Clinical Child and Family Psychology, Vol. 10, No.

2, June 2007 (
2007)

DOI: 10.1007/s10567-007-0021-9

The Ethnic Context of Child and Adolescent Problem Behavior:

Implications for Child and Family Interventions

Miwa Yasui,1,2 and Thomas J. Dishion1

This article links the empirical literature on race and ethnicity in developmental psychopa-
thology with interventions designed to reduce adolescent problem behavior. We present a
conceptual framework in which culture is endogenous to the socialization of youth and the
development of specific self-regulatory strategies. The importance of cultural influence is
identified at three levels: (a) intrapersonal developmental processes (e.g., ethnic identity
development, development of coping modifies mechanisms and self-regulatory mechanisms),
(b) family socialization processes (e.g., racial and ethnic socialization), and (c) interaction with
larger societal contexts (e.g., maintenance of bicultural competence in adapting to mainstream
and ethnic cultures). We discuss limitations of current assessment and intervention practices
that focus on reducing adolescent problem behavior with respect to the cultural issues iden-
tified above. We propose that empirically supported adaptive and tailored interventions for
adolescent problem behavior are optimal for serving multicultural children and families. To
empower such interventions to better serve children and families of color, it is essential that
assessments that guide the adaptation and tailoring process include culturally salient dynamics
such as ethnic identity, racial socialization, and culturally informed parenting practices.

KEY WORDS: child and family interventions; culture; ethnic minority youth; resilience; self-regulation

INTRODUCTION applying mainstream theories and norms to under-

Our current developmental and intervention
models for child and adolescent problem behavior are
underdeveloped with respect to integrating into their
core formulations the unique experiences of ethnic
minority children and families. Mainstream devel-
opmental models do not incorporate multilevel cul-
tural influences experienced by the ethnic minority
child, such as the intergenerational transmission of
culturally specific values and traditions, challenges of
the acculturative process, and the negative impact of
discrimination. More often than not, developmental
science has taken the ‘‘one model fits all’’ approach,
1 ing ethnicity and culture in development and
Child and Family Center, University of Oregon, 195 West 12th
Avenue, Eugene, OR, 97401-3408, USA
2
To whom correspondence should be addressed;
e-mail: miwipiwi@uoregon.edu
stand developmental processes of ethnic minority
youth. The result has been race-comparative research
that perceives ethnic differences as an indication of
socialization and cultural deficits (Bronfenbrenner,
1986). This ‘‘cultural deviant’’ perspective in which
ethnic minority youth are perceived to fall short of
the mainstream standards of healthy child adjustment
is often an implicitly dominant perspective within
developmental psychopathology and research on
intervention science. Empirically supported inter-
ventions are habitually designed to serve majority
(mostly of European descent and culture) children
and families, and then adapted post hoc to serve the
needs of specific ethnic groups of children and fami-
lies. Clearly, a more general framework for address-
intervention science is needed.
Researchers interested in the ethnicity, cultural,
and minority/majority issues have begun to address

137
1096-4037/07/0600-0137/0
2007 Springer ScienceþBusiness Media, LLC
138
this dilemma by identifying normative and adaptive
developmental pathways among ethnic minority
youth. This article provides an overview of ethnic
minority familial socialization and highlights the
centrality of culture in the ecology of ethnic minority
youth. Culture permeates the ecology of all youth,
but is especially salient for those of minority ethnic
status, who are more likely to be aware of the power
of culture on assumptions and daily behavior. Youth
who are in the minority with respect to ethnicity and
race often experience parental socialization practices
that diverge from those of the mainstream culture,
political and economic challenges, discrimination,
and acculturation stress; they bridge two or more
worlds and confront implicit and explicit challenges
inherent to their position and status.
The goal of this article is not to simply list these
challenges, but rather to provide a framework that
will promote a scientific dialectic that routinely
incorporates and tests cultural variation in develop-
mental and intervention science. We will review the
current literature across Asian American, Latino,
African American, and Native American families,
highlighting culturally specific conceptualizations of
adaptive and functional child development through
the examination of culturally grounded socialization
practices, cultural familial values, and sociocultural
variables that influence the developmental pathways
of youth of color. Further, we will examine the
importance of these cultural variables in areas of
family-centered intervention and assessment.
