate that this scale can be used when examining the
acculturation and enculturation levels of Mexican/Mexican Americans and Central Americans.
However, the differences in the normative sample could be potential sources of difficulties in the
generalizability to Mexican and Mexican Americans compared to Central Americans.
Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-II. Cuéllar et al. (1995)
developed the American Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-II (ARSMA-II) which is a revised
version of the ARSMA developed in 1980 (Gamst et al., 2011). The purpose of the ARSMA-II
is to assess behavioral and affective aspects of acculturation as well as enculturation (Betterndorf
32
& Fischer, 2009). A systematic review of the literature indicates that the ARSMA-II has been the
most widely used to measure of acculturation and enculturation within the social and behavioral
sciences. In addition to being applied in psychological studies, it has also been used in studies in
public health, medicine, and education. Moreover, the ARSMA-II has been used in hundreds of
peer-reviewed articles and unpublished studies in the form of doctoral dissertations and master’s
theses. Consequently, this measure has influenced the development of measures of acculturation
with other ethnic, racial, and cultural groups such as Arab Americans (Ahlam, & Lee, 2015) and
Asian Americans (Lee, Yoon, & Liu-Tom, 2006).
Both, the BAS and the ARSMA-II included in this section have been validated and tested
with Mexicans and Mexican Americans. However, the disproportion of the ethnic backgrounds
(79% Central Americans compared to 24% Mexicans) in the sample used when constructing the
BAS could posit difficulties when assessing subpopulations of people from Mexican descent.
Despite efforts to highlight the diversity within Latina/o populations (as previously noted), the
BAS was developed under the assumption that Latinas/os are a homogenous group. Therefore,
since the ARSMA-II was validated with an entire sample of Mexicans and Mexican Americans,
it seems more appropriate to be used in research, particularly when trying to understand the
enculturation processes of subpopulations such as Mexican farmworkers.
Resilience
Latinas/os are at a disadvantage in experiencing hardships that can disrupt the harmony
of the family system. Yet, Latinas/os seem to have a natural ability to be resilient (Mogro-
Wilson, 2011). However, minimal scholarly attention has been paid to this particular group
within a positive context. In general, models of psychological health focusing on the strengths of
individuals and families rather than their weaknesses or risks have proposed the term resilience.
33
This concept is defined as the capacity to overcome obstacles and hardships that make people
stronger and more resourceful in response to experiencing adversity (Patterson, 2002).
Furthermore, resilience is a dynamic process that involves the risks and protective factors an
individual possesses when facing adversity; therefore, is not simply a personality trait.
Oftentimes, stressful situations serve as learning experiences that make individuals more capable
of overcoming overall environmental stressors existing in life (Morgan Consoli et al., 2011;
Parra-Cardona et al., 2006).
Several cultural factors and outlooks in life among Latinas/os have been found to be
helpful in achieving resilience. For instance, a positive and optimistic attitude toward adversity
seems to be a precursor of resilience among Latinas/os including those of Mexican descent
(Parra-Cardona et al., 2006; Snipes et al., 2007). In a major review on Latina/o resilience with
immigrant populations Morgan Consoli et al. (2012) concluded Latino culture, social support,
and internal factors promote resilience in Latina/o immigrants. More specifically, Latina/o
resilience is more likely achieved by having a strong supportive network with extended family
members, community members and service providers. Helpful internal factors also increase
Latina/o resilience such as having a sense of purpose, higher positive perception, and optimistic
attitudes. According to Morgan Consoli et al. (2012) a strong self-esteem, sense of control over
situations, and having integrity and determination are also part of Latina/o immigrants’ internal
factors contributing to higher resilience. Furthermore, Morgan Consoli (2012) found
enculturation, religiosidad, and cultural support to improve Latina/o resilience. Taken together,
these cultural and internal factors help Latina/o immigrants to find comfort, hope, and guidance
during difficult times.
34
Holleran and Waller (2003) found the strongest protective Latino cultural values are the
beliefs systems related to spirituality and collectivismo. Within the Latino cultural context,
spirituality and religion help Latinas/os to have the confidence necessary to overcome adversity.
Furthering the importance of collectivism in the resilience in Mexicans, Holleran and Waller
(2003) argued Mexican people strongly value the importance of being part of their community
and take an active role in creating positive and trusting relationships within the people around
them.
Moreover, strong social and family support, and ethnic identity have been found to be
protective sociocultural factors that may also account for resilience among Mexicans including
farmworkers (Alderete et al., 2000). Further illustrating resilience in a systematic review of the
literature, Cardoso and Thompson (2010) found individual characteristics, family strengths,
cultural factors, and community support as resilience factors among Latino immigrant families.
Furthermore, Morgan Consoli, Delucio, Noriega, and Llamas (2015) found hope to be a
predictor of the resilience among Latino undergraduate college students. Taken together, these
protective sociocultural factors can help to shelter and protect the family unit from oppressive
forces (Alderete et al., 2000) including discrimination and socioeconomic disadvantage
(Bermudez & Mancini, 2013). Researchers have indicated Mexican farmworkers are resilient
people in this world despite dealing with being separated from their family, working in
substandard conditions, and receiving low wages while enduring long work hours (Parra-
Cardona et al., 2006; Snipes et al. 2007).
Few studies have highlighted the resilience of Mexican people. Morgan Consoli and
Llamas (2013) found support for the role of Mexican cultural values in resilience. More
specifically, Morgan Consoli and Llamas (2013) found familismo/familism, respeto/respect,
35
religiosidad, and traditional gender roles as Mexican values influencing college students’
resilience. Consistent with these results, Graff, McCain, and Gomez-Vilchis (2013) found family
support and the value of hard work as the most important factors in the academic success of
Latina undergraduate students with seasonal farmworker backgrounds.
In 2006, Parra-Cardona and colleagues studied the life experiences of Mexican migrant
families by conducting semistructured interviews. Participants were 13 women who identified
themselves or their partner as migrant workers. Their findings suggest resilience is influenced by
Latino cultural values such as familismo/familism, the importance of extended family support,
having a positive outlook, colectivismo, and personalismo.
Morgan Consoli and colleagues (2011) examined resilience and thriving among a sample
of 103 Latino community members. Most the participants were immigrants (70.9%) and
Mexican (95.1%) ranging from 18-66 years old. Participants were administered a demographic
questionnaire, the Thriving Scale (TS) measuring growth because of suffering, the Resilience
Scale (RS) which measures individual resilience or the Resilience Scale-Spanish version
(SVRS), and Social Support questions to assess external support and open-ended questions to
examine personal accounts of resilience and thriving. Morgan Consoli et al. (2011) found the
traditional Mexican values of aguantar/endure, familismo/familism, and religiosidad/religiosity
as significant predictors of resilience among their sample. However, family support was found to
be only a predictor of thriving but not of resilience. A drawback from their study is that while
studying mostly Mexicans, the sample also included a few people from other Latin American
countries; therefore, assuming Latinos are a homogeneous group.
While the existing literature among Latinas/os resilience is scarce, Morgan Consoli and
colleagues (2012), comprehensive review spotlighted the importance familismo/familism, social
36
support, and retaining cultural values such as religious beliefs and strong ethnic identity in the
resilience of Latina/o immigrants. Additionally, their review provided the significance culture,
internal factors, and social support has in Latina/o immigrants and their ability to be resilient.
Throughout the research in this area, social support, familismo/familism, and other cultural
factors are the prevailing themes within the Latina/o population including Mexicans. Thus, to
better understand the resilience Mexican farmworkers possess to endure occupational, social, and
economic hardships, it is necessary to utilize a theoretical framework with a strong focus in
family support and cultural context.
Theoretical framework: Relational and Resilience Theory of Ethnic Family Systems.
Family stress theory was essential to the understanding of how families can manage
stressors that may impact their well-being and was the platform to develop and establish family
resilience theories (McCubbin & McCubbin, 2013). Family resilience is defined as the ability
and process of a family to do well despite facing adversity in their life (Patterson, 2002). In
1988, McCubbin and McCubbin specifically defined family resilience as “characteristics,
dimensions, and properties of families which help families to be resistant to disruption in the face
of change and adaptive in the face of crisis situations.” The ethnic composition of the U.S. has
driven scientists to examine the ethnic family systems and their ability to be resilient; however,
this work posed limitations because family stress and family resilience theories were developed
from normative samples which are not representative of indigenous people (McCubbin &
McCubbin, 2013). As such, it is important to study resilience from a culturally sensitive lens that
focuses on the resilience of ethnic families that live in the U.S.
37
Developed most recently, McCubbin and McCubbin (2013) proposed a Relational and
Resilience Theory of Ethnic Family Systems (R&RTEFS). This theory of ethnic family
resilience gives precedence to the durability, resilience, and survival of the family system.
McCubbin and McCubbin (2013) operationally defined ethnic family systems as:
Consisting of interdependent elements (individuals in family roles, agents of the family in
the community), and as collectives with ancestral origins, patterns of functioning (POF),
having a collective identity, and having responsibilities to maintain their commitment to
the family and to harmonious relationship with the neighborhood, community, society,
and the world. (p. 178)
McCubbin and McCubbin (2013) further emphasized family evolves with time and
changes as a response to experiencing structural, social, and cultural influences. Additionally,
they argued the family unit adapts and transforms. For instance, Mexican farmworkers must
continuously adapt to the U.S. culture, and maneuver the sociocultural challenges posed by the
substandard employment conditions and structural and institutional discrimination.
An advantage of the R&RTEFS is that it places the family system at the center of the
ecological structure as opposed to Bronfenbrenner’s model that focuses on the individual within
a multilevel system (McCubbin & McCubbin, 2013). The R&RTEFS encompasses the following
ethnic family systems: 1) family schema, 2) family patterns of functioning (POF), and 3) the
relational well-being (RWB). These three systems involve the adjustment processes, crisis
transition, and adaptation of the family unit.
According to McCubbin and McCubbin (2013) family schema refers to the “fundamental
convictions and values shaped and adopted by the family system over time” (p.180). Family
schemas help to reflect a family’s mode of functioning such as how life experiences are
38
processed, evaluated, and valued. Gates (2010) argues that family schema also includes cultural
and ethnic values and beliefs that serve as the basis of how to act and react to a presented
stimulus. A binary direction exists in the influences among family schema, family POF and
RWB. Thus, a family schema becomes central to the development of family meanings, which
includes understandings, justifications, and a family’s perspective about life experiences to
facilitate the family adjustment and adaptation processes (McCubbin & McCubbin, 2013). For
example, Mexican farmworker families who must adjust to repeated family separations in order
to follow the crops. In this case, new patterns of functioning must occur to be able to adjust to
family members leaving for work (i.e., grandparents taking care of the children while their
parents migrate to work in the farms away from home). Furthermore, when family members
explain the reasons for the new POF (i.e., we need to work to provide for our family and to
survive), it provides family meanings that help to facilitate the transformation process that needs
to happen to adjust to their new family structure. This places, the hardship of being away from
their parents in the context of experiences rather than individual factors. At the end,
communicating family meanings highlight the schemas in which the family functions to
facilitate, affirm, and make sense of the new POF thus, improving the family’s overall relational
well-being (McCubbin & McCubbin 2013).
The expansion of family schemas into culturally based values, beliefs, and expectations
help a family unit to establish and/or to adjust into new POF. In the case of Mexican
farmworkers, ethnocultural factors such as enculturation and familismo/familism and other
Mexican cultural traditions could influence their family schema. Thus, Mexican farmworkers
may need to understand and adapt to the new environments and POF necessary to work in the
agricultural industry.
39
Considering the processes of assimilation, adaptation, and protection McCubbin and
McCubbin (2013) focused their Relational Well-being (RWB) within the context of indigenous
and immigrant families who are often faced with many challenges as they try to fit into the
mainstream U.S. culture. For example, Mexican immigrants in the U.S. often have to subordinate
their identity, language, and cultural tradition in their efforts to thrive in the mainstream culture.
Despite the challenges of having to succumb to the dominant culture, Mexican families continue
to show high levels of enculturation (Davidson & Cardemil, 2009).
Ethnic minority families such as Mexican farmworkers, engage in a dynamic process
between interacting with the U.S. culture and the relational processes that must happen within
their family unit to survive, endure, develop, and to be resilient. McCubbin and McCubbin
(2013) indicate that ethnic family systems (such as Mexican farm working families) achieve
RWB by changing the family schema and POF to find meaning in their communities, society,
and the world. Furthermore, McElroy and Townsend (1979) argued that survivability, harmony
and balance in a family system’s RWB are achieved through diffusion, acculturation,
assimilation, and ethnic/cultural revitalization. In sum, the R&RTEFS framework focuses on
identifying and validating ethnic family systems. The importance of the R&RTEFS framework
highlights how family systems adapt and recover to overcome challenges posed in life and
cultivate resilience (McCubbin & McCubbin, 2013).
Although the Relational and Resilience Theory of Ethnic Family Systems was recently
developed and there are no current studies that have used this theory, it considers family and
ethnic cultural values, which are both part of the enriched experiences of Mexican farmworkers.
