Family Profiles of Cohesion and Parenting Practices and Latino Youth Adjustment

• Author: Peter S.Y. Kim,Carolyn S. Henry,Mayra Y. Bámaca‐Colbert,Tovah Sands,Melinda Gonzales‐Backen,Scott W. Plunkett,Martha Zapata Roblyer
• Published date: 01 September 2018
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12314
• Date: 01 September 2018

Family Profiles of Cohesion and Parenting Practices

and Latino Youth Adjustment

MAYRA Y. B



AMACA-COLBERT

*

MELINDA GONZALES-BACKEN

†

CAROLYN S. HENRY

‡

PETER S.Y. KIM

*

MARTHA ZAPATA ROBLYER

§

SCOTT W. PLUNKETT

¶

TOVAH SANDS

**

Using a sample of 279 (52% female) Latino youth in 9th grade (M=14.57, SD =.56), we

examined profiles of family cohesion and parenting practices and their relation to youth

adjustment. The results of latent profile analyses revealed four family profiles: Engaged,

Supportive, Intrusive, and Disengaged. Latino youth in the Supportive family profile

showed most positive adjustment (highest self-esteem and lowest depressive symptoms), fol-

lowed by youth in the Engaged family profile. Youth in the Intrusive and Disengaged pro-

files showed the lowest levels of positive adjustment. The findings contribute to the current

literature on family dynamics, family profiles, and youth psychological adjustment within

specific ethnic groups.

Keywords: Latino; Adolescence; Family Cohesion; Parenting; Family Profiles

Fam Proc 57:719–736, 2018

*Department of Human Development and Family Studies, The Pennsylvania State University, University

Park, PA.

†

Department of Family and Child Sciences, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.

‡

Department of Human Development and Family Science and Center for Family Resilience, Oklahoma State

University, Stillwater, OK.

§

Center for Family Resilience, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK.

¶

Department of Psychology, California State University, Northridge, Northridge, CA.

**Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling, California State University, Northridge, Northridge,

CA.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Mayra Y. B

amaca-Colbert, Department

of Human Development and Family Studies, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.

E-mail: myb12@psu.edu

This research was supported by a faculty diversity supplement (R01 DA017902 09S1) and a training

grant (R25 DA026401) both of which were funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) and the

Masonic Chair at Oklahoma State University. Intellectual contributions are as follow: Dr. B

amaca-Colbert

conceived of the study, participated in the design and interpretation of the data, and drafted the manu-

script; Dr. Gonzales-Backen was involved in the analyses, interpretation, and write-up of methods and

results; Dr. Henry was involved in the conception and write up of the paper as well as conceptualizing and

drafting the implications. Mr. Kim was involved in the conception of the paper, performed preliminary

analyses, and conducted literature reviews; Dr. Zapata Roblyer was involved in literature reviews on key

constructs and provided feedback on earlier drafts; Dr. Plunkett was involved in data collection efforts,

conception of the paper, and writing of the manuscript; Dr. Sands was involved in the selection of mea-

sures for larger study and data collection efforts.

719

Family Process, Vol. 57, No. 3, 2018 ©2017 Family Process Institute

doi: 10.1111/famp.12314

INTRODUCTION

As the United States moves toward a majority population of ethnic minority groups

(Passel, Cohn, & Center, 2008), research on adaptive family patterns for ethnic

minority children is flourishing (Chao & Otsuki-Clutter, 2011). Latinos will be a signifi-

cant 29% of this population (Passel et al., 2008). Of concern is Latino youth’s risk for

depressive symptoms (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2013) and low self-

esteem (Greene & Way, 2005). Given that the family context is critical for youth psycho-

logical adjustment (Aquilino & Supple, 2001), distinguishing family patterns that prom ote

Latino youth adjustment is imperative.

An important family context is parenting, which coalesces into parenting types or pro-

files associated with various youth outcomes (Baumrind, 2013; Morris, Cui, & Steinberg,

2013). Research indicates mixed results regarding the most prominent Latino parenti ng

profiles in the United States. Some researchers showed authoritative parenting, or

responsiveness to the child while setting behavioral expectations that foster autonomy, to

be most prominent; whereas others showed additional prevalent Latino parenting types.

Controlling for socioeconomic status (SES), Varela et al. (2004) found authoritarian par-

enting, or parental authority with low responsiveness to the child, to be the second most

common style after authoritative parenting among U.S. Mexican-origin parents of chil-

dren ages 10–14 years. In another study of mostly low-income Latino fathers and mothers

of young children, 61% of parents used a protective parenting style combining features of

authoritative and authoritarian parenting (i.e., warm and responsive parenting along

with emphasis on parental authority), and another 31% used authoritative parenting

(Domenech Rodr~

ıguez, Donovick, & Crowley, 2009). Finally, a study of Mexican American

fifth graders and their parents showed that after controlling for SES, mothers and fathers

tended to use authoritative parenting (White, Zeiders, Gonzales, Tein, & Roosa, 2013).

The results revealed a “no-nonsense” parenting style consisting of high parental expecta-

tions for child compliance, high acceptance of the child, and moderate harsh parenting

(i.e., punitive or demeaning techniques), yielding the authors to conclude that Latino par-

enting is uniquely packaged to successfully socialize children in context.

In a rare longitudinal study with African American and Mexican American families,

Gorman-Smith, Tolan, Henry, and Florsheim (2000) combined family system qualities

and parenting variables into family profiles. They uncovered four family clusters and

examined associations with child outcomes. After controlling for SES, Mexican American

families were more prevalent among the moderately functioning families (i.e., adequate

discipline and monitoring over time and increased cohesion and beliefs about importance

of family) and struggling families (i.e., low in discipline, structure, cohesion , and beliefs

about the family). This study did not examine which profiles within ethnic groups were

most closely aligned with youth adjustment. Building on this research, we proposed that

Latino fathers’ and mothers’ parenting interface with the family system’s emotional cli-

mate.

Using adolescents’ perceptions of family cohesion and parenting, we identified profiles

of family cohesion, mothers’ parenting, and fathers’ parenting. We examined whether pro-

file membership differed by adolescent gender, nativity, or parental education level, and

whether there was an association between the identified profiles and youth depression

and self-esteem. The current study extends research about parenting styles in Latino fam-

ilies in three key ways. First, we used latent profile analysis, a person-centered approach,

to identify family and parenting patterns that arise from the data rather than aggregating

data into means. This allowed for identifying family profiles that may be unique to Latino

families. Second, we incorporated family cohesion with the parenting variables to identify

family profiles involved at multiple levels of family systems (parent–child subsystem and

www.FamilyProcess.org

720

/

FAMILY PROCESS