Acculturative Family Distancing and Latinx Adolescents’ Behaviors: Mediation by General Family and Intergenerational Cultural Conflict

• In Event: Poster Session 14
  In Poster Session: PS 14 Topic - Family Context & Processes

Abstract

Acculturative family distancing (AFD) is the distancing between parents and youth due to different rates of acculturation and is manifested in communication difficulties and cultural values incongruence (Hwang & Wood, 2009). Conceptually, AFD is associated with youth depressive symptoms via family conflict (Hwang et al., 2010). Most of the previous research has focused on the effects of general family conflict (GFC) and lacks a consideration of intergenerational cultural conflict (ICC) on youth’s well-being. While GFC focuses on family member’s active oppositions (e.g. arguing and criticizing), it is considered a less intense form of conflict than ICC (Lawton & Gerdes, 2014). ICC is conflict based on core values and differences in culture and has been associated with youth psychological distress and educational outcomes (Lui, 2015). Although AFD has been linked to lower self-esteem, academic performance, and life satisfaction among Asian-origin youth, less is known about its impact among Latinx youth. The present study aims to expand the literature on AFD by examining its relation to Latinx youth’s reports of internalizing and externalizing problem behaviors and the mediating impact of GFC and ICC. First, it is expected that AFD will be associated with problem behaviors. Next, it is anticipated that GFC and ICC will mediate the relationship between AFD and problem behaviors. Finally, ICC will be a stronger mediator than GFC.
Participants (n = 150, Mage = 14.24 years, SDage = .55, 55% female) were recruited from a secondary school in California’s Central Valley and reported on AFD (Hwang, 2006), GFC (Robin & Foster, 1989), ICC (Basáñez et. al., 2013) and problem behaviors (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001).
First, multiple regression analyses (see Table 1) indicated that AFD was positively associated with internalizing (Model 1a) and externalizing (Model 1e) problems. Next, analyses of indirect effects (Hayes, 2017) indicated that when examined separately, GFC (b = 2.56, SE = 1.70, 95% CI [.41, 4.89]) and ICC (b = 2.93, SE = 1.01, 95% CI [1.13, 4.04]) explained the relation between AFD and adolescents’ internalizing problem behavior (Models 1b and 1c, respectively). However, when considered simultaneously, only the indirect effect of ICC (b = 2.43, SE = 1.12, 95% CI [.52, 4.89]) remained significant (Model 1d). Additionally, for externalizing problem behavior, results indicated that GFC (b = 2.28, SE = .86, 95% CI [.76, 4.10]) and ICC (b = 2.93, SE = 1.01, 95% CI [1.13, 4.04]) explained separately the relation between AFD and externalizing problem behavior (Models 1f and 1g, respectively). However, when considered simultaneously, the indirect effect of ICC (b = 1.71, SE = .86, 95% CI [.13, 3.51]) was the only one to remain significant (Model 1h).
Overall, findings support the importance of examining AFD among Latinx families and youth. Results indicate that ICC appears to be a stronger explanatory mechanism in the relation between AFD and adolescents’ problem behaviors, when taking into account the influence of GFC. Thus, studying AFD and its influence on youth will allow for the development of group-focused support programs.

Authors

• Emely Covarrubias, University of California Merced
  Presenting Author

• Yaritza Bautista Reyes, California State University, Fresno
  Non-Presenting Author

• Sebastian Borja, California State University of Fresno
  Non-Presenting Author

• Rosa I Toro, California State University, Fresno
  Non-Presenting Author