Given the scarcity of scientific literature in terms of a resilience framework, that considers such
important cultural values, the Relational and Resilience Theory of Ethnic Family Systems is
40
likely to be a useful guidance structure to examine the resilience factors contributing to the well-
being of Mexican farmworkers in this country.
Resilience Measures
Windle, Bennett, and Noyes (2011) conducted a methodological review of existing
resilience scales. Their evaluation concluded the best psychometric ratings were on the Connor-
Davison Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) and the Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA). However, their
review did not include the Escala de Medición de la Resilencia con Mexicanos/Scale of
Resilience in Mexicans (RESI-M) in their review. The RESI-M was developed by Palomar Lever
and Gómez Valdez, (2010) specifically to measure resilience among Mexicans. Therefore, short
descriptions of the CD-RISC, and the RSA and an examination of the RESI-M will be included
in this section.
Connor-Davison Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). The CD-RISC was developed for
clinical practice as a measure of stress and coping ability (Windle et al., 2011). It is a 25-item
scale measuring the following five key dimensions: 1) personal competence; 2)
trust/tolerance/strengthening effects of stress; 3) acceptance of change and secure relationships:
4) control; and 5) spiritual influences. After further evaluation of the CD-RISC a shorter version
was created, the 10-item Connor-Davison Resilience Scale (10-item CD-RISC).
10-item Connor-Davison Resilience Scale (10-item CD-RISC). Notario-Pacheco and
colleagues (2011) evaluated the psychometric properties of the 10-item CD-RISC Spanish
version derived from the original CD-RISC 25-Item scale. They examined the validity and
reliability with a sample of 681 freshmen students ranging in ages 18-30 years old. The students
attended a University campus in Spain and completed the 10-item CD-RISC, the Mental
Component Summary (MCS) of the SF-12 quality of life questionnaire, and the Pittsburg Sleep
41
Quality Index (PSQI). The results indicated that the 10-item CD-RISC has good psychometric
properties and a high level of reliability (Cronbach’s µ = 0.85 and a test-retest intraclass
correlation coefficient of .71) and validity. However, the scale translations were conducted by
people from Spain who utilize different words than people from Mexico at times, making it
difficult to generalize Spanish translations to different Latin American countries, including
Mexico.
Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA). The RSA was developed to examine both
intrapersonal and interpersonal factors facilitating an individual’s ability to adapt to psychosocial
adversities (Windle et al, 2011). It is a 33-item scale measuring six factors: 1) perception of self,
2) planned future, 3) social competence, 4) structures style, 5) family cohesion, and 6) social
resources (Hjemdal, 2007). A higher score is associated with stronger ability to adapt to
psychosocial adversities. The RSA’s original six-factor structure is based on a normative sample
from Norway and has been translated into several other languages. Hjemdal, Roazzi, Dias, and
Friborg (2015) conducted a cross-cultural review of the RSA. Their results showed evidence to
support the cross-cultural validity of the RSA and its stability with a group of adults in Norway
and Brazil. Therefore, Hjemdal and colleagues (2012) highlighted that protective factors
measured in the RSA seem to be relevant across cultures. However, it would be important to
explore if the protective factors in the RSA are universally accepted by other cultures.
Escala de Medición de la Resilencia con Mexicanos/Scale of Resilience in Mexicans
(RESI-M). Both the CD-RISC and the RSA served as a foundation for Palomar Lever and
Gómez Valdez (2010) to construct the RESI-M. This scale was developed with a Mexican
community sample of 217 participants (56% women) from Mexico City ranging from 17-25
years old. First, Palomar Lever and Gómez Valdez (2010) conducted back translations of all
42
items in both the CD-RISC and the RSA. After translating the scales, the new instrument
containing all their items (25 from the CD-RISC and 43 from the RSA) was administered to all
individuals in the study. After conducting various statistical analyses, the final scale was
produced with 43-items loading on five dimensions: 1) strength and confidence on themselves,
2) social competence 3) family support, 4) social support, and 5) structure. The five factors
obtained strong Cronbach alphas of .92, .87, .87, .84, and .79 respectively. The complete RESI-
M explained 43.6% of the variance, CI= 93%. It is noteworthy to note the five factors in the
RESI-M emphasize individual, family and social levels of resilience.
State of Current Research
The current scientific literature has highlighted important factors in the experiences of
Mexican farmworkers. McCurdy et al. (2015) addressed the fact that Mexican farmworkers are
low income and have difficulty accessing medical and psychological health services. Mexican
farmworkers also work long hours (Hovey & Magaña, 2003), live in poor housing conditions
(Marsh et al, 2015), and often experience language barriers (Grzywacz et al., 2006). Considering
the challenges Mexican farmworkers experience, Ramos and colleagues (2015) examined the
psychological impact resulting from living under such circumstances. They found Mexican
farmworkers in their study showed significant levels of anxiety and depression. Similarly,
Grzywacz et al. (2006) found Mexican farmworkers experience high levels of depression due to
their living conditions, occupational stressors, and living away from their family. Others studies
conducted by Garcia (2007) concluded Mexican farmworkers were more likely to resort to
substance use when feeling isolated from others, lived under poor housing conditions, and felt
pressured by their peers.
43
Mexican farmworkers have significantly different cultural views than the U.S.
mainstream society. Thus, an integral part of the scientific literature among the Latino population
has examined their cultural factors such as familismo/familism, collectivismo, personalismo,
respeto/respect, religiosidad/religiosity, and cultural pride. These cultural aspects are important
to examine to better understand the lives of Mexican people. Familismo/familism has been
researched extensively and has been found to be a precursor to better health outcomes (Arcury,
2015), academic success (Parra et al., 2006; Piña-Watson, 2015), and resilience (Morgan Consoli
& Llamas, 2013). Yet, other empirical studies have found familismo/familism to be problematic
because it requires different generations of Mexicans to place the family first which contradicts
the individualism expected within U.S. society (Rodriguez et al., 2007). Similarly, Alegría and
colleagues (2007) found familismo/familism can create a high level of distress because it can
become burdensome to prioritize the family’s needs. The process of enculturation captures the
need for Mexicans to adhere to their traditional Mexican values. However, clearly, there is a
need for more studies distinguishing the impact cultural values have on the well-being of
Mexican farmworkers.
Mexican farmworkers experience multiple negative consequences because of their
occupation. Yet, they seem to be able to survive the multiple stressors in their life. Making
resilience a significant part of their ability to continue to harvest the land despite the negative
impact their work bears on their life and their families. Thus, evaluating the individual, family,
and social levels of resilience may help us illustrate the positive aspects Mexican farmworkers
possess to endure the challenges presented to them. McCubbin and McCubbin (2013) proposed
the R&RTFES which is a theoretical model within the context of indigenous and immigrant
families. Although this theory has not been used with Mexicans, it places family at its central
44
focus, which is congruent with familismo/familism. Thus, the R&RTFES seems to be an
appropriate theoretical model to investigate the resilience of Mexican farmworkers.
Limitations and Future Directions
Morgan Consoli and Colleagues (2012) recommended future research to focus on
immigrants’ resilience process, understanding how specific cultural factors benefit Latina/o
resilience to inform policy and create programs based on a strength-based perspective. In
agreement with Morgan Consoli et al. (2012), Latina/o immigrants possess a wealth of protective
factors embedded in their culture and it is important to assess how these aspects aid in the
resilience process, particularly of Mexican farmworkers.
The importance of Mexican farmworkers in the United States is unquestionable. Many
researchers have lead key and valuable studies to further understand Mexicans and Mexican
farmworkers; however, most of the research has been conducted from a deficit perspective. This
has resulted in multiple studies addressing the negative aspects of Mexican farmworkers’ life
such as the effects of pesticides (Kammel, & Hoppin, 2004), risk in sexual health (Organista &
Organista, 1997) psychosocial stressors (Hovey & Magaña, 2003; McClure et al., 2015), and
racism and discrimination (Maldonado, 2006). Additionally, most research that includes
Mexican farmworkers are completed under the assumption Latinas/os are a homogenous group,
making it difficult to decipher specifics of the Mexican farmworker population. Unfortunately to
date, there are no studies examining the resilience in Mexican farmworkers. As noted by Morgan
Consoli et al. (2012), the role of familismo/familism, culture, and social support are integral to
the resilience of Latina/o immigrants and it would be beneficial to further study their process.
McCubbin and McCubbin (2013) developed the R&RTFES theoretical framework from a
strength-based lens and incorporated ethnocultural values important to immigrant families.
45
McCubbin and McCubbin’s (2013) proposed R&RTFES can highlight Mexican farmworkers’
resilience from a strength-based perspective that includes enculturation, familismo/familism,
religiosidad, and internal factors involved in the resilience process. However, no investigations
have been conducted with the R&RTFES within the Mexican farmworker population. This gap
in the scientific literature emphasizes the importance of research examining cultural values, the
process of enculturation, and the resilience of Mexican farmworkers. Furthermore, it is also
imperative to conduct scientific research utilizing instruments addressing Mexican cultural
values, and if possible, scales normed within a Mexican sample.
MANUSCRIPT TWO
¡Sí Se Puede! Cultural Factors as Predictors of Resilience among Mexican Farmworkers:
An Empirical Study
Karla Trinidad Blanco
Washington State University
47
Introduction
The term farmworker includes migrant and seasonal temporary workers whose skills are
utilized to plant, maintain, harvest, and process crops for consumption (Maureen, Williams, &
Avery, 2008). Migrant farmworkers move constantly throughout the U.S. or their countries of
origin, as they are mainly dependent on farming seasons (Maureen, et al., 2008), and the U.S.
agricultural industry would not survive without the labor of all farmworkers (Connor, Layne, &
Thomisee, 2010). The National Center Farmworker Health, NCFH (2012) estimates there are
over 3 million migrant and seasonal farmworkers in the United States who help drive a multi-
billion dollar U.S. agricultural industry. Furthermore, the NCFH reported that 84% of
farmworkers in the United States speak Spanish, 78% are foreign born, and 75% of those who
are foreign born were born in Mexico, and the remainder from Central and South America.
Although it is difficult to provide a precise number for the existing Mexican farmworker
population, from the reported figures it can be estimated that there are more than 1.4 million
Mexican migrant and seasonal farmworkers in the United States.
Unfortunately, Mexican farmworkers experience many stressors threatening their ability
to surpass obstacles, which can ultimately impact their resilience. These stressors include
physical, social, and/or psychological challenges. From a medical standpoint, Mexican
farmworkers may have pre-existing and untreated medical conditions caused by farm work such
as lower back injuries, pesticide intoxication, and respiratory and visual problems (Kamel &
Hoppin, 2004). Some of the social stressors include poverty (Ramos, Su, Lander, and Rivera,
2015), transportation, housing problems, as well as an undocumented legal status; thus, having to
live an invisible life due to the fear of deportation to Mexico. Depending on their immigration
status, many of them suffer from isolation or lack of family presence in the U.S. since it is often
48
necessary for them to leave their spouses, children, and other family members in their country of
origin (Bacallao & Smokowski, 2007). Other stressors may include the trauma experienced in
leaving Mexico and coming to this country (especially without proper documentation), and
initial and ongoing separation from one’s family and community.
Further expanding the existing psychosocial stressors Mexican farmworkers experience,
Grzywacz et al. (2006) argue that language barriers and separation from the family to be the two
most commonly reported hardships and stressors irrespective of whether family lived in or
outside of this country. Grzywacz and colleagues (2006) noted that some of the farmworkers
from Mexico reported the separation from family can be described as if their “body is in the
United States and their mind and heart are in Mexico” (p. 87). Such findings may be highlighting
the devotion and importance Mexico and its culture represents for Mexican farmworkers. In
another study, Grzywacz et al. (2010b) explored the depressive symptoms experienced by
Latina/o (mostly Mexican, 94.8%) farmworkers. The highest symptoms of depression were
endorsed by unmarried farmworkers, while those who were married and living with their spouse
showed the lowest. Furthermore, higher concerns for being separated from their family and
occupational stressors elevated farmworkers’ depressive symptomology (Grzywacz et al.,
2010b). Thus, Mexican farmworkers may experience higher levels of depression depending on
the presence of the family around them or being geographically separated from them.
Farmworkers who are separated from their family have also been linked to experiencing
more stress then those who have family with them. For instance, Ward (2010) found Mexican
farmworkers who were separated from their families were more likely to be undocumented, to
follow the harvest, and experienced poorer housing conditions. Additionally, Mexican
farmworkers who migrated were more likely to be required to pay for their own equipment and
49
transportation. Having these extra expenses resulted in poorer working conditions and a decrease
in their already minimal salary. Another statistical difference found by Ward (2010) was in terms
of education. Mexican farmworkers who were separated from their families showed lower
educational attainment, encountered greater difficulties in accessing health care, and had the
lowest level of utilization of government aid than those who were with their families. Ward’s
findings indicate the challenges experienced by Mexican farmworkers such as poorer housing
conditions, low wages, and access to medical care are further exacerbated by being separated
from their family (2010).