We propose a conceptual framework for under-
standing the developmental pathways unique to eth-
nic minority youth and their families. The framework
will describe how culture is endogenous to the
socialization of all youth and central to the devel-
opment of specific self-regulatory strategies and
problem behavior. The centrality of culture and cul-
tural influence is revealed on the following three
ecological levels: (a) internal developmental processes
(e.g., development of racial and ethnic identity,
development of coping skills and self-regulatory
mechanisms), (b) familial socializing contexts (e.g.,
racial and ethnic socialization), and (c) interaction
with larger societal contexts (e.g., maintenance of
bicultural competence in adapting to mainstream and
ethnic cultures). Specifically, we will focus on ethnic
minority groupsÕ experiences of discrimination and
oppression, ethnic minority status and its resulting
effects, and the development and maintenance of
adaptive strategies (e.g., cultural values, bicultural
competence) that promote resiliency in ethnic
Yasui and Dishion
minority children and families. We will examine these
influences as they apply during adolescence, when
sociocultural influences play significant roles in
shaping oneÕs coping ability, psychological adjust-
ment, and identity development.
Second, our proposed conceptual framework
addresses current conceptual and methodological
challenges in the field of developmental and clinical
psychology that arise when conducting ethnic
minority research. The limitations of current theo-
retical models of child development for ethnic
minority youth have spurred the conceptualization of
a more adaptive model for understanding how cul-
turally specific influences within the familial context
promote resiliency and self-regulation among all
youth in general, and ethnic minority youth in par-
ticular. In addition, we will address the limitations of
current methodologies in assessment and intervention
research and discuss the critical need to incorporate
culturally anchored methods in assessments and
interventions involving ethnic minority youth. Thus
we draw on a theoretical model to identify the key
elements critical to conducting culturally sensitive
interventions with children and families.
Conceptualizing Culture
Within developmental research, several models
of child development have served as an anchor for
understanding adaptive development in ethnic
minority children. BronfenbrennerÕs (1979, 1986,
1989) ecological systems theory describes the child as
developing within a multilevel system of relation-
ships, behavior settings, and more general commu-
nity contexts. The model describes the child as
embedded within ‘‘layers’’ of environment, which
include the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and
macrosystem. The ecological theory is comprehensive
in describing how various contexts can impact a
childÕs development; however, when examining the
developmental pathways of ethnic minority youth,
the model does not fully address the presence of
cultural influences that permeate each contextual le-
vel and that stimulate the developmental path of the
child. In the ecological model, culture is described as
part of the macrosystem, and its influences are
experienced through the interactions of other layers.
Cultural influences on child development can
also be described by using the ‘‘developmental niche’’
model (Super & Harkness, 1986). According to Super
and Harkness (1986), the developmental niche is
a ‘‘theoretical framework for studying cultural
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
regulation of the micro-environment of the child’’
and explains cultural acquisition through three sub-
systems: (a) physical and social settings of the child,
(b) culturally regulated customs of parenting, and (c)
the psychology of the caretakers (Super & Harkness,
1986). The three subsystems work within the frame-
work of the larger environment, where external
influences such as political- or societal-level changes
impact each subsystem, and in turn these influences
are experienced by the child as changes in his or her
immediate microsystem. In the developmental niche
model, culture is viewed as a central aspect of child
development, present within each of the three mi-
crosystems directly influencing the child.
A similar model of child development proposed
by Garcia Coll and colleagues (1996) considers cul-
ture to be a central aspect of the socialization process;
that is, endogenous within the relationships that
influence child and adolescent development. Whereas
BronfenbrennerÕs ecological model identifies culture
as an exogenous macrolevel factor in which cultural
influences are experienced indirectly by means of
other contextual levels such as the mesosystem or the
microsystem, the integrative model by Garcia Coll
et al. (1996) identifies culture as a central tenant of all
environmental contexts, directly influencing the
developmental trajectory of the child. As such, cul-
tural influences are experienced by the child at each
ecological level, from the immediate microsystem-le-
vel (e.g., racial, ethnic socialization within the familial
context) to the larger macrosystem-level influences
such as social, economic, or psychological segrega-
tion, racism, discrimination, and oppression. In this
model, culture is an integral part of all subsystems of
the childÕs environment and exists on multiple levels
of analysis within individuals, within groups, and
across groups. A fluid and dynamic process occurs
between the individual and his or her culture, con-
firming the centrality of culture in child development.
Much of the empirical and theoretical work
about culture and ethnic minority status presumes the
Bronfrenbrenner framework that identifies culture as
external macrolevel influence on the development of
the child. Our conceptualization, however, is most
consistent with that articulated by Garcia Coll et al.
(1996), in which cultural influences are perceived as
embedded within various contextual levels and di-
rectly experienced. The integrative model (Garcia
Coll et al., 1996) extends Super and HarknessÕ con-
ceptualization of cultural regulation to ecological
contexts other than the microsystem, such as schools,
neighborhoods, and communities.
139
Figure 1, an overview of our conceptualization
of the importance of culture, illustrates that the key
socializing dynamics of interactions with parents,
extended family/kin, peers, spouses, community
members, and others are seen as embedded within a
cultural context and therefore vary in meaning and
impact. It is also true that the definition of child
adjustment itself is culturally embedded and charac-
terizes a particular coping pattern as acceptable (e.g.,
crying, repressing emotion, praying) or a behavior as
problematic (e.g., aggression, lying).
