Psychoecological Model of Alcohol Use in Mexican American Adolescents
- 420 Downloads
In this study, we proposed and tested a structural model based on Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory in order to further understand alcohol use among Hispanic adolescents, who are at greater risk of alcohol use than adolescents of other racial/ethnic groups. Family cohesion, school connectedness, and peer influence were conceptualized as three primary process factors, while psychological distress was used as a mediating factor and Mexican culture orientation as a cultural factor. The sample comprised 444 Mexican American adolescents (aged 16–20) living along the U.S./Mexico border. The proposed model explained 33 % of the variance in alcohol use. Most of the hypothesized relationships in the proposed model were supported: (a) low family cohesion had significant indirect effects mediated through psychological distress, poor school connectedness, and negative peer influence; (b) poor school connectedness had significant indirect effects mediated through psychological distress and negative peer influence; (c) psychological distress had a significant direct effect as well as a significant indirect effect mediated through negative peer influence; and (d) negative peer influence had the strongest direct effect. However, contrary to the hypothesis, Mexican culture orientation was not a protective factor, but rather had a significant positive relationship with negative peer influence. Lastly, it was found that gender, school status, Anglo cultural orientation, and severity of alcohol use did not have any moderating effects. Based on the collective findings, suggestions for primary prevention programs designed to reduce underage drinking among Mexican American youth were given.
KeywordsMexican American adolescents Alcohol use Psychoecological model Cultural orientation
This research was partially supported by grant 1461 from the Paso Del Norte Health Foundation, Center for Border Health Research, 1100 N. Stanton #410, El Paso, TX 79902.
- Babor, T. F., De La Fuente, J. R., Saunders, J. B., & Grant, M. (1989). AUDIT—The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test: Guidelines for use in primary health care. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
- Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. (1998). Handbook of child psychology: Volume 1: Theoretical models of human development (5th edn., pp. 993–1028). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 793–828). New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Brook, J. S., Brook, D. W., Richter, L., & Whiteman, M. (2003). Risk and protective factors of adolescent drug use: Implications for prevention programs. In Z. Sloboda & W. J. Bukoski (Eds.), Handbook of drug abuse prevention: Theory, science, and practice (pp. 265–287). New York, NY: Plenum.Google Scholar
- Brown, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009). Youth Risk Behavior Survey. Retrieved August 15, 2010, from http://www.cdc.gov/yrbs.
- Hawkins, J. D., Herrenkohl, T. I., Farrington, D. P., Brewer, D., Catalano, R. F., Harachi, T. W., & Cothern, L. (2000, April). Predictors of youth violence. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
- Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2012). Monitoring the future national survey results on drug use, 1975–2011: Volume I, secondary school students. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan.Google Scholar
- Ketterlinus, R. D., Lamb, M. E., & Nitz, K. A. (1994). Adolescent nonsexual and sex-related problem behaviors: Their prevalence, consequences, and co-occurrence. In R. D. Ketterlinus & M. E. Lamb (Eds.), Adolescent problem behaviors: Issues and research (pp. 17–39). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Montanez, M., Devall, E., & Van Leeuwen, D. M. (2010). Social capital: Strengthening Mexican-American families through parenting education. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 102, 27–33.Google Scholar
- Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus user’s guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
- Olson, D. H., McCubbin, H. I., Barnes, H., Larsen, A., Muxem, A., & Wilson, M. (1992). Family inventories (2nd ed.). St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota, Family Social Science.Google Scholar
- Pong, S., & Zeiser, K. L. (2012). Student engagement, school climate, and academic achievement of immigrants’ children. In C. García Coll & A. K. Marks (Eds.), The immigrant paradox in children and adolescents: Is becoming American a developmental risk? (pp. 209–232). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Contemporary approaches to assessing mediation in communication research. In A. F. Hayes, M. D. Slater, & L. B. Snyder (Eds.), The Sage sourcebook of advanced data analysis methods for communication research (pp. 13–54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Tyler, K. M., Boelter, C. M., & Boykin, A. W. (2008). Linking teachers’ perceptions of educational value discontinuity to low-income middle school students’ academic engagement & self-efficacy. Middle Grades Research Journal, 3, 1–20.Google Scholar
- Wanberg, K. W. (1992). Adolescent self assessment profile. Arvada, CO: Center for Alcohol/Drug Abuse and Evaluation.Google Scholar