The limited scientific research conducted with the Mexican farmworker population
cannot be overlooked. Furthermore, the majority of this line of research has focused on negative
factors contributing to medical illness, psychological disorders, and the effects of pesticides in
the lives of many farmworkers throughout the nation. Interestingly, for Mexican farmworkers, it
appears occupational stressors such as poor working conditions and being away from their
family can result negative outcomes such as depression, anxiety, and substance use. Thus, it is
extremely important to investigate the influence of potential positive cultural factors such as
familismo/familism, and a sense of spirituality, while accounting for enculturation, and
acculturation to gain a deeper understanding of how more positive factors may influence the
psychological well-being of Mexican farmworkers in this country.
Familismo/Familism
Familismo/familism is believed to be the most crucial and influential factor in the daily
lives of Latinas/os (Calzada, Tamis-LeMonda, & Yoshikawa, 2012). Familismo/familism is a
core collectivistic value existing in the Latina/o culture for hundreds of years where the family
always comes before the self or individual to the point that one’s behavior reflects the entire
50
family (Bacallao & Smokowski, 2007; Steidel & Contreras, 2003), as individuals see their family
as an extension of themselves (Garza & Watts, 2010). Furthermore, family interdependence is
such a critical aspect of Latinas/os that tasks related to parenting, education, and socialization are
extended to key family members like aunts, uncles, and grandparents (McNeill et al., 2001).
Parra-Cardona et al. (2006) addressed family interdependence in their findings when facing
adverse conditions, as Mexican parents will consider their children to be an “inspiration” to
overcome obstacles and barriers. That is, Mexican parents will place their children above all
else, and work as hard as possible to see their children succeed in life and to improve the family.
Bacallao and Smokowski (2007) also state that a logical extension of familismo/familism
occurs when bilingual family members who navigate the world of mainstream society are
expected to help others in the community. This sense of service to the community is immersed
in the belief that community is also a part of the familia (family) and thus part of the collective
(Parra-Cardona et al., 2006). While some research suggests this concept may become less salient
after both immigration and several generations, familismo/familism continues to be considered a
supportive coping mechanism for Latinas/os and helps to overcome adversity, thus leading to
resilience (Alderete et al., 2000; Parra-Cardona et al., 2006; Snipes et al. 2007).
In Latino families, the extended family is simply the continuation of the nuclear family
with boundaries defined quite differently than those by other cultural groups. For example, in
Latino culture, the role of parenting and discipline is also a part of other key family members and
crosses across generations (McNeill et al., 2001). Furthermore, religion/spirituality has been
found helpful to cope with adversity (Morgan Consoli, 2011) and to remain physically and
spiritually healthy (McNeill, 2001).
Acculturation and Enculturation
51
Within the literature, acculturation refers to the psychological and social changes groups
and individuals experience when they enter a new and different cultural context (Cuéllar, Siles,
& Bracamontes, 2004), and is considered a multidimensional process of adapting to the host
majority culture (Berry, 1980). Consequently, acculturation has been a key concept in trying to
understand the lives of many immigrants that come into the U.S., and has been associated with
psychological, behavioral, and health outcomes including acculturative stress, educational
achievement, and depression (Cuéllar, Arnold, & Maldonado, 1995). However, for many people
who migrate into the U.S., it becomes imperative to retain some aspects of their culture such as
language, values, and beliefs in order to flourish in such a new environment. Thus, the concept
enculturation is viewed as equally important, and defined as the retention of cultural socialization
to one’s culture of origin (Berry, 1994; Jones & Mortimer, 2014; Kim & Abreu, 2001).
According to Schwartz, Unger, Zamboanga, and Szapocznik (2010) the process of enculturation
develops over time and can be measured independently from acculturation. Within the Mexican
population, enculturation has been significantly associated with an elevated stigma toward
seeking conventional psychological treatment, with preference for religious psychological
treatments or no treatment. (Hirai, Vernon, Ropan, & Clum, 2015).
Resilience
In general, models of psychological health focusing on the strengths of individuals and
families rather than their weaknesses or risks have proposed the concept of resilience. This
concept is defined as the capacity to overcome obstacles and hardships that make people stronger
and more resourceful in response to experiencing adversity (Patterson, 2002). Furthermore,
resilience is a dynamic process involving the risks and protective factors an individual possesses
when facing adversity; therefore, is not simply a personality trait. Oftentimes, stressful situations
52
serve as learning experiences that make individuals more capable of overcoming overall
environmental stressors existing in life (Morgan Consoli et al., 2011; Parra-Cardona et al., 2006).
Few studies have highlighted the resilience of Mexican people. More specifically,
Morgan Consoli and Llamas (2013) found familismo/familism, respeto/respect, religiosidad, and
traditional gender roles as Mexican values predicted higher levels of college students’ resilience.
Consistent with these results, Graff, McCain, and Gomez-Vilchis (2013) found family support
and the value of hard work as the most important factors in the academic success of Latina
undergraduate students with seasonal farmworker backgrounds.
In 2006, Parra-Cardona and colleagues studied the life experiences of Mexican migrant
families by conducting semi-structured interviews. Their findings suggested that resilience is
influenced by Latino cultural values such as familismo/familism, the importance of extended
family support, having a positive outlook, colectivismo/collectivism, and
personalismo/personalism. Morgan Consoli, Gonzalez and Lopez (2012) conducted a
comprehensive review highlighting the importance of familismo/familism, social support, and
retaining cultural values such as religious beliefs and strong ethnic identity in the resilience of
Latina/o immigrants. Additionally, their review provided support for the influence of culture
(having a bicultural identity, cultural support, and preserving cultural heritage), internal factors
such as social competence, having a sense of purpose and a positive attitude, and strong social
support in Latina/o immigrants in their ability to be resilient. Throughout the research in this
area, social support, familismo/familismo, spirituality, and other cultural factors are the
predominant factors related to resilience within the Latina/o population including Mexicans.
Thus, to better understand the levels of resilience Mexican farmworkers possess in order to
53
endure occupational, social, and economic hardships, it is necessary to utilize a theoretical
framework strongly focusing on family support and cultural context.
Theoretical framework: Relational and Resilience Theory of Ethnic Family Systems.
Building on over two decades of research on resilience in ethnic family systems,
McCubbin and McCubbin (2013) developed a conceptual framework to identify the role of
resilience in ethnic populations in the U.S. The Relational and Resilience Theory of Ethnic
Family Systems (R&RTEFS, see Figure 1) places the family system (rather than individual
members) at the center of the ecological family system, fostering important protective factors
such as the ancestral past and its respective cultural values, beliefs, traditions, practices, and
expectations.
The R&RTEFS represents a paradigm shift in resilience research. Rather than focusing
on family dysfunction, this model explains why and how ethnic families, exposed to historical or
situational trauma, can use cultural strengths to promote resilience and health. McCubbin and
McCubbin emphasize the pressing need to investigate the ways and circumstances that ethnicity,
culture, and identity shape the course and outcome of family resilience and well-being.
McCubbin and McCubbin (2013) operationally defined ethnic family systems as:
Consisting of interdependent elements (individuals in family roles, agents of the family in
the community), and as collectives with ancestral origins, POF, having a collective
identity, and having responsibilities to maintain their commitment to the family and to
harmonious relationships with the neighborhood, community, society, and the world. (p.
178)
54
McCubbin and McCubbin (2013) further emphasize that a family evolves with time and
changes as a response to experiencing structural, social, and cultural influences. Additionally,
they argue that the family unit adapts and transforms. For instance, Mexican farmworkers must
continuously adapt to the U.S. culture, and maneuver the sociocultural challenges posed by the
substandard employment conditions and structural and institutional discrimination.
Considering the processes of assimilation, adaptation, and protection, McCubbin and
McCubbin (2013) focused their concept of Relational Well-being (RWB) within the context of
indigenous and immigrant families who are often faced with many challenges as they try to fit
into the mainstream U.S. culture. For example, Mexican immigrants in the U.S. often have to
subordinate their identity, language, and cultural traditions in their efforts to thrive in the
mainstream culture. Despite the challenges of having to succumb to the dominant culture,
Figure 1. Modified resilience model of adjustment and adaptation in ethnic family systems McCubbin, L. D., & McCubbin, H. I. (2013). Resilience in Ethnic Family Systems: A Relational Theory for Research and Practice. In: Becvar D. (eds) Handbook of family Resilience (pp. 180): Springer, New York, NY
55
Mexican families continue to show high levels of enculturation (Davidson & Cardemil, 2009).
McCubbin, McCubbin, Zhang, Kehl, and Strom (2013) defined well-being as a relational
construct rather than individually based. From an emic perspective, relational well-being from an
indigenous lens includes ecological and holistic perspectives. Relational well-being encompasses
nature, spirituality, and sense of belonging (McCubbin et al., 2013).
Ethnic minority families such as Mexican farmworkers, engage in a dynamic process,
interacting with the U.S. culture and the relational processes needed within their family unit to
survive, endure, develop, and to be resilient. McCubbin and McCubbin (2013) indicated that
ethnic family systems (such as Mexican farm working families) achieve RWB by changing the
family schema, their POF, and find meaning in their communities, society, and the world.
Furthermore, McElroy and Townsend (1979) argued that survivability, harmony and balance in a
family system’s RWB is achieved through processes of diffusion, acculturation, assimilation, and
ethnic/cultural revitalization. In sum, the R&RTEFS framework focuses on identifying and
validating the ethnic family’s capacity to make the according adjustments in their family
structure to deal with challenges life poses to them, to be able to adapt and to recover, and thus to
be resilient (McCubbin & McCubbin, 2013).
Within the R&RTEFS framework, the adaptation phase includes RWB and an Adapted
Family Schema. McGregor, Morelli, Matsuoka, and Minerbi (2003) defined RWB as an
interdependency between an individual, a family unit, neighborhood, community, society, and
the world. This dependence helps individuals to create a sense of place (McCubbin & McCubbin,
2013). The Adapted Family Schema or identity is the values, traditions, beliefs, and expectations
the family has developed to adapt to challenges in life and creates a sense of belonging in the
world (McCubbin & McCubbin, 2013). For instance, within the R&RTEFS’ adaptation phase,
56
Mexican farmworkers’ cultural factors such as familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality,
and acculturation are part of their relational well-being. Thus, for Mexican farmworkers having
strong RWB can help them adapt and recover after facing adversity and ultimately enhance their
resilience.
Purpose of the Current Study
Based on the research examining the lives of the Mexican population in the U.S., the
current study seeks to provide strength-based evidence of Mexican Farmworkers’ capacity to
overcome obstacles in their life. Consequently, this study will examine the ability of the
variables of familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality, and acculturation to predict Mexican
farmworkers’ level of resilience and well-being. Ultimately, the goal is to contribute to the
scientific literature focusing on the positive factors impacting Mexican farmworkers rather than
examining deficits addressed within existing scientific literature.
Method
Participants and Procedures
A total of 151 participants (59.6% women and 40.4% men) over 18 years old were
recruited for the study using a convenience sample from Washington State. Participants were
solicited from nonprofit organizations providing services to farmworkers in Washington State.
Collaboration with professional contacts within these nonprofit organizations assisted in data
collection through the previously established relationships with Mexican farmworkers. Most of
the professional staff in these nonprofit organizations attended three Spanish workshops
provided by the researcher. These workshops included Autoestima y Motivación (self-esteem and
motivation), Comunicación Efectiva (communications skills), and Valoremos Lo Que Somos
(value ourselves), which also provided an opportunity to learn about the study and recruit
57
participants. To meet the inclusion criteria in this study, individuals must have self-identified as
Mexican/Mexican-American farmworkers. Participants were asked to respond to a seven-part
survey in Spanish, which took approximately 30-45 minutes to complete. With consideration of
low literacy levels, participants were verbally informed of their rights to voluntarily participate
and terminate the study at upon request. Participants were given the option to complete the
survey alone or have it read to them. No identifying information was collected. Participants were
compensated with a $10-dollar gift certificate for their completion of the study.
Table 1 describes the demographic characteristics of the participants in this study. The
Mean age of the participants in this study was 39.26 years old (SD=13.36) ranging from 18-79
years old. In terms of marital status, 51.7% of the participants were married. The majority of the
participants self-identified as Mexican or Mexican American (95.4%), and were born in Mexico
(72.2%). Approximately 72% of the individuals lived in the U.S. for more than 10 years and
75.5% indicated they lived with their family. The majority of the participants (74.2%) reported
having children (Mean= 1.87, SD=1.87, ranging from 0-10). Most participants did not move with
harvest to new locations did not follow the harvest (77.5%), and more than half of the
participants were undocumented (53%).