Understanding cultural and ethnic factors as
endogenous to key developmental processes has
implications for the development of assessment and
intervention practices that are sensitive and effective
for ethnically diverse children and families. We as-
sume that child and family interventionists have al-
ways implicitly addressed cultural issues in their
work, in that effective, sensitive, and knowledgeable
therapists work well with diverse cultural groups.
However, the science of child and family interven-
tions is predominantly based on European American
families and uses theoretical frameworks developed
from within European American perspectives of child
development. The increasing diversity of the US
population, however, makes critical an explicit
understanding of how cultural patterns may vary
across groups and mindfulness of within-group vari-
ations. It is also incumbent that we consider the
historical factors embedded within the cultural per-
spectives of children and families that bear on the
receptiveness of ethnic minority children and families
to empirically supported interventions (Duran &
Duran, 1995).
Development and psychopathology promotes
strong linkages between models of psychopathology
and intervention strategies. While conceptualizing
factors that influence the development of child and
Behavior Settings
Culturally Defined
Schools Home
Relationship Dynamics
Peers Child Spouses
Adjustment
Teachers In
Siblings
Cultural Context
Extended Parents Community
Family/ kin Members
Community Neighborhood
Fig. 1 The ecology of problem behavior
140
adolescent problem behavior, we first offer an
empirically derived model for adolescent problem
behavior that integrates resilience, self-regulation,
and prosocial coping (adapted from Dishion &
Patterson, 2006). Then we discuss specific examples
of how this model can be applied to understanding
protective factors among ethnic minority children
and families within the United States. Finally, we
discuss the implications of this perspective in terms of
redefining future research toward effective and effi-
cient child and family assessment and interventions.
AN EMPIRICAL MODEL
Overview
Figure 2 provides an update of a model recently
offered by Dishion and Patterson (2006) in a litera-
ture review on the development of problem behavior
in children and adolescents. This review established
causal status of constructs using two criteria: (a) the
constructs were found to covary with problem
behavior longitudinally, and (b) randomized inter-
ventions that target these constructs result in reduc-
tions in child and adolescent problem behavior.
Two major sets of findings require explanation
relevant to the issue of ethnicity and culture for
understanding and intervening with child and ado-
lescent problem behavior. First, the rates of problem
behaviors vary for specific ethnic groups across var-
ious contexts. For example, in some samples, African
American children were found to be more aggressive
than European American children; however, Euro-
pean American children had higher rates of substance
use and abuse (Catalano, Morrison, Wells, & Gil-
more, 1992). Second, although the literature is limited
as of this writing, most studies that included a sub-
stantial number of ethnic minority families revealed
Culturally Specific
Biosocial Self-regulation/
Traits Cultural Resilience
Problem
Sociocultural Family, Peer
Contexts
Behavior:
& Communal Timing &
and Resources Socialization Severity
Fig. 2 A model for self regulation in the development of problem
behavior
Yasui and Dishion
that all groups were responsive to family-centered
interventions (Connell, Dishion, Yasui, & Kavanagh,
2007, in press). It is yet unclear as to why, despite the
differences in frequencies of problem behaviors across
ethnicities, interventions appear to be effective with
diverse populations of children and families. These
findings reveal the importance of first, understanding
how various contextual mechanisms uniquely impact
the developmental trajectories of ethnically diverse
youth, and second, of identifying intervention com-
ponents that effectively address the specific needs of
culturally diverse families.
First, in examining differential problem behavior
outcomes among diverse youth, we propose that
ethnic differences in the prevalence of problem
behaviors are primarily a function of resilience
among children to pathogenic environment influ-
ences. We conceptualize self-regulation as a construct
that encompasses a large set of abilities that almost
certainly vary as a function of culture, ethnicity, and
minority status. In fact, cultural values, ethnic iden-
tity, and cultural traditions and routines are thought
to provide the infrastructure for the successful
learning and practice of self-regulatory strategies
(Dishion & Patterson, 2006). Growing up African
American in the context of racism and oppression,
for example, requires a unique set of prosocial coping
skills compared with growing up European Ameri-
can, primarily in a high-achieving and competitive
family context. We hypothesize that childrenÕs
development of culturally specific self-regulation
strategies is largely a function of parent and family
and communal mentoring, modeling, and socializa-
tion.
Self-regulation in children and adolescents is also
highly relevant to intervention science. Most clinical
interventions delivered directly to children and ado-
lescents focus on enhancing self-regulation and pro-
social coping and are found to successfully reduce
child and adolescent problem behavior (e.g., Kazdin,
1994; Prinz, Blechman, & Dumas, 1994). Dishion and
Stormshak (2007) focused on self-regulation in an
ecological approach to interventions with children
and families.
