The Emotional Guardianship of Foreign-Born and Native-Born Hispanic Youth and Its Effect on Violent Victimization

• Author: Amy S. Eggers,Ojmarrh Mitchell
• DOI: 10.1177/2153368715615192
• Date: 01 October 2016
• Published date: 01 October 2016
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

The Emotional Guardianship

of Foreign-Born and

Native-Born Hispanic

Youth and Its Effect on

Violent Victimization

Amy S. Eggers

1

and Ojmarrh Mitchell

1

Abstract

Despite numerous tests of routine activities theory, attempts to explain the rela-

tionship between Hispanic immigration and victimization are quite minimal. As such,

this study seeks to determine whether differences in violent victimization between

native-born Hispanic and foreign-born Hispanic youth are attributable to variations in

target suitability and emotional guardianship. This study expands routine activities

theory’s concept of capable guardianship by basing its operationalization on measures

related to family ties and is thus termed emotional guardianship. Using data from the

National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), the results show

native-born Hispanic youth were more likely to be violently victimized than their

foreign-born Hispanic counterparts. However, once components of routine activities

theory and neighborhood safety were entered into the model, the Hispanic youth’s

birth status was no longer significant. Prior delinquency also had the strongest direct

effect on violent victimization and served to mediate the relationship between

emotional guardianship and violent victimization.

Keywords

immigration and crime, criminological theories, Latino/Hispanic Americans, race/

ethnicity, victimization, immigration

1

Department of Criminology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA

Corresponding Author:

Amy S. Eggers, Department of Criminology, University of South Florida, 4202 East Fowler Ave, SOC107,

Tampa, FL 33620, USA.

Email: aeggers@mail.usf.edu

Race and Justice

2016, Vol. 6(4) 283-302

ªThe Author(s) 2015

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/2153368715615192

raj.sagepub.com

Introduction

As of July 2013, the Hispanic population in the United States reached 54 million,

which resulted in people of Hispanic origin becoming the largest ethnic or racial group

in the nation (2013 Population Estimates, 2014). This tremendous growth in the

Hispanic population has been driven primarily by a surge in immigration from Latin

America and the Caribbean (Rumbaut, Gonzales, Komaie, Morgan, & Tafoya-

Estrada, 2006). In 2012, about 49.8%of Hispanic adults were reported to have

been born in another country (Manuel Krogstad & Hugo Lopez, 2014). Many

Americans view the growth in Hispanic immigration with considerable consternation.

A central and often repeated concern, particularly in the media, is that Hispanic

immigrants are ‘‘crime prone’’ and Hispanic immigration has driven a rise in urban

decay, intergroup conflict, as well as crime (Klein & Naccarato, 2003; Martinez, 2002,

2006; Romer, Jamieson, & de Couteau, 1998).

Existing research, however, does not support the notion that Hispanic immigrants

are crime prone. Nearly 100 years of research has investigated the relationship

between immigrant status and involvement in crime. An early review of this body of

research conducted in the 1930s as part of ‘‘the Wickersham Commission’’ concluded

that foreign-born immigrants were less likely to be involved in offending than native-

born Americans (National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, 1931).

Recent reviews of the empirical research on this issue continue to find that foreign-

born immigrants are less involved in criminal offending than native-born Amer-

icans (Lee & Martinez, 2009; Martinez & Lee, 2000; Mears, 2002). Further, recent

research focusing strictly on Hispanics also supports the general conclusion that

foreign-born Hispanics are less involved than native-born Hispanics (Morenoff &

Astor, 2006; Rumbaut et al., 2006). Thus, the existing evidence indicates that Hispanic

immigrants do not arrive in the United States, with elevated criminal tendencies;

rather Hispanics appear to become more involved in criminal offending as they

assimilate into American society. The consistent finding that foreign-born Hispanics

have lesser involvement in crime and fewer social problems generally than native-

born Hispanics has been labeled the ‘‘immigrant paradox’’ (Markides & Coreil,

1986). Some of the earlier work on the immigrant paradox stems from the epide-

miological research of Markides and Coreil (1986). In this piece, they conclude that

despite the similarity in socioeconomic status with Blacks, the overall health (e.g.,

infant mortality and life expectancy) of Hispanics resembled that of Whites. Aside

from physical health, Hispanics were also found to enjoy better mental health. Part of

the explanation for this phenomenon is attributed to the birth status of Hispanics,

which in many cases was foreign-born. However, over time the same paradox has

emerged in criminological-based outcomes as well, particularly those related to

violence and antisocial behavior (Sampson & Bean, 2006; Vaughn, Salas-Wright,

Maynard, et al., 2014; Vaughn, Salas-Wright, DeLisi, & Maynard, 2014).

While considerable research demonstrates the immigrant paradox in offending,

there’s a dearth of research regarding whether this phenomenon exists in victimization.

As a consequence, it is largely unknown whether first-generation, foreign-born

284 Race and Justice 6(4)