58
Table 1 Sample Demographics Characteristics
Participants (N = 151) Age (18-79 years, M = 39.26, SD = 13.36) Number of Children (0-10 children, M = 3.00, SD = 1.87) Gender
Men 40.4% Women 59.6% Other 0.0%
Marital status Married 51.7%
Cohabitate 14.6% Divorced 6.0% Widow 0.0% Single 27.8%
Ethnicity Mexican 73.5% Mexican American 21.9% Other 1.3% Missing 3.3% Nationality U.S. 9.9% Mexican 72.2% U.S. and Mexican 10.6% Other 2.0% Missing 5.3% Immigration Status
U.S. Citizen 20.5% Permanent Resident 21.9% Undocumented 42.4% Tourist Visa 6.0% Other 4.6% Missing 4.6%
Years Living in U.S Less than 1 year 7.3% 1-2 years 6.6% 2-5 years 8.6% 5-10 years 4.0% More than 10 years 72.8% Missing .7% Living with Family Members Yes 75.5% No 15.9% Missing 8.6% Have Children Yes 74.2% No 24.5% Missing 1.3% Follow the Harvest Yes 17.9% No 77.5% Missing 4.6%
59
Instruments
Demographic Questionnaire
This self-report questionnaire was created by the researcher and included information
about age, assigned gender, marital status, ethnicity, nationality, residency status, immigration
status, years living in the United States, whether they lived with family, if they had children, and
if they followed the harvest (see Appendix A).
The initial intent for this investigation was to use the Escala de Medición de la Resilencia
con Mexicanos/Scale of Resilience in Mexicans (RESI-M) developed by Palomar Lever and
Gómez Valdez (2010). The RESI-M uses a combination of items from both the Resilience Scale
for Adults (RSA) and the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). After closely
reviewing the RESI-M items, it was apparent that the content and the anchors of the questions
did not match those from the original RSA and the CD-RISC. Consequently, in order to measure
resilience, the Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA) and the CD-RISC-10CA were used. The
following sections describe the specific scales used in the current investigation.
Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-II (ARSMA-II) Cuéllar et al. (1995) developed the Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-II
(ARSMA-II). The purpose of the ARSMA-II is to assess behavioral and affective aspects of
acculturation as well as enculturation (Betterndorf & Fischer, 2009). The ARSMA-II measures
acculturation and enculturation through language preference, ethnic identity and classification,
cultural heritage and ethnic behaviors, and ethnic interactions. Cuéllar and colleges (1995) used a
university student population representing Mexican, Mexican-Americans, and White non-Latinos
identities from various generations and socioeconomic backgrounds.
60
The ARSMA-II has two scales. Scale 1 (Acculturation Scale) consists of 30-items and
measures Anglo Orientation (AOS, 13-items) and Mexican Orientation (Enculturation Scale)
(MOS, 17-items). Responses are set up in a 5-point Likert Scale ranging from not at all (1) to
extremely often (5). The AOS score is calculated by adding all the items and dividing them by 13
while the MOS score is sum of the items divided by 17. According to the manual, level of
acculturation is derived by subtracting the MOS score from the AOS score.
The ARSMA-II obtained the following coefficient alphas and 1-week test-retest
reliabilities (AOS= .83/.94), (MOS, .88/.96). In terms of validity, the ARSMA and the ARSMA-
II were strongly correlated (r = .89) suggesting concurrent validity while obtaining a correlation
of .61 between acculturation and generational status (Cuéllar et al., 1995). In this study, the
ARSMA-II was used to examine individuals’ levels of enculturation (MOS), and acculturation
(AOS) to analyze the relationship that these processes have on the resilience of Mexican
farmworkers. In the present study, the internal reliability for the MOS was a Cronbach’s alpha
of .74 and for the AOS was a Cronbach’s alpha of .88.
Latino Values Scale (LVS)
Kim et al. (2009) developed the Latino/a Values Scale (LVS) to measure individuals’
adherence to the values of Latino culture or what is also called enculturation. The researchers
conducted three separate studies to develop the instrument from item development to item
selection and thorough factor analysis to examine reliability and validity. The final scale is
composed of 35 items (14 reversed-worded), ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree
(4) and measuring four dimensions: cultural pride, simpatía/congeniality, familismo/familism,
and espiritismo/spiritualism. Construct validity was significantly supported resulting in an
internal reliability of .85. The coefficient alphas were found as follows: LVS-Cultural Pride
61
(.85), LVS-Simpatía (.46), LVS- Familismo/familism (.68), and LVS-Espiritismo (.50). The low
coefficients of internal reliability for the LVS-Simpatía and the LVS-Espiritismo led Kim et al.
(2009) to recommend against the use of these scales in future research. Concurrent, discriminant,
and factorial validity were provided (Kim et al., 2009). More specifically, concurrent validity
provided significant bivariate correlations among the LVS, LVS-Cultural Pride, and LVS-
Familismo/familism scores and other dimensions of enculturation, which included 1) a single-
item measuring adherence to traditional Latina/o cultural values, the 2) Latina/o Orientation
Subscale (LOS, which Kim and colleagues changed from the original use of Mexican in the
ARSMA-II to Latina/o in this study. Discriminant validity was partially shown by comparing the
LVS scores with the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale and the Social Desirability Scale scores.
Using the current data, a Cronbach’s alpha of .71 was found for the LVS-Familismo/Familism
scale. The five items were averaged to create a total score for familismo/familism.
Daily Spiritual Experience Scale (DSES and DSES-S in Spanish)
Underwood and Teresi (2002) developed the 16-item Daily Spiritual Experience Scale
(DSES) to measure the frequency of experiences of interaction with the transcendent throughout
individuals’ daily life rather than beliefs or behaviors. The DSES has a strong reliability (alpha=
.93). The DSES also evaluates the experiences associated with interacting with the transcendent,
such as, gratitude, mercy, awe, and sense of connection (e.g., “I am spiritually touch by the
beauty of creation,” and I am thankful for my blessings”). The first 15 items are scored on a
Likert six-point format ranging from many times a day to never, to almost never (e.g., “I find
comfort in my religion or spirituality”). The last item asks, “In general, how close do you feel to
God?” and is in a Likert scale format ranging from 1 (not at all close) to 4 (as close as possible).
The scores of the first 15 items are inverted to calculate the total score followed by adding the
62
score of the 16th item. The higher total scores in the DSES represent a lower level of daily
spiritual experience. The Spanish version of the DSES (DSES-S) was validated in a sample of
Mexicans (Mayoral, Underwood, Laca, & Mejía, 2013). The DSES-S showed a high internal
consistency (alpha=.91) and reliability. In the present study, an internal reliability was found (α
=.94). The total 16 items of the DSES-S were averaged to create a total spirituality score.
Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA)
The Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA) was developed to examine both intrapersonal and
interpersonal factors facilitating an individual’s ability to adapt to psychosocial adversities
(Hjemdal, Roazzi, Dias, & Friborg, 2015; Windle, Bennett, & Noyes, 2011). It is a 33-item scale
measuring six factors: 1) perception of self, 2) planned future, 3) social competence, 4) structures
style, 5) family cohesion, and 6) social resources (Hjemdal, 2007). A higher score is associated
with stronger ability to adapt to psychosocial adversities. The RSA’s original six-factor structure
is based on a normative sample from Norway and has been translated into several other
languages. Hjemdal, Roazzi, Dias, and Friborg (2015) conducted a cross-cultural review of the
RSA. Their results showed evidence to support the cross-cultural validity of the RSA and its
stability with groups of adults in Norway and Brazil. For the current study, three steps were
taken to translate the RSA into Spanish. First, the researcher translated the RSA into Spanish.
Second, the translated Spanish version was back translated into English by a certified bilingual
teacher. Third, the back translated version was then translated into Spanish by a certified
translator in the State of Washington. In the current study, a Cronbach’s alpha of .89 of the final
RSA in Spanish was obtained. Following the RSA manual procedures, sixteen of the items were
reversed scored. The final RSA total score for this study was calculated by totaling all of items.
Connor-Davison Resilience Scale 10 in Spanish (CD-RISC-10CA).
63
Notario-Pacheco and colleagues (2011) evaluated the psychometric properties of the 10-
item CD-RISC Spanish version (CD-RISC-10 in Spanish) derived from the original CD-RISC
25-Item scale. They examined the validity and reliability with a sample of 681 freshmen students
ranging in ages 18-30 years old. The students attended a University campus in Spain and
completed the 10-item CD-RISC in Spanish, the Mental Component Summary (MCS) of the SF-
12 quality of life questionnaire, and the Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). The results
indicated that the CD-RISC-10 in Spanish has good psychometric properties and a high level of
reliability (Cronbach’s µ = 0.85 and a test-retest intraclass correlation coefficient of .71) and
validity. In the current study, an unpublished Spanish version (CD-RISC-10CA) adapted for the
U.S. Latino population was used. Using the current data, a Cronbach’s alpha of .88 was found.
All of the items were totaled to create a CD-RISC-10CA resilience score.
The World Health Organization Quality of Life in Spanish (WHOQOL-BREF in
Spanish)
The World Health Organization (WHO) workgroup on quality of life (QOL) in
collaboration with 15 international centers developed the World Health Organization Quality of
Life BREF scale, WHOQOL-BREF (WHOQOL Group, 1998). This questionnaire assesses an
individual’s satisfaction with their quality of life within the past two weeks. It is composed of 26
items assessing major sectors of quality of life: 1) health satisfaction, 2) overall life satisfaction,
and 3) physical, psychological and environmental health, and 4) social relationships (Benitez-
Borrego, Guàrdia-Olmos, & Urzúa- Morales, 2014).). All items are on a 5-point Likert scale
format ranging from 1 to 5. The WHOQOL-BREF was translated into Spanish and internal
consistencies (α =.69) for physical health QOL (α =.74), for Psychological QOL (α= .77) for
Environmental QOL, and (α= .70) for Social QOL (Benitez-Borrego, Guàrdia-Olmos, & Urzúa-
64
Morales, 2014). In the current study, the internal reliability obtained was a Cronbach’s alpha of
.91. After following the steps in the WHOQOL-BREF manual (WHOQOL Group, 1998), all of
the items were averaged to create a total quality of life score.
Statistical Analyses
SPSS statistical software was used to conduct three hierarchical regression analyses to
asses the ability of the independent variables (familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality, and
acculturation) to predict resilience as measured by both the RSA and CD-RISC-10, and well-
being as measured by the WHOQOL-BREF in Mexican farmworkers. An alpha level of p <.05
was used to test all significance. Three hierarchical regressions were conducted to determine the
relative effect of each predictor variable on resilience and well-being. The four predictor
variables were as follows: 1) Familismo/familism measured by the familismo scale of the LVS
(Kim et al., 2009); 2) Enculturation measured by the Mexican Orientation Scale (MOS) of the
ARSMA-II (Cuéllar et al., 1995); 3) Spirituality measured by the DSES (Underwood & Teresi,
2002); and 4) Acculturation level obtained by subtracting the MOS from the Anglo Orientation
Scale (AOS) of the ARSMA-II (Cuéllar et al., 1995).
Hierarchical regressions explored the relationship between the predictor variables and the
outcome variables. The specific order of entry was selected for each predictor to contribute to the
explanatory variance of the dependent variables (resilience and well-being) after controlling for
the variance explained by the previous variables. Variables were entered in the multiple
regression model based on presumed causality. Specifically, demographic predictors
(immigration status and gender) were entered as controlling variables in the first block. In the
second block, the familismo/familism variable (LVS-Familismo Scale) was entered. In the third
block, the enculturation variable (MOS Scale) was entered. In fourth block, the spirituality
65
variable (DSES-S Scale) was entered. In the fifth block, the acculturation variable (ARSMA-II
Acculturation Scale) was entered. The specific order of the variables entered was used to assess
the level of resilience and the level of well-being among participants in this study. Furthermore,
to make the findings more robust, a 95% confidence interval was calculated by utilizing
bootstrapping procedures (Kalil, Mattei, Florescu, Sun, & Kalil, 2010).
Data Screening
Data screening used in this study followed procedures recommended in the literature
(Tabachnick & Fidell, 2012). Missing values were less than 5% for most of the variables.
Further, the MCAR test revealed that the data missing was at random, X2(14) = 16.08, p = .31.
Missing data values were excluded due to missing at random and the study’s low sample size
(Tabachnick & Fidell, 2012). In the present study, the missing values were excluded from the
analyses. Two values were labeled as outliers with z-scores above 3.30. To examine the
influence of these two outliers on the regression line, two scatterplots were conducted before
changing the values. Graphically, the original outliers influenced the regression line. Thus, the
two outliers were changed to the nearest extreme values. When examining the normality of the
used variables, both skewness and kurtosis values were not above the absolute value of two.
Normality was graphically visible in the histograms, which resulted in a normal data set. Lastly,
multicollinearity was absent because all the VIF values were in the range of 1-10 and the
tolerance values were not below .20. Overall, all required statistical assumptions were met in the
current study.
Results
In the current study, most of the obtained correlations between the variables were in the
expected directions. Table 2 presents the correlation matrix between predictor variables and
66
outcomes. Table 3 summarizes the descriptive for all variables. Table 4 summarizes the
unstandardized (B) coefficients, standardized (b) coefficients, and bootstrapping confidence
interval. The results section is divided in three sections, Resilience as measured by the RSA,
Resilience as measured by the CD-RISC-10CA, and well-being as measured by the WHOQOL-
BREF.