We will review the general model for self-regu-
lation presented in Fig. 2, linking it to the literature
on ethnic identity, racial socialization, bicultural
competence, and coping. We will describe the devel-
opment of culturally specific self-regulatory processes
observed within both intrapersonal and interpersonal
(familial socialization) contexts that foster cultural
resilience among ethnic minority youth.
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
Culturally Embedded Self-regulation
Linking concepts of self-control and self-regula-
tion to adolescent problem behavior has a long his-
tory. HirschiÕs theoretical model of adolescent
problem behavior makes self-regulation central to the
etiology of problem behavior (Hirschi, 2004). Most of
the research, however, shows that self-regulation is a
moderator variable, in that children with high levels
of self-regulation are less vulnerable to pathogenic
environments (Dishion & Patterson, 2006; Wills &
Dishion, 2004). The unique role of language in
behavior and responsiveness to the environment is a
central feature of self-regulation (Watson, 1929; Lu-
ria, 1966). Indeed, notions such as identity, goals,
values, and the like can be seen as integral compo-
nents of ‘‘relational schema’’ that form the basis of
self-regulatory strategies that guide and influence
behavior (Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, & Roche, 2001).
Racial identity and ethnic identity are key com-
ponents in the development of self-regulation and
form the basis of resilience among children of color.
Children and adults of majority status are often
unaware of the ease with which they can operate in a
social world and conduct day-to-day transactions
with individuals who may have control over their
futures and fate. As discussed earlier, children and
youth of color, in contrast, are uniquely challenged,
and the formulation of a set of rules and values that
underlie racial and ethnic identity provides a basis for
success and resilience as a minority member of a
community with a historical and cultural backdrop.
Positive attitudes about oneÕs race or ethnicity are
central to healthy psychological functioning in that
they provide a relational schema for motivating
prosocial behavior in the context of daily microag-
gressions and disadvantages (Phinney & Chavira,
1982).
Conceptual work on ethnic and racial identity
has generally focused on the development of attitudes
and beliefs related to the meaning of those identities
(Lovett, 2000, as cited in Burlew et al., 2000). Ethnic
identity and racial identity have often been inter-
changeably used in the literature, in part because each
has been similarly related to identity development in
terms of being a member of a particular (racial/eth-
nic) group. However, it is important to make clear
distinctions between what constitutes ethnicity and
race. An individualÕs ethnicity or ethnic group is
largely defined by membership in a grouping of
individuals who share historical and cultural heritage.
As such, ethnic identity refers to oneÕs self-concept in
141
the context of ethnic background. In contrast, race is
the category to which individuals are assigned on the
basis of physical characteristics, skin color, or hair
type, in addition to any resulting generalizations and
stereotypes (Helms & Talleyrand, 1997). Racial
identity, then, describes the internal psychological
processes of how individuals experience themselves as
a function of their racial categorization.
Both racial identity and ethnic identity are cen-
tral constructs in understanding resilience among
ethnic minority youth. The salience of racial identity
or ethnic identity may vary by the individual; for
example, African culture and heritage may be more
meaningful to the self-concept of immigrant Afro-
Carribean Blacks than their membership in the racial
category ‘‘Black.’’ Ethnic identity may be closely
associated with cultural transmission of cultural val-
ues, heritage, history, and traditions, yet racial iden-
tity may have important implications for how ethnic
minorities perceive racial discrimination.
Literature about racial identity describes several
models of racial identity. CrossÕs model of Black ra-
cial identity describes five stages of racial identity
development: preencounter, encounter, immersion/
emersion, internalization, and internalization-com-
mitment (Cross, 1978, 1991). Cross describes preen-
counter as the stage during which an individual
internalizes the beliefs and values of the dominant
European American culture. Thus, individuals may
seek to assimilate into White European American
culture, placing less value on their racial group
membership. The encounter stage often occurs after a
first-hand experience of racial discrimination that
forces the individual to question what it means to be
a member of a group that is targeted by racism. The
immersion/emersion stage is characterized by an ac-
tive examination of Black culture and history during
which individuals expand their definition of what it
means to be Black. Internalization is characterized by
a sense of security in oneÕs own racial identity, and
individuals are open to developing interracial rela-
tionships with others who acknowledge their identi-
fication with their racial group. Last, individuals in
the internalization-commitment stage extend their
commitment to their racial group through plans and
actions that cater to the concerns of Blacks as a group
(Cross, 1991).
Helms (1995) introduced the People of Color
Racial Identity model that describes five statuses of
racial identity development: conformity, dissonance,
immersion–emersion, internalization, and integrative
awareness. Conformity status includes individuals
142
who align themselves with the dominant White
American culture and reject their own racial group.
Dissonance status applies to those who often expe-
rience conflict with both their racial group and the
dominant White group. Immersion–emersion status
is characterized by immersion in oneÕs own race and
culture and rejection of the dominant White culture.
Internalization status describes those who have a se-
cure and positive sense of racial group membership
and are able to respond objectively to those outside
their racial group. Finally, integrative awareness
status describes individuals who place high value on
their racial identity while acknowledging similarities
between themselves and other racially oppressed
groups.
Racial identity has been conceptually related to
ethnic minority psychological adjustment (Cross,
Parham, & Helms, 1998; White & Parham, 1990).
Using the Racial Identity Attitudes Scale (RIAS),
Pyant and Yanico (1991) found that scores for the
pre-encounter stage of racial identity were negatively
associated with psychological well being and higher
self-esteem but positively associated with depressive
symptoms. Resnicow and colleagues (1999) found
that individuals who reported more positive attitudes
about being African American tended to exhibit more
antidrug attitudes. Similarly, Belgrave et al. (1994)
found that African American individuals who more
strongly endorsed Africentric values reported more
negative attitudes about drug use. Numerous other
positive psychological outcomes have also been
associated with racial identity development (Castro,
Sharp, Barrington, Walton, & Rawson, 1991; Gary &
Berry, 1984). Overall, these findings indicate that
racial identity development serves as a critical ele-
ment in the psychological adjustment for ethnic
minority youth.
Ethnic Identity Development
The ethnic identity literature has emphasized the
importance for minority group members to examine
and question preexisting attitudes and assumptions
about ethnicity as a necessary step toward identity
achievement (Atkinson, Morten, & Sue, 1993; Cross,
1991; Phinney, 1989). PhinneyÕs (1989) model of
ethnic identity development describes four stages that
outline the extent to which individuals are committed
to and have explored the meaning of their ethnicity:
diffused stage, foreclosure, moratorium, and an
achieved ethnic identity. Individuals in the diffused
stage have not explored the meaning of their ethnicity
Yasui and Dishion
and are not committed to a particular identity
meaning. Foreclosure is a stage during which indi-
viduals take on without questioning the values and
attitudes to which they have been exposed. Attitudes
toward others and about oneÕs own group depend
largely on socialization in the family and the social
context (Phinney, Ferguson, & Tate, 1997). The
moratorium stage is characterized by individuals
becoming deeply interested in knowing about their
ethnic group. Exploration and reexamination of the
history, culture, and social positioning of their group
within mainstream society promote the awareness of
ethnicity and group membership. Individuals at this
stage, however, have not reached a point of com-
mitment to a specific ethnic identity definition. Last,
the achieved ethnic identity stage describes a secure
commitment to oneÕs group based on understanding
obtained through an active exploration of oneÕs eth-
nicity (Phinney, 1996). This final stage of ethnic
identity achievement involves the acceptance and
internalization of oneÕs ethnicity. Minority individu-
als who have achieved this stage develop a secure,
confident sense of themselves as members of their
group. They hold positive, yet realistic, views of their
group, abandon their anger toward the majority
group, and are generally open to other groups
(Phinney, 1996).
This developmental process of achieving ethnic
identity is important because of its implication in the
overall adjustment of minority group adolescents.
Empirical evidence has shown a consistent positive,
although modest, correlation between ethnic identity
and self-esteem (Belgrave et al., 1994; Phinney,
Cantu, & Kurtz, 1997; Wright, 1985). Phinney and
Kohatsu (1997) describe the initial stage of unexam-
ined or diffuse ethnic identity as characterized by low
self-regard and feelings of inadequacy, whereas the
final stage of ethnic identity achievement typically is
associated with a positive self-concept and absence of
psychological distress. In a study by Phinney (1989)
of 10th grade African American, Asian American,
and Mexican American adolescents, subjects at more
advanced stages of ethnic identity were found to have
significantly higher scores on all four subscales of a
measure of psychological adjustment (Self-evalua-
tion, Sense of Mastery, Family Relations, and Social
Relations). A similar relationship between ethnic
identity search and commitment and self-esteem was
found among college students from four ethnic
groups (Asian American, African American, Mexican
American, and European American), and the rela-
tionship was found to be stronger among the
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
minority group students than among the European
American students (Phinney & Alipuria, 1990).
Phinney and Chavira (1982) found that adolescents
with high ethnic identity had higher self-esteem and
used more active strategies in dealing with threats
such as discrimination and stereotypes than did those
with low ethnic identity.