Table 2 Correlation Matrix for Variables Used in the Current Study Men Women M SD M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. RSA 130.20 28.75 129.57 13.47 1.00 2. CD-RISC-10CA 3.19 .60 3.02 .66 .44* 1.00 3. WHOQOL-BREF 3.93 .54 3.74 .50 .38* .57* 1.00 4. Gender .01 -.13 -.17* 1.00 5. Immigration Status .46 .50 .44 .50 -.08 -.22* -.09 -.02 1.00 6. Familismo 3.2 .59 3.14 .61 .10 .31* .20* -.05 .01 1.00 7. Enculturation 4.15 .56 4.21 .43 .11 .26* .22* .06 -.11 .12 1.00 8. Spirituality 4.43 1.02 4.51 .88 .27* .25* .28* .04 -.07 .19* .36* 1.00 9. Acculturation -1.33 1.14. -1.45 1.13 -.11 -.39* -.19* -.05 .27* -.37* -.60* -.34* 1.00 Note: *p < .05 level
Table 3 Descriptive of Variables (N=151)
Characteristic Percentage M SD Gender 59.6% Female Male
40.4%
Immigration Status Undocumented 53.0% Documented 42.4% Missing 4.6% RSA 130.21 19.05 CD-RISC-10CA 30.09 .64 WHOQOL-BREF 3.82 .53 Familismo 3.17 1.13 Enculturation 4.19 .47 Spirituality 4.48 .94 Acculturation -1.40 1.13
67
Table 4 Summary of Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Outcomes in the Final Block
Bootstrapping
95% Confidence Interval Variables B SE b B BCC Lower Upper RSA
Gender -1.23 5.92 -.02 -1.23 -.073 -13.75 10.38 Immigration Status -3.66 6.12 -.05 -3.66 -.157 -16.76 7.44 Familismo 4.28 5.34 .07 4.28 -.203 -.8.57 15.63 Enculturation -.05 7.79 -.00 -.05 -.416 -14.85 13.76 Spirituality 10.18* 3.40 .27 10.18 .143 3.02 19.24 Acculturation .71 3.62 .02 .71 -.158 -6.82 8.61
CD-RISC-10CA Gender -.19 .10 -.14 -.19 -.003 -.38 -.00 Immigration Status -.17 .10 -.13 -.17 .003 -.38 .03 Familismo .20* .09 .19 .20 -.002 .00 .40 Enculturation .08 .13 .06 .08 .002 -.18 .33 Spirituality .08 .06 -.10 .07 .002 -.05 .19 Acculturation -.13* .06 -.23 -.13 .000 -.26 -.01
WHOQOL-BREF Gender -.19* .09 -.17 -.19 .004 -.36 -.01 US Status -.07 .09 -.07 -.07 -.006 -.25 .09 Familismo .13 .08 .15 .13 -.001 -.05 .30 Enculturation .15 .11 .13 .15 -.004 -.09 .35 Spirituality .12* .05 .21 .12 .005 .02 .24 Acculturation .03 .05 .05 .03 .000 -.07 .13
Note: The BCC is the bias correction coefficient, a value representing the adjustment for sources of bias in the data (e.g., skewedness) in the bootstrap sample distribution. If the bootstrap sampling distribution is perfectly symmetrical to the data distribution, then the BCC will be zero (Haukoos & Lewis, 2005). Bootstrap 95% CI is confidence interval. Unstandardized coefficients are labeled as B; standardized coefficients are labeled as b. *indicates a significant result at less than .05. The bias values are reported by three decimals. Resilience with the RSA
A hierarchical regression examined whether the predictor variables related to resilience.
In first block, the demographic predictors (gender and immigration status) were not significantly
related to resilience (F(2,138)=.261, p > .05, R2=.004). Gender and immigration status together
accounted for less than one percent of the variability in resilience. Next, gender, immigration
status, and the familismo/familism variables (LVS-Familismo Scale) were entered in the second
block. The demographic predictors (gender and immigration status) and familismo/familism
were not significantly related to resilience (F(3,137)=.748, p > .05, R2=.02), which accounted for
approximately 2% of the variance. This finding indicated that adding familismo/familism did not
significantly improve the accounted for variance on resilience (ΔF(1,137)=1.719, p > .05,
ΔR2=.01). In the third block, gender, immigration status, familismo/familism, and the
enculturation variables (MOS Scale) were entered. Demographic predictors (gender and
68
immigration status), familismo/familism, and enculturation were not significantly related to
resilience (F(4,136)=.767, p > .05, R2=.02), which accounted for approximately 2% of the
variance. This change indicated that the addition of enculturation did not significantly improve
the accounted variance of resilience (ΔF(1,136)=.829, p > .05, ΔR2=.006). In fourth block,
gender, immigration status, familismo/familism, enculturation, and the spirituality variables
(DSES-S Scale) were entered. The demographic predictors, familismo/familism, enculturation,
and spirituality were significantly related to resilience (F(5,135)=2.449, p < .05, R2=.08), which
accounted for approximately 8% of the variance. This finding indicated that adding spirituality
significantly improved the accounted variance by six percent in resilience (ΔF(1,135)=8.994, p <
.05, ΔR2=.06). In the final block, gender, immigration status, familismo/familism, enculturation,
spirituality, and the acculturation variables (ARSMA-II Acculturation Scale) were entered. The
demographic predictors, familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality, and acculturation were
not significantly related to resilience (F(6,134)=2.033, p > .05, R2=.08), which accounted for
approximately 8% of the variance. This result suggests that adding acculturation did not improve
the accounted variance by approximately three percent (ΔF(1,134)=.039, p > .05, ΔR2=.000).
To examine the direct relationship of the predictors with resilience, the regression
coefficients from the last block were examined. Gender, (B = -1.23, b = -.02, p > .05),
immigration status (B = -3.66, b = -.05, p > .05), Familismo/familism (B = 4.28, b = .07, p >
.05), enculturation (B = -.05, b = -.00, p > .05), and acculturation (B = .71, b = .02, p > .05) did
not significantly predict resilience. In this investigation, spirituality (B = 10.18, b = .27, p < .05)
was significantly and positively related to resilience.
Resilience with the CD-RISC-10CA
69
A hierarchical regression examined whether predictors related to resilience. In first block,
the demographic predictors (gender and immigration status) were significantly related to
resilience (F(2,136)=4.454, p < .05, R2=.061). Gender and immigration status altogether
accounted for six percent of the variability in resilience. Next, gender, immigration status, and
the familismo/familism variables (LVS-Familismo Scale) were entered in the second block. The
demographic predictors (gender and immigration status) and familismo/familism were
significantly related to resilience (F(3,135)=8.418, p < .05, R2=.158), which accounted for
approximately 16% of the variance. This result indicated that adding familismo/familism
significantly improve the accounted variance by 10 percent on resilience (ΔF(1,135)=15.401, p <
.05, ΔR2=.096). In the third block, gender, immigration status, familismo/familism, and the
enculturation variables (MOS Scale) were entered. Demographic predictors, familismo/familism,
and enculturation were significantly related to resilience (F(4,134)=8.177, p < .05, R2=.196),
which accounted for approximately 20% of the variance. This change indicated that the addition
of enculturation significantly improved the accounted variance of resilience by four percent
(ΔF(1,134)=6.438, p < .05, ΔR2=.039). In fourth block, gender, immigration status,
familismo/familism, enculturation, and the spirituality variables (DSES-S Scale) were entered.
The demographic predictors, familismo/familism, enculturation, and spirituality were
significantly related to resilience (F(5,133)=7.014, p < .05, R2=.209), which accounted for
approximately 21% of the variance. However, this finding indicated that adding spirituality did
not significantly improve the accounted variance in resilience (ΔF(1,133)=2.093, p > .05,
ΔR2=.012). In the final block, gender, immigration status, familismo/familism, enculturation,
spirituality, and the acculturation variables (ARSMA-II Acculturation Scale) were entered. The
demographic predictors, familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality, and acculturation were
70
significantly related to resilience (F(6,132)=6.759, p < .05, R2=.235), which accounted for
approximately 23% of the variance. This result indicates that adding acculturation improved the
accounted variance by approximately three percent (ΔF(1,132)=4.550, p < .05, ΔR2=.026).
To examine the direct relationship of gender and immigration status with resilience, the
regression coefficients from the last block were examined. Gender, (B = -.188, b = -.143, p >
.05), immigration status (B = -.173, b = -.133, p > .05), enculturation (B = .077, b = .055, p >
.05), and spirituality (B = .069, b = .100, p > .05) did not significantly predict resilience.
Familismo/familism was significantly and positively related to resilience. On the other hand,
acculturation (B = -.131, b = -.226, p < .05) was significantly and negatively related to
resilience. Overall, familismo/familism and acculturation were the only predictors of resilience
identified in these statistical analyses highlighting two major points. First, both obtained
significant relationships with resilience, and second, both have the largest standardized
coefficients. This relationship is still present after accounting for controlling variables and the
other predictors.
Well-being with the WHOQOL-BREF
A hierarchical regression examined whether predictors related to well-being. In the first
block, the demographic predictors (immigration status and gender) were not significantly related
to well-being (F(2,138)=2.541, p > .05, R2=.036). The demographic variables together accounted
for four percent of the variability in well-being. Next, the familismo/familism variable (LVS-
Familismo Scale) was entered in the second block. The demographic predictors and
familismo/familism were significantly related to well-being (F(3,137)=3.413, p < .05, R2=.070),
which accounted for approximately 7% of the variance. This finding indicated that adding
familismo/familism significantly improved the accounted variance by three percent on well-
71
being (ΔF(1,137)=5.010, p < .05, ΔR2=.034). In the third block, the enculturation variable (MOS
Scale) was entered. Demographic predictors, familismo/familism, and enculturation were
significantly related to well-being (F(4,136)=3.769, p < .05, R2=.100), which accounted for
approximately 10% of the variance. This change indicated that adding enculturation significantly
improved the accounted variance on well-being by three percent (ΔF(1,136)=4.569, p < .05,
ΔR2=.030). In fourth block, the spirituality variable (DSES-S Scale) was entered. The
demographic predictors, familismo/familism, enculturation, and spirituality were significantly
related to well-being (F(5,135)=4.254, p < .05, R2=.136), which accounted for approximately
14% of the variance. This finding indicated that adding spirituality significantly improved the
accounted variance by four percent in well-being (ΔF(1,135)=5.676, p < .05, ΔR2=.036). In the
final block, the acculturation variable (ARSMA-II Acculturation Scale) was entered. The
demographic predictors, familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality, and acculturation were
significantly related to well-being (F(6,134)=3.563, p < .05, R2=.138), which accounted for
approximately 14% of the variance. This result indicated that adding acculturation did not
significantly improve the accounted variance by less than one percent (ΔF(1,134)=.228, p > .05,
ΔR2 < .01).
To examine the direct relationship of the predictors with well-being, the regression
coefficients from the last block were examined. Immigration status, (B = -.069, b = -.065, p >
.05), familismo/familism (B = .131 b = .150, p > .05), enculturation (B = .149, b = .132, p >
.05), and acculturation (B = .025, b = .053, p > .05) did not significantly predict well-being.
Gender (B = -.186, b = -.173, p < 0.05) was significantly and negatively related to well-being.
On the other hand, spirituality (B = .120, b = .211, p < .05) was significantly and positively
related to well-being. Overall, gender and spirituality were the only predictors of well-being
72
identified in these statistical analyses highlighting two points. Interestingly, the gender
standardized coefficient (b = -.173) matched the corresponding correlation value (r = -.17) in
Table 3, which accounts approximately for three percent of the variance. This finding indicates a
small effect. Again, both obtained significant relationships with well-being; second, both have
the largest standardized coefficients. This relationship is still present even after accounting for
controlling variables and the other predictors.
Discussion
In the present study, the ability of familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality, and
acculturation to predict levels of resilience and well-being in Mexican farmworkers was
explored. A unique contribution of this study to the scientific literature is that it focused
exclusively on Mexican/Mexican-American farmworkers rather than the broad population of
Latina/o community members or undergraduate students. Studying Mexican/Mexican-American
farmworkers is critical for the following three reasons: 1) Mexican farmworkers are a
marginalized group in U.S. society and within psychological research; 2) the U.S. agricultural
industry depends on the workforce produced by Mexican farmworkers (NCFH, 2012); and 3)
this study was developed from a strength-based perspective, shifting the focus of previous
research from deficits to protective factors. In fact, there are no current studies examining the
role of familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality, and acculturation among
Mexican/Mexican-American farmworkers and their resilience and well-being.
Three separate hierarchal regressions were used to examine the relationship between
gender, immigration status, fammilismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality, and acculturation
with resilience and well-being (see Table 4). The findings in this study provide further support
for the role of cultural factors in resilience and well-being.
73
Resilience with the RSA
Resilience highlights the ability for an individual to evaluate an existing challenge, to
consider their resources and acknowledge their ability to overcome it. The hierarchical
regression demonstrated that gender, immigration status, familismo/familism, enculturation,
spirituality, and acculturation together were significant predictors of resilience among Mexican
farmworkers. Out of the six variables entered in the hierarchical regression model, spirituality
accounted for most of the variance (ΔF(1,135)=8.994, p < .05, ΔR2=.06). This result aligns with
the current literature with Latina/o populations. For example, Morgan Consoli (2011) found
religiosidad/religiosity to be a component of college students’ level of resilience. Consistent with
Holleran and Waller (2003), spirituality also helps Latinas/os to increase their confidence leading
to overcome life challenges.
Resilience with the CD-RISC-10CA
Another hierarchical regression using the CD-RISC-10CA demonstrated that gender,
immigration status, familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality, and acculturation together
were significant predictors of resilience among Mexican farmworkers. In this hierarchical
regression model, familismo/familism accounted for approximately 10% variance
(ΔF(1,135)=15.401, p < .05, ΔR2=.096). When examining the direct relationship of the
demographic variables, the cultural predictors and resilience, both familismo/familism and
acculturation were significantly related to resilience. This finding is consistent with studies
focusing on the impact of familismo/familism in the lives of Mexican/Mexican-Americans in the
U.S., such as Parra-Cardona and colleagues (2006) with partners of farmworkers, and Morgan
Consoli and Llamas (2013) with a Mexican-American college student population. Moreover,
familismo/familism seems to be significantly present in collectivistic societies including the
74
Mexican culture. An important aspect of the participants in this investigation is that both men
and women Mexican farmworkers are responsible for taking care of their children and families.
Although traditional gender roles place a higher emphasis on women being responsible for
childrearing (Morgan Consoli & Llamas, 2013), Mexican female farmworkers are also working
and contributing economically in their household. In this investigation, Mexican females helping
males economically may be capturing an important aspect of familismo/familism such as family
members’ roles and responsibilities (Calzada, Tamis-LeMonda, & Yoshikawa, 2012) and a
change in their patterns of functioning (POF). Furthermore, having employment has been found
to be helpful in experiencing pride and providing a sense of being resilient among undocumented
women (Sellers Campbell, 2008).
Another predicting factor found in this study was acculturation as demonstrated by its
negative relationship to resilience, indicating that lower acculturation levels predicted high levels
of resilience among Mexican/Mexican-American farmworkers. Acculturation as measured by the
ARMSA-II in the case of Mexican farmworkers represents their adherence to the U.S. culture.
The results in this investigation are consistent with previous researchers who argue that high
levels of acculturation are associated with loss of social support (Caplan, 2007), increase in
familial conflict (Padilla & Borrero, 2006) and greater marital conflict (Flores, Tschann, Marin,
and Pantoja, 2004). The current results are not surprising due to Mexican farmworkers adherence
to Mexican cultural values such as familismo and spirituality.
Well-being with the WHOQOL-BREF
According to the WHOQOL-BREF Group (1998) well-being is defined as individual’s
satisfaction with their quality of life in the following domains: 1) health satisfaction, 2) overall
life satisfaction, and 3) physical, psychological and environmental health, and 4) social
75
relationships (Benitez-Borrego, Guàrdia-Olmos, & Urzúa- Morales, 2014). The domains
incorporated in the WHOQOL-BREF scale include health satisfaction, overall health, physical,
environmental and physical health and social relationships. In this study, spirituality was a
predictor of well-being. Finding spiritualty as predictive variable of well-being is consistent with
results indicating the value of spirituality and religion in the lives of Mexicans/Mexican-
Americans. For example, religion was found to be associated with lower perceived burden and
increased levels of well-being among Mexican-American families (Herrera, Lee, Nayonjo,
Layfman, & Torres-Vigil, 2009). In the current investigation, these findings highlight the
importance of spirituality among Mexican/Mexican-American farmworkers and their well-being.
Relational and Resilience Theory of Ethnic Family Systems Model
The current investigation used the Relational and Resilience Theory of Ethnic Family
Systems (R&RTEFS) as a theoretical framework to develop the study (McCubbin & McCubbin,
2013). The R&RTEFS has not been used within the Mexican farmworker population. Given the
importance of relationships within the Mexican culture, this model was structured using the
cultural predictors of resilience found in the existing scientific literature. Thus,
familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality, and acculturation (or Relational Well-Being)
were used as cultural protective factors of resilience and well-being. This investigation supports
the R&RTEFS particularly, the adaptation phase that includes Relational Well-being and adapted
Family Schema. More specifically, familismo/familism and spirituality are an integral part of the
lives of Mexican farmworkers, substantially to create a sense of belonging in the world as
highlighted in the R&RTEFS (McCubbin &McCubbin, 2013). Mexican farmworkers’ Relational
Well-being (i.e., familismo and spirituality) was a predicting factor of their resilience. Further
supporting the R&RTEFS, in this investigation, Mexican female and males farmworkers are both
76
employed, which challenges traditional gender roles (e.g., women are housewives and men are
financial providers). Consequently, changes in their traditional gender roles become part of their
Adapted Family Schema (or identity) in order to function as a family in the United States. Thus,
an important factor to consider is the role of marianismo (feminine virtues) and machismo
(masculine pride) within the adaptation phase and how this may impact the level of resilience
and well-being of Mexican farmworkers.
Conclusions and Future Directions Despite this study’s contributions to the literature, this investigation has limitations that
warrant consideration. First, the cross-sectional nature of this study makes it impossible to
establish the direction of the predictions between variables (e.g., individuals with stronger levels
of resilience might develop more familismo/familism). Future studies should consider using
longitudinal designs to better assess and examine the directionality of the relationships between
familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality and acculturation with resilience, and well-being.
Second, the nonrandom sampling methodology used in this investigation limits the
generalizability of the findings to Mexican farmworkers in the Southern Eastern Washington
area. Thus, future research examining Mexican farmworker populations would benefit from a
mixed methods design that incorporate qualitative procedures (e.g., semi-structured interviews,
focus groups) to allow for more in-depth exploration of the personal strengths of such imperative
community and workforce.
One of the most important contributions of this study is to highlight the strengths and
protective factors of Mexican farmworkers rather than their deficits. The current investigation
also brings awareness and provides a better understanding of the strengths Mexican farmworkers
possess for researchers, practitioners, program developers, and advocacy agencies. Consistent
77
with previous studies, results of this investigation indicate that the Mexican cultural values of
familismo/familism and spirituality can positively influence their ability to cope in the world and
have stronger levels of well-being. These results suggest that prevention, intervention, and
program initiatives developed for Mexican farmworkers should consider incorporating family
and spiritual aspects.
78
GENERAL DISCUSSION
Manuscripts I and II collectively examined Mexican cultural values predicting resilience
among Mexican farmworkers. Manuscript I was a comprehensive and critical review of the
existing literature. While most of the existing literature focused on deficits rather than the
protective factors among Mexicans. Several findings provided an understanding of specific
Mexican cultural values related to resilience and well-being. More specifically,
familismo/familism, enculturation, spirituality, and acculturation have been found to be
protective factors within the Mexican population living in the U.S. When examining resilience,
most theoretical models were developed from a Westernized approach while the Relational and
Resilience Theory of Ethnic Family Systems (R&RTEFS) incorporated an indigenous
perspective (McCubbin & McCubbin, 2013).
Research on Mexican farmworkers has been mostly focused on challenges, deficits, and
occupational stressors (Ward, 2010). Based on the literature one can assume that Mexican
farmworkers deal with significant health outcomes, such as back pain, intoxication due to
pesticides, and vision problems (Kammel, & Hoppin, 2004) and higher rates of psychological
disorders i.e., depression and anxiety (Hovey & Magaña, 2002). However, there is no literature
that examines the strengths Mexican farmworkers possess to continue to work under such critical
conditions.
The study executed in Manuscript II attempted to broaden the understating of the
protective factors Mexican farmworkers have and fill in the gap in the literature by exploring
cultural values as predictors of resilience and well-being while utilizing an indigenous theoretical
model (R&RTEFS). Study findings indicated that familismo/familism, spirituality, and
acculturation serve as protective factors and are related to resilience and well-being.
79
While the research conducted in Manuscript II began to fill in the gap, further exploration
and understanding is needed. Future research should focus on examining the familismo/familism,
enculturation, spirituality, and acculturation through qualitative methodology. Additionally,
future research should examine resilience’s growth over time among Mexican farmworkers.
Furthermore, researchers can also examine cultural predictors that could influence the changes in
the level of resilience across time. Exploring the growth processes of resilience and well-being
for Mexican farmworkers overtime may provide a better understanding of the protective factors.
The further examination of protective factors among Mexican farmworkers will help inform
researchers and practitioners.
80
REFERENCES
Alderete, E., Vega, W.A., Bohdan, K., Aguilar-Gaxiola, S. (2000). Lifetime prevalence of the
risk factors for psychiatric disorders among Mexican migrant farmworkers in California.
American Journal of Public Health, 90.4, 608-614.
Alegría, M., Shrout, P. E., Woo, M., Guarnaccia, P., Sribney, W., Vila, D., . . . Canino, G.
(2007). Understanding differences in past year psychiatric disorders for Latinos living in
the US. Social Science and Medicine, 65, 214 –230.
doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.03.026
Arcury, T. A., Jacobs, I.J., & Ruiz, V. (2015). Farmworker housing quality and health. NEW
SOLUTIONS: A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy, 25, 256-262.
doi:10.1177/1048291115604426
Ayón C., & Aisenberg, e. (2010). Negotiating cultural values and expectations within the public
and welfare system: A look at familismo and personalismo. Journal of Child & Family
Social Work, 15, 335-344. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2206.2010.00682.x
Bacallao, M.L., & Smokowski, P.R. (2007). The costs of getting ahead: Mexican family system
changes after immigration. Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied
Family Studies, 56, 52-66.
Benitez-Borrego, S., Guàrdia-Olmos, J., & Urzúa-Morales, A. (2014). Factorial structural
analysis of the Spanish version of WHOQOL-BREF: and exploratory structural equation
model study. Quality of Life Research, 23, 2205-2212. doi 10.1007/s11136-014-0663-2
Berry, J. W. (1980). Social and cultural change. In H. C.Triandis & R.Brislin (Eds.), Handbook
of cross-cultural psychology: Social psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 211–279). Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
81
Berry, J. W. (1994). Acculturation and psychological adaptation: An overview. In A.Bouvy, F. J.
R.Van de Vijver, P.Boski, & P.Schmitz (Eds.), Journeys into cross-cultural psychology
(pp. 129–141). Berwyn, PA: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Betterndorf, A.K., & Fischer, A.R. (2009). Cultural strengths as moderators of the relationship
between acculturation to the mainstream U.S. society and eating—and-body-related
concerns among Mexican American Women. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56,
430-440. doi: 440. 10.1037/a0016382
Calzada, E.J., Tamis-LeMonda C.S., & Yoshikawa, H. (2012). Familismo in Mexican and
Dominican families from low-income, urban communities. Journal of Family Issues, 34,
1696-1724. doi: 10.1177/0192513X12460218
Cano, M.A., & Castillo, L.G. (2015). The role of enculturation and acculturation on Latina
college students. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 9, 221-231.
Caplan, S. (2007). Latinos, acculturation, and acculturative stress: A dimensional concept
analysis. Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice, 8, 93-106.
Castillo, L.G., & Caver, K.A. (2009). Expanding the concept of acculturation in Mexican
American rehabilitation psychology research and practice. Rehabilitation Psychology, 54,
351-362. doi: 10.1037/a0017801
Cerezo, A., Morales, A., Quintero, D., & Rothman, S. (2014). Trans migrations: Exploring life at
the intersection of transgendered identity and immigration. Psychology of Sexual
Orientation and Gender Diversity, 1, 170-180. doi: 2329-0382/14/$12.00
Connor K.M., & Davidson J.R. (2003) Development of a new resilience scale: the Connor-
Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Depression and Anxiety,18, 71-82.
Connor, A., Layne, L., & Thomisee, K. (2010). Providing care for migrant farm worker families
82
in their unique sociocultural context and environment. Journal of Transcultural Nursing,
21, 159-166.
Cuéllar, I., Arnold, B., & Maldonado, R. (1995). Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican
Americans-II: A revision of the original ARSMA Scale. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral
Sciences, 17, 275-304. doi: 10.1177/07399863950173001
Davidson, T.M., & Cardemil, E.V. (2009). Parent-child communication and parental
involvement in Latino adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 29, 99-121. doi:
10.1177/0272431608324480
Esparza, P., & Sánchez, B. (2008). The role of attitudinal familism in academic outcomes: A
study of urban, Latino high school seniors. Journal of Cultural Diversity and Ethnic
Minority Psychology, 14, 193-200. doi: 10.1037/1099-9809.14.3.193
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical
power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior
Research Methods, 39, 175-191.
Flores, E., Tschann, J.M., Marin, B.V., & Pantoja, P. (2004). Marital conflict and acculturation
among Mexican American husbands and wives. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority
Psychology, 10, 39-52.
Garcia, V. (2007). Meeting a binational research challenge: Substance abuse among transnational
Mexican farmworkers in the United States. The Journal of Rural Health, 23, 61-67.
Garza, Y., & Watts, R.E. (2010). Filial therapy and Hispanic values: Common ground for
culturally sensitive helping. Journal of Counseling & Development, 88, 108-113.
Gates, H.L. (2010). Faces of America with Henry Louis Gates Jr. New York: Public
Broadcasting Service (PBS).
83
Graff, C.S., McCain, T., & Gomez-Vilchis, V. Latina resilience in higher education:
Contributing factors including seasonal farmworker experience. Journal of Hispanic
Higher Education, 12, 331-344.