The evidence establishing the protective effects of
racial and ethnic identity suggests these constructs
serve as important dimensions in the regulation of
youth psychological adjustment. Developing a secure
self-concept thus provides a critical foundation from
which ethnic minority youth can explore and acquire
critical self-regulatory skills. Unlike most models of
identity, self-esteem, or self-concept, however, we
propose that this aspect of self-regulation is largely
unconsciously enacted in daily interactions (Bargh &
Williams, 2006), and therefore self-reports are only
partially useful. The automaticity of racial identity
and ethnic identity is, we think, largely a function of
its basis in family and extended-family interactions
and daily communications that occurs in the context
of socialization.
Familial Socialization
Family Socialization and Problem Behavior
Child and adolescent self-regulation and prob-
lem behavior are mutual outcomes of immediate,
extended family, peer, and communal socialization
processes. Literature about child development sug-
gests that inconsistent, erratic, and harsh parenting
practices, excessive levels of parental control, and
parent–child conflict are parental factors that lead to
the development of problem behavior and depressive
symptoms (Patterson, 1995; Sanders, Dadds, John-
ston, & Cash, 1992). For example, family conflict has
been related to adolescent externalizing problems,
including aggression, antisocial behavior, and con-
duct problems, and further, internalizing problems
such as depression, anxiety, and low self-esteem
(Barrera, Li, & Chassin, 1995; Jenkins & Smith,
1990). Adolescents who engage in delinquent behav-
iors are reported as more likely to live with families
identified as having lower levels of parental moni-
toring and parental warmth and higher levels of
parent–child conflict, inconsistent discipline, and
higher levels of parental psychological control (Hill,
Howell, Hawkins, & Battin-Pearson, 1999; Lahey,
Gordon, Loeber, Stouthamer-Loeber, & Farrington,
143
1999; Walker-Barnes & Mason, 2001). Similarly,
Mason and colleagues (1994) reported that even after
controlling for the neighborhood context, family
conflict was predictive of child externalizing behavior.
Negative parenting practices such as these are re-
ported to be highly associated with high levels of
stress; for example, Webster-Stratton & Hammond
(1988) found that mothers with high levels of stress
were more controlling and more punitive with their
children than were mothers who reported less stress.
Similarly, Weinraub & Wolf (1983) found that
mothers who experienced more stressful life events
were less responsive to their children.
The absence of negative parenting practices in
the family, however, does not necessarily translate
into growth in positive child behavior and abilities. A
growing body of literature suggests that a childÕs
development of self-regulation is a critical step to-
ward prosocial behavior and psychosocial adjustment
in home and school through childhood and adoles-
cence (Barkley, 2001; Eisenberg, Fabes, Guthrie, &
Reiser, 2000; Rothbart, Ellis, & Posner, 2004; Wills &
Dishion, 2003). Less is known about the parenting
factors associated with the emergence of childrenÕs
self-regulation, although it is likely linked with the
development of prosocial behavior, including
behaviors such as induction of empathy, proactive
structuring, scaffolding, and other positive parenting
practices (Eisenberg & Fabes, 1998; Rothbart &
Bates, 1998). Thus, within the familial environment,
fostering the growth of cultural resilience involves
both the integration of adaptive family management
and the development of positive, culturally embedded
self-regulatory abilities in the child. Especially for
ethnic minority youth, achieving resilience involves
not only acquiring the many aspects of self-regulation
that are likely to be universally beneficial to children
and adolescents (e.g., the ability to inhibit prepotent
responses in the social interactions), but also acquir-
ing unique skills and competencies that are particu-
larly appropriate for coping with daily
‘‘microaggressions’’ (Walters, Simoni, & Evans-
Campbell, 2002) that may occur, as well as negoti-
ating multiple cultural worlds (Szapocznik, Kurtines,
et al., 1997). To understand culturally grounded
socialization practices that foster effective family
management and self-regulatory skills, it is pertinent
that we examine the sociocultural context of the
ethnic minority family and the culturally embedded
socialization practices that foster the development of
cultural resilience and self-regulation.
144
Culturally Grounded Parenting Practices for Minority
Youth
In addition to the basic parenting processes that
involve balancing and regulating the demands that
come from within and outside the family, ethnic
minority families encounter multiple sociocultural
influences that shape their experiences into those that
differ from mainstream families. Discrimination,
prejudice, poverty, acculturation, lack of accessible
resources, and language barriers are some examples
of external influences that affect ethnic minority
families. Not only that, ethnic minority parents bring
to their family context internal cultural elements such
as cultural beliefs, attitudes, values, family roles, and
cultural expectations about childrearing that are
central to the development of ethnic minority chil-
dren. Both external and internal cultural influences
affect parenting processes and family functioning of
ethnic minority families in ways that deviate from
mainstream European American families. Because of
their ‘‘deviation’’ from normative European Ameri-
can familial processes, ethnic minority families are
often perceived as having deficits that are attributed
to ethnicity, culture, or race (Thomas, 1929). This
‘‘cultural deviant’’ perspective, in which ethnic
minority families are evaluated as maladaptive or as
falling short of the mainstream standards of healthy
child adjustment, has been the dominant view in
current literature on child development. Bronfen-
brenner (1986) reported that because majority group
values, behaviors, and attitudes are used to evaluate
minority groups, any deviation from the ‘‘norm’’ is
interpreted as the result of cultural, racial, and
socioeconomic status influences. This ‘‘cultural devi-
ant’’ view of ethnic minorities is a reflection of the
‘‘melting pot’’ ideal of society that encourages
minorities to embrace and assimilate into mainstream
American culture and discard their ethnic differences.