Grzywacz, J.G., Arcury, T.A., Talton, J.W., D’Agostino, R.B., Trejo, G., Mirabelli, M.C. &
Quandt, S.A. (2013). “Causes” of pesticide safety behavior change in Latino farmworker
families. American Journal of Health Behavior, 37, 449-457.
Grzywacz, J. G., Quandt, S. A., Early, J., Tapia, J., Graham, C. N., & Arcury, T. A. (2006).
Leaving family for work: Ambivalence and mental health among Mexican migrant
farmworker men. Journal of Immigrant Health, 8, 85–97.
Grzywacz, J.G., Quandt, S.A., Vallejos, Q.M., Whalley, L.E., Chen, H.,… &
Arcury, T.A. (2010b). Job demands and pesticide exposure among immigrant Latino
workers. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 15, 252-266.
Hernández, B., García, J.I., Flynn, M. (2010). The role of familism in the relation between
parent-child discord and psychological distress among emerging adults of Mexican
descent. Journal of Family Psychology, 24, 105-144. doi: 10.1037/a0019140
Herrera, A.P., Lee, J.W., Nanyonjo, R.D., Laufman, L.E. & Torres-Vigil, I. (2009). Religious
coping and caregiver well-being in Mexican-American families. Age and Mental Health, 13, 84-91.
Hirai, M., Vernon, L.L., Ropan, J.R., & Clum, G.A. (2015). Acculturation and enculturation,
stigma toward psychological disorders, and treatment preferences in a Mexican American
sample: The role of education in reducing the stigma. Journal of Latina/o Psychology, 3,
88-102.
Hjemdal, O., Roazzi, A., Dias, M.G., & Friborg, O. (2015). The cross-cultural validity of the
84
resilience scale for adults: A comparison between Norway and Brazil. BioMed Central
Psychology, 3, 1-9.
Hovey, J.D., & Magaña, C.G. (2003). Suicide risk factors among Mexican migrant farmworkers
women in the Midwest United States. Archives of Suicide Research, 7, 107-121.
Jones, N., & Mortimer, A. (2014). Measuring acculturation with the ARSMA-II: Bidimensional
analysis increase accuracy and frequency of use. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral
Sciences, 36, 387-412. doi: 10.1177/0739986314548025
Kalil, A. C., Mattei, J., Florescu, D. F., Sun, J., & Kalil, R. S. (2010). Recommendations for the
Assessment and Reporting of Multivariable Logistic Regression in Transplantation
Literature. American Journal of Transplantation, 10(7), 1686–1694. doi:10.1111/j.1600-
6143.2010.03141.x
Kamel, F., & Hoppin, J.A. (2004). Association of pesticide exposure with neurologic
dysfunction and disease. Environmental Health Perspectives, 112, 950-958.
Kim, B. S. K., & Abreu, J. M. (2001). Acculturation measurement: Theory, current instruments,
and future directions. In J. G.Ponterotto, J. M.Casa, L.Suzuki, & C. M.Alexander (Eds.),
Handbook of multicultural counseling (2nd ed., pp. 394–424). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kim, B. S. K., Soliz, A., Orellana, B., & Alamilla, S. (2009). Latino/a Values Scale:
Development, reliability, and validity. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and
Development, 42, 71–91. doi:10.1177/ 0748175609336861
Kim-Godwin, Y.S., Maume, M.O., Fox, J.A., (2014). Depression, stress, and intimate partner
violence among Latino migrant and seasonal farmworkers in rural southeastern North
Carolina. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 16, 1217-1224. doi
10.1007/s10903-014-0007-x
85
Krogstad, J.M. (2016, July 28). 5 facts about Latinos and education. Retrieved November 07,
2017, from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/28/5-facts-about-latinos-and-
education/
Magaña, C.G., & Hovey, J.D. (2003) Psychosocial stressors associated with Mexican
farmworkers in the Midwest United States. Journal of Immigrant Health, 5, 75-86.
Marsh, B., Milofsky, C., Kissam, E., & Arcury, T.A. (2015). Understanding the roles of social
factors in farmworkers housing and health. NEW SOLUTIONS: A Journal of
Environmental and Occupational Health Policy, 25, 313-333.
10.1177/1048291115601020
Maureen, A., Williams, J.M., & Avery, A.M. (2008). Health needs of migrant and seasonal
farmworkers. Journal of Community Health Nursing, 25, 153-160.
Mayoral, E.G., Underwood, L.G., Laca, F.A., and Mejía, J.C. (2013). Validation of the Spanish
version of Underwood’s daily spiritual experience scale in Mexico. International Journal
of Hispanic Psychology, 6, 191-202.
McCubbin, L.D., & McCubbin, H.I. (2013). Resilience in ethnic family systems: A relational
theory for research and practice. In Beevar, D.S. (ed.), Handbook of Family Resilience,
175-195. New York: Springer Science+Business Media.
McCubbin, L.D., McCubbin, H.I., Zhang, W., Kehl, L., & Strom, I. (2013). Relational well-
being: An indigenous perspective and measure. Family Relations, 62, 354-365. doi: 10.1111/fare.12007 McCurdy, S.A., Stoecklin-Marois, M.T., Tancredi, D.J., Hennessy-Butt, T.E., & Schenker, M.B.
(2015). Region of birth, sex, and reproductive health in rural immigrant Latino
farmworkers: The MICASA study. The Journal of Rural Health, 31, 165-175. doi:
86
10.1111/jrh.12083
McElroy, A., & Townsend, P. (1979). Medical anthropology in ecological perspective. North
Scituate, MA: Duxbury.
McGregor, D., Morelli, P., Matsuoka, J., & Minerbi, L. (2003). An ecological model of well-
being. In H. Becker & F. Vanclay (Eds.), The international handbook of social impact
assessment:Conceptual and methodological advances (pp. 109 – 126). Northhampton,
MA: Edward Elgar.
McNeill, B.W., Prieto, L.R., Niemann, Y.F., Pizarro, M., Vera, E.M., & Gómez, S.P. (2001).
Current directions in Chicana/o psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 29, 5-18. doi:
0.1177/ 0011000001291001
Morgan Consoli M.L. Delucio, K., Noriega, Erika, & Llamas, J. (2015). Predictors of resilience
and thriving among Latina/o undergraduate students. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral
Sciences, 37, 304-318.
Morgan Consoli, M.L., Gonzalez, N., & Lopez, S.A. (2012). Promoting Resilience in
Immigrants: Understanding Latino/a adaptation and strengths. In Vera, E.M. (ed.), The
Oxford Handbook of Prevention in Counselling Psychology, 345-363. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Morgan Consoli, M.L., & Llamas, J.D. (2013). The relationship between Mexican American
cultural values and resilience among Mexican American college students: A mixed
methods study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60.4, 617-624. doi: 10.1037/a0033998
Morgan Consoli, M. L., López, S.A., Gonzales, N., Cabrera, A.P., Llamas, J., & Ortega, S.
(2011). Resilience and thriving in the Latino/o population: Intersections and
discrepancies. Revista Interamericana de Psicología, 45, 351-362.
87
National Center for Farmworker Health, Inc. (2012). Farmworker health factsheet.
http://www.ncfh.org/docs/fs-Migrant%20Demographics.pdf
Niemeyer, A.E., Wong, M.M., & Westerhaus, K.J. (2009). Parental involvement, familismo, and
academic performance in Hispanic and Caucasian adolescents. North American Journal
of Psychology, 2009, 11, 613-632.
Norario-Pacheco, B., Solera- Martínez, M., Serrano-Parra, M., Bartolomé- Gutiérrez, R.,
García-Campayo, J., Martínez-Vizcaíno, V. (2011). Reliability and validity of the Spanish
version of the 10-item Connor-Davidson resilience scale (10-item CD-RISC) in young
adults. Health and Quality of Life, 9, 63-68.
Ojeda, L., Flores, L.Y., & Navarro, R.L. (2011a). Social cognitive predictors of Mexican
American college student’s academic and life satisfaction. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 58, 61-71.
Ojeda, L., Navarro, R.L., Morales, A. (2011b). The role of la familia on Mexican American
men’s college persistence intentions. Journal of Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 12,
216-229. doi: 10.1037/a0020091
Palomar Lever, J., & Gómez Valdez, N.E. (2010). Desarollo de una escala de medición de la
resilencia con Mexicanos (RESI-M). Interdisciplinaria Revista de Psicología y Ciencias
Afines, 27, 7-22.
Parra-Cardona, J. R., Bulock, L. A., Imig, D. R., Villarruel, F. A., & Gold, S. J. (2006).
“Trabajando duro todos los días”: Learning from the life experiences of Mexican-Origin
116 migrant families. Family Relations, 55(3), 361-375. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-
3729.2006.00409.x
Patterson, J.M. (2002). Understanding family resilience. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 58,
88
233-46.
Piña-Watson, B., López, B., Ojeda, L. & Rodriguez, K.M. (2015). Cultural and cognitive
predictors of academic motivation among Mexican American adolescents: Caution
against discounting the impact of cultural processes. Journal of Multicultural Counseling
and Development, 43, 109-129. doi: 10.1002/j.2161-1912.2015.00068.x
Ramos, A.K., Su, D., Lander, L., and Rivera, R. (2015). Stress factors contributing to depression
among Latino migrant farmworkers in Nebraska. Journal of Immigrant and Minority
Health, 17, 1627-1634. doi: 10.1007/s10903-015-0201-5
Rodriguez, N., Mira, C. B., Paez, N. D., & Myers, H. F. (2007). Exploring the complexities of
familism and acculturation: Central constructs for people of Mexican origin. American
Journal of Community Psychology, 39, 61–77. doi:10.1007/s10464-007-9090-7
Schwartz, S. J., Unger, J. B., Zamboanga, B. L., & Szapocznik, J. (2010). Rethinking the concept
of acculturation: Implications for theory and research. American Psychologist, 65, 237–
251. doi:10.1037/a0019330
Sellers Campbell, W. (2008). Lessons in resilience. Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 23, 231-241. doi: 10.1177/0886109908319172 Snipes, S.A., Thompson, B., O’Connor, K., & Ibarra, G.R. (2007). Anthropological and
psychological merge: design of a stress measure for Mexican farmworkers. Culture,
Medicine, and Psychiatry, 31, 359-388.
Sobralske, M, C. (2006). Health care seeking among Mexican American men. Journal of
Transcultural Nursing, 2, 129-138. doi:10.1177/1043659606286767
Steidel, A.G. & Contreras, J.M. (2003). A new familism scale for use with Latino populations.
Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 25, 312-330.
89
Suárez-Orozco, C., Katsiaficas, D., Alcantar, C.M., Hernandez, E., Garcia, Y., & Michikyan, M.
(2015). Undocumented undergraduates on college campuses: Understanding their
challenges and assets and what it take to make an undocufriendly campus. Harvard
Educational Review, 85, 427-463. Tabachnick, G. B., & Fidell, S. L. (2012). Using multivariate statistics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Torres, V. Influences of ethnic identity development of Latino college students in the first two
years of college. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 532-547. doi:
doi:10.1353/csd.2003.0044
Underwood, L.G., & Teresi, J.A. (2002). The daily spiritual experience scale: Development,
theoretical description, reliability, exploratory factor analysis, and preliminary construct
validity using health-related data. The Society of Behavioral Medicine, 24, 22-33.
Ward, L.S. (2010). Farmworkers at risk: The cost of family separation. Journal of Immigrant and
Minority Health, 12, 672-677.
WHOQOL Group. (1998). Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment. Psychological Medicine, 28(3), 551–558. Windle, G., Bennett, K.M., and Noyes, J. (2011). A methodological review of resilience
measurement scales. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 9, 2-18.
90
APPENDIX A
Cuestionario demográfico
1. Edad: _____________
2. Género: ______Hombre (1) ______Mujer (2) ______Otro género (3)
3. Estado civil: ______Casada/o (1) ______Cohabituada/o (2) ______Divorciada/o (3)
______Viuda/o (4) ______Soltera/o (5)
4. Etnia: ______Mexicana/o (1) ______Mexicoamericana/o (2) ______Otra (3)
5. Nacionalidad: ______Estadounidence/Americana (1) ______Mexicana (2) ______
Ciudadania Estadounidence/Americana y Mexicana (3) _____Otra (4) ______
6. Estado de residencia: Cuidadana/o Estadounidence/Americana/o (1) ______
Residente permanente (2) ______Indocumentada/o (3) ______Visa de turista (4)
______ Otro (5) ______
7. ¿Cuánto tiempo ha vivido en los Estados Unidos? ______Menos de un año (1)
______1-2 años (2) ______ 2-5 años (3) ______5-10 años (4) ___Mas de 10 años (5)
8. ¿Vive con su familia inmediata (con su esposa/o, hijoas/os)? ____Si (1) ____No (2)
9. ¿Tiene hijos/as? ____Si (1) ____No (2) a. ¿Si tiene hijos/as, cuantos tiene? ______
10. ¿Usted se muda casa para seguir la cosecha? ______Si (1) ______ No (2)
91
APPENDIX B
Latino Values Scale (LVS) in Spanish
INSTRUCCIONES: Utilice la siguiente escala para indicar hasta qué grado está de acuerdo con el valor mencionado en cada enunciado. 1=totalmente en desacuerdo 2=en desacuerdo 3=de acuerdo 4=totalmente de acuerdo _____1. Uno no necesita seguir las costumbres de su cultura. _____2. Uno no tiene que ser fiel a su origen cultural. _____3. La unión que uno tenga con su grupo cultural debe ser muy fuerte. _____4. Uno debe conservar su herencia cultural. _____5. Uno nunca debería perder su lengua nativa. _____6. Uno debería esforzarse por conservar la lengua de su grupo étnico. _____7. El hombre debe mantener económicamente a su familia. _____8. Uno debería ser capaz de cuestionar a sus mayores. _____9. Uno nunca debería deshonrar a su familia. _____10. Uno no tiene que seguir sus celebraciones culturales. _____11. La fortaleza de un hombre proviene de ser un buen padre y esposo. _____12. Uno no tiene que ser afectuoso con personas conocidas. _____13. La mujer debería sacrificar todo por su familia. _____14. Los éxitos de uno deberían atribuirse a su familia. _____15. La madre debe mantener unida la familia. _____16. Uno no tiene que mostrarse siempre agradable ante los demás. _____17. A la mujer se le considera el pilar de la familia. _____18. La principal fuente de identidad es la familia de uno. _____19. Uno no debe ofender a los demás. _____20. Uno no tiene que ser siempre cortés con los demás. _____21. Uno debe acudir a sus mayores para buscar consejo. _____22. Uno no tiene que creer en los presentimientos. _____23. Uno debe conservar un sentido de interdependencia con su grupo. _____24. Uno no tiene que confiar en un ser supremo. _____25. Uno no tiene que mantener sus tradiciones culturales. _____26. Uno no tiene que apoyar siempre a su grupo. _____27. Uno debe ayudar a su grupo para alcanzar sus metas. _____28. Uno no tiene que evitar siempre los problemas con los demás. _____29. La mujer debe ser un recurso de fortaleza para su familia. _____30. Uno debe respetar a las personas de mayor estatus. _____31. Uno nunca debe ofender a sus mayores. _____32. La mujer no tiene que salir avante de todas las adversidades. _____33. La mujer debe ser la líder espiritual en la familia. _____34. Uno no tiene que conservar las costumbres de su origen cultural. _____35. Uno debe sentirse orgulloso de su grupo cultural.
92
APPENDIX C
93
94
95
APPENDIX D
The Daily Spiritual Experience Scale in Spanish (DSES-S) The DSES-S is protected by author. Please see below: © Lynn Underwood For permission to copy see www.dsescale.org Translation validated in publications, US and Mexico
96
APPENDIX E
Escala de Resilencia para Adultos (RSA) in Spanish Escala de resiliencia para adultos Por favor piense en cómo sería o cómo han estado en el último mes, que es lo que piensa y como se siente acerca de sí mismo y de las personas más importantes a su alrededor. Favor de seleccionar el recuadro más cercano a la opción que mejor lo/a describa. Fecha: ________________________ Edad: ____ Sexo: ________ Mujer/Hombre: ___________ 1. Mis planes
para el futuro son Difícil de llevar a cabo
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Posibles de llevar a cabo
2. Cuando sucede algo repentino
Siempre encuentro una solución
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ A menudo me encuentro confundido
3. Lo que es importante para mi familia en la vida es
Muy diferente a lo mío
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Muy similar a lo mío
4. Siento que mi futuro se ve
Muy prometedor £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Incierto
5. Mis planes para el futuro
Sé cómo realizarlos
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ No estoy seguro de cómo realizarlos
6. Puedo hablar de asuntos personales con
Nadie £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Amigos/ familiares
7. Me siento Muy feliz con mi familia
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Muy infeliz con mi familia
8. Me gusta estar Con otras personas
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Conmigo mismo
9. Las personas que son buenas para animarme son
Amigos/familiares cercanos
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Nadie
10. Vínculos entre mis amigos son
Débiles £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Fuertes
11. Mis problemas personales
Son difícil de llevar a cabo
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Sé cómo resolverlos
97
12. Cuando un miembro de la familia tiene una crisis o una emergencia
Soy informado inmediatamente
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Tarda mucho tiempo antes de que me digan
13. Mi familia se caracteriza por
Desconexión £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Unión saludable
14. Ser flexible en un entorno social
No es importante para mí
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Es muy importante para mí
15. Obtengo apoyo de
Amigos/familiares £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Nadie
16. En tiempos difíciles mi familia
Mantiene una perspectiva positiva para el futuro
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Ve el futuro obscuro
17. Mis capacidades
Creo firmemente en ellas
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Estoy inseguro/a de ellas
18. Mis juicios y decisiones
A menudo los dudo
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Confío totalmente en ellos
19. Nuevos amigos es algo
Que puedo hacer fácilmente
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Tengo dificultades en hacerlo
20. Cuando es necesario
No tengo a nadie que me pueda ayudar
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Siempre tengo alguien que me puede ayudar
21. Estoy en mi mejor momento cuando
Tengo un objetivo claro por el cual luchar
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Puedo tomar un día a la vez
22. Conocer a gente nueva es
Difícil para mí £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Algo en lo que soy bueno
23. Cuando estoy con otros
Me río fácilmente £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Rara la vez que me río
24. Cuando empiezo cosas nuevas / proyectos
Rara vez que planeo con anticipación, sólo empiezo
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Prefiero tener un plan completo
25. Al enfrentarse a otras personas, mi familia actúa
No se apoyan unos a otros
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Son fieles uno al otro
98
26. Para mí, pensar en buenos temas de conversación es
Difícil £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Fácil
27. Mis amigos/familiares
Aprecian mis cualidades
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ No aprecian mis cualidades
28. Soy bueno a Organizar mi tiempo
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Perder mi tiempo
29. En mi familia nos gusta
Hacer las cosas solos
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Hacer cosas juntos
30. Reglas y rutinas regulares
Están ausente en mi vida diaria
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Simplifican mi vida diaria
31. Durante los tiempos difíciles tiendo a
Ver todo obscuro £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Encontrar algo bueno que me ayuda a crecer / prosperar
32. Mis metas para el futuro son
Un poco claras £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Muy bien pensadas
33. Eventos en mi vida que yo no puedo cambiar
Trato de aceptarlos
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Son una fuente constante de preocupación
99
APPENDIX F
Connor-Davison Escala de Adaptación (CD-RISC-10CA)
The CD-RISC-10CA is is protected by author. Contact Dr. Jonathan Davidson at mail@cd-
risc.com to request permission to use and obtain a copy of the scale.
100
APPENDIX G
The World Health Organization Quality of Life in Spanish (WHOQOL-BREF in Spanish)
101
102
APPENDIX H
Demographic Questionnaire
1. Age: _____________
2. Gender: ______Male (1) ______Female (2) ______Other (3)
3. Marital Status: ______Married (1) ______Co-habituated (2) ______Divorced (3)
______
Widow (4) ______Single (5)
4. Ethnicity: ______Mexican (1) ______Mexican-American (2) ______Other (3)
5. Nationality: ______United States (1) ______Mexican (2) ______
United States and Mexican (3) _____Other (4)
6. Residency Status: ______U.S. Citizen (1) ______Permanent Resident (2) ______
Undocumented (3) ______Tourist Visa (4) ______Other (5)
7. How long have you lived in the United States? ______Less than a year (1)
______1-2 years (2) ______ 2-5 years (3) ______5-10 years (4) ___More than 10
years (5)
8. ¿Do you live with your immideate family (with your spouse and/or children)? ____Yes (1) ____No (2)
9. Do you have children? ____Yes (1) ____No (2) a. If so, how many? ______
10. Do you move to follow the harvest? ______Yes (1) ______ No (2)
103
APPENDIX I
Latino Values Scale (LVS) INSTRUCTIONS: Use the scale below to indicate the extent to which you agree with the value expressed in each statement. 1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = agree 4 = strongly agree _____1. One does not need to follow one’s cultural customs. _____2. One does not need to be loyal to one’s cultural origin. _____3. One’s bond with one’s cultural group must be very strong. _____4. One must preserve one’s cultural heritage. _____5. One should never lose one’s language of origin. _____6. One should work to preserve the language of one’s ethnic group. _____7. A man must provide for his family financially. _____8. One should be able to question one’s elders. _____9. One should never bring shame upon one’s family. _____10. One does not need to practice one’s cultural celebrations. _____11. A man’s strength comes from being a good father and husband. _____12. One does not need to be emotionally affectionate to familiar individuals. _____13. A woman should sacrifice everything for her family. _____14. One’s successes should be attributed to one’s family. _____15. A mother must keep the family unified. _____16. One does not need to always present oneself as likeable to others. _____17. A woman is considered the backbone of the family. _____18. One’s family is the main source of one’s identity. _____19. One must not offend others. _____20. One does not need to always be cordial to others. _____21. One must defer to one’s elders for advice. _____22. One does not need to have faith in premonitions. _____23. One must maintain a sense of interdependence with one’s group. _____24. One does not need to trust a higher being. _____25. One does not need to maintain one’s cultural traditions. _____26. One does not need to always support one’s group. _____27. One must help one’s group to achieve its goals. _____28. One does not need to always avoid conflict with others. _____29. A woman must be a source of strength for her family. _____30. One should be respectful to people who have a higher status. _____31. One should never offend one’s elders. _____32. A woman does not need to successfully endure all adversity. _____33. A woman should be the spiritual leader in the family. _____34. One does not need to preserve the customs of one’s cultural background. _____35. One must be proud of one’s cultural group.
104
APPENDIX J
Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans II (ARSMA-II) in English
105
106
APPENDIX K
The Daily Spiritual Experience Scale The DSES is protected by author. Please see below: © Lynn Underwood For permission to copy see www.dsescale.org
107
APPENDIX L
Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA) in English Resilience Scale for Adults Please think of how you usually are, or how you have been the last month, how you think and feel about yourself, and about important people surrounding you. Please check the option box that is closest to the end statement that describes you best. Name: Today’s date: Age: Gender: female/male
1. My plans for the future are difficult to accomplish
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ possible to accomplish
2. When something unforeseen happens
I always find a solution
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ I often feel bewildered
3. My family’s understanding of what is important in life is
quite different than mine
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ very similar to mine
4. I feel that my future looks very promising £ £ £ £ £ £ £ uncertain 5. My future goals I know how to
accomplish £ £ £ £ £ £ £ I am unsure how
to accomplish 6. I can discuss personal issues with no one £ £ £ £ £ £ £ friends/family-
members 7. I feel very happy with
my family £ £ £ £ £ £ £ very unhappy
with my family 8. I enjoy being together with
other people £ £ £ £ £ £ £ by myself
9. Those who are good at encouraging me are
some close friends/family
members
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ nowhere
10. The bonds among my friends is weak £ £ £ £ £ £ £ strong 11. My personal problems are unsolvable £ £ £ £ £ £ £ I know how to
solve 12. When a family member experiences crisis/emergency
I am informed right away
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ it takes quite a while before I am told
13. My family is characterized by disconnection £ £ £ £ £ £ £ healthy coherence
14. To be flexible in social settings is not important to me
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ is really important to me
15. I get support from friends/family members
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ No one
16. In difficult periods my family keeps a positive outlook on the
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ Views the future as gloomy
108
future 17. My abilities I strongly
believe in £ £ £ £ £ £ £ I am uncertain
about 18. My judgements and decision I often doubt £ £ £ £ £ £ £ I trust
completely 19. New friendships are something I make easily £ £ £ £ £ £ £ I have difficulty
making 20. When needed, I have no one who can
help me £ £ £ £ £ £ £ always someone
who can help me 21. I am at my best when I have a clear goal
to strive for £ £ £ £ £ £ £ can take one
day at a time 22. Meeting new people is difficult for me £ £ £ £ £ £ £ something I am
good at 23. When I am with others I easily laugh £ £ £ £ £ £ £ I seldom laugh 24. When I start on new things/projects
I rarely plan ahead, just get on with it
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ I prefer to have a thorough plan
25. Facing other people, our family acts
unsupportive of one another
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ loyal towards one another
26. For me, thinking of good topics for conversation is
difficult £ £ £ £ £ £ £ easy
27. My close friends/family members appreciate my qualities
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ dislike my qualities
28. I am good at organizing my time
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ wasting my time
29. In my family we like to do things on our own
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ do things together
30. Rules and regular routines are absent in my everyday life
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ simplify my everyday life
31. In difficult periods I have a tendency to
view everything gloomy
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ find something good that help me thrive/ prosper
32. My goals for the future are unclear £ £ £ £ £ £ £ well thought through
33. Events in my life that I cannot influence
I manage to come to terms
with
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ are a constant source of worry/concern
109
APPENDIX M
Connor-Davidson Scale-10 (CD-RSC-10)in English The CD-RISC-10 is protected by author. Contact Dr. Jonathan Davidson at [email protected] to
request permission to use and obtain a copy of the scale.
110
APPENDIX N
The World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF) in English
111
112