Recent research on ethnic minority parenting has
found that ethnic minority families may use a set of
adaptive parenting styles that differs somewhat from
those practiced by mainstream-culture families.
Table I summarizes the literature about protective
parenting practices for the major groups of minority
families in the United States, and includes charac-
teristics of the majority European American popu-
lation.
Ogbu (1981) suggests that childrearing attitudes
and practices can be heavily influenced by the ethnic
and cultural backgrounds of oneÕs parents, extended
family, and neighborhood. Cultural variability in
Yasui and Dishion
parenting practices, family values, and childrearing
attitudes is often the product of the methods devel-
oped by a culture that promotes and fosters a childÕs
competence and adaptability in that particular cul-
ture (Garcia Coll, 1990).
The literature about socialization practices of
ethnic minority families suggests that there is cultural
variation in what is considered ‘‘optimal’’ parenting
practices when comparing the developmental trajec-
tories of ethnic minority and mainstream European
American children. Little research has examined
normative developmental processes within ethnic
minority families, let alone within specific ethnic
minority groups. Herein we review current literature
about specific groups, including Asian Americans,
Latinos, African Americans, and Native Americans,
and focus on identifying culturally specific adaptive
strategies of family extendedness, biculturalism, and
cultural worldviews critical for these ethnic groups
(Harrison, Wilson, Pine, Chan, & Buriel, 1990).
Asian American Families
The literature about Asian American child
development suggests that standard mainstream
parenting practices may not adequately capture ele-
ments of child socialization within Asian American
families. Baumrind (1971) reported that parenting
styles capture two important elements of parenting:
(a) parental responsiveness, which is the degree to
which parents are warm, nurturing, and sensitive to
their childrenÕs needs, and (b) parental demanding-
ness, which indicates the degree to which parents
establish high expectations for their childrenÕs
behaviors and monitor those behaviors (Macoby &
Martin, 1983). Baumrind (1971) suggested that cate-
gorizing parenting according to these two dimensions
yields four types of parenting styles: (a) authoritarian,
(b) authoritative, (c) permissive, and (d) indifferent.
In our analysis of Asian American parenting prac-
tices we will focus on authoritarian and authoritative
parenting styles, which are the two principal parent-
ing practices associated with Asian Americans.
According to BaumindÕs (1971) parenting style
model, authoritarian parenting includes valuing
obedience to and respect for authority, having high
expectations for child behaviors, expecting that chil-
dren do not question or challenge parental decisions
or judgments, and exhibiting limited parental
warmth. On the other hand, authoritative parenting
is characterized by encouragement of child auton-
omy, exhibition of parental warmth, and respon-
 Table I. Cultural Influences by Ethnicity

European African American Latino American Asian American Native American

Self-regulatory White racial identity Ethnic/racial identity Ethnic identity Ethnic identity Ethnic identity
patterns Bicultural competence Bicultural competence Bicultural competence Bicultural competence
Level of acculturation Level of acculturation Level of acculturation
Parenting Authoritative parenting Authoritarian parenting Authoritarian parenting Authoritarian parenting Guan Permissive, lax parenting
More egalitarian No-nonsense parenting Patriarchal family structure Chiao shun Patriarchal and matriarchal
family structure Unilateral parent High expression of Structural & managerial family structures
decision making parental warmth parental involvement
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior

Egalitarian family Patriarchal family structure

structure
US contextual White privilege History of slavery Immigration Immigration to the US History of cultural genocide
issues Institutional Internment of Japanese
discrimination Americans
Minority model
Ethnic/ racial Direct, verbal Transmission of: Transmission of: Cultural Emphasis on academic achievement Transmission of:
socialization communication Cultural values values Transmission of: Cultural values
Cultural history Cultural history Cultural values Cultural history
Cultural Cultural practices Cultural history Cultural practices
practices Fulfillment of family Cultural practices Storytelling of legends &
Minority experience expectations & obligations Fulfillment of family cultural traditions
Mainstream experience expectations & obligations Oral transmission of culture
Direct verbal Nonverbal & indirect Indirect communication
communication communication (e.g., use of storytelling)
Cultural values Independence Communalism Collectivism Collectivism Collectivism
of importance Autonomy Individualism Interdependence Interdependence Interdependence
Individualism Importance of kinship Familism Filial piety Nature
relations Respeto Guan Harmony
Unity Personalismo Chiao shun Balance
Creativity Machismo Amae Extended family
Cooperation Marianismo Conformity Respecting elders
Authenticity Hijo de crianze Obedience Cooperation
Awareness of racial disparities Confianza Face (avoiding loss of face) Sharing
Humility/modesty
Spiritual/ religious Christianity Christianity Catholicism Confucianism Spirituality
influences Muslim Hinduism Interconnectedness
African spirituality Buddhism with nature
Ancestor worship
145
146
siveness to the childÕs perspectives while setting clear
limits and expectations. Authoritative parenting has
been documented as the optimal parenting style for
promoting positive child development, whereas
authoritarian parenting is associated with negative
child adjustment, particularly in European American
samples (Baumrind, 1971).
Despite mainstream emphasis on the positive
influence of authoritative parenting, studies have
consistently found that authoritarian parenting is the
dominant parenting style among Asian Americans.
Associations between authoritarian parenting and
child adjustment indicate differential effects whereby
Asian American children with authoritarian parents
were found to perform better academically than those
who reported that their parents engaged in authori-
tative parenting (Chao, 1994). Not only that, some
studies have indicated mixed findings in which Asian
American parents tended to fall into both
authoritarian and authoritative parenting categories,
revealing that both parenting styles were associated
with academic achievement, lower depressive symp-
toms, and lower externalizing behavior problems
(Chao, 2001; Xu et al., 2005).
These findings suggest that for Asian American
families, parenting characteristics identified as central
to the psychological adjustment of children differ
from what reportedly constitutes standard main-
stream parenting practices. One way to understand
the varying effects of parenting style among Asian
American families is to examine the cultural values
and belief systems that underlie these ethnic groups.
Among East Asian cultures such as Chinese, Japa-
nese, and Korean, Confucian ethics are embedded in
the basic foundations of relationships and family
structure (Ho, 1982). According to Bond and Hwang
(1995), Confucian ethics place special emphasis on
particular relationships, including sovereign and
subject, father and son, older brother and younger
brother, husband and wife. All these relationships are
hierarchical structures in which the subordinate
member is expected to display loyalty and respect to
the senior member, who holds the responsibility to
teach, discipline, and govern the subordinate. Within
parent–child relationships, filial piety is a central
quality that includes obeying and honoring oneÕs
parents, ensuring the continuity of the family line,
behaving in ways to bring honor and not disgrace to
the family name, and fulfilling family obligations.
Chao (1994) describes that for Chinese families,
the influence of Confucian thought can be found in
the parenting concepts ‘‘guan’’ and ‘‘chiao shun.’’
Yasui and Dishion
Guan, which means ‘‘to govern,’’ ‘‘to care for,’’ and
‘‘to love,’’ is most often used to describe a teacherÕs
control and regimentation in the classroom. Tobin,
Wu, and Davidson (1989) described guan as the
continuous monitoring and correcting of the childÕs
behavior by providing appraisal when the child obeys
clearly defined parental or teacher expectations or
standards for childrenÕs behaviors. It represents the
parentsÕ and teachersÕ governance of the child. Chiao
shun, which refers to ‘‘training’’ children in the
appropriate or expected behaviors, is particularly
emphasized in the area of parental support and
childrenÕs academic achievement. As described by
Chao (1994), training children to adhere to socially
desirable and culturally approved behaviors requires
parentsÕ immense devotion, sacrifice, and commit-
ment to the child, and further, the mother is expected
to be constantly available to the childrenÕs physical
and psychological needs. Parents foster motivation in
their children to achieve in school so they can ulti-
mately fulfill societal and familial expectations of
success.
The centrality of ‘‘training’’ among Chinese
families has been replicated in several studies, indi-
cating that this construct includes some aspects of
authoritarian parenting, yet is qualitatively different.
Chao and Kim (2000) found that Chinese parents
strongly endorse the training style over other par-
enting styles, including the authoritarian style. Xu
et al. (2005) reported that both authoritative and
authoritarian parenting styles correlated with these
Chinese values: family recognition, emotional self-
control, collectivism, humility, and filial piety. Par-
ents who scored high on authoritarian and on
authoritative parenting dimensions scored the highest
on these Chinese values. The authors found that both
authoritarian and authoritative parenting styles in-
cluded aspects of chiao shun and guan. These find-
ings thus indicate that although BaumrindÕs
parenting distinctions appear to describe facets of
Asian American parenting, the typologies are limited
in accurately reflecting culturally grounded Asian
American parenting processes.
Several studies have examined subcomponents of
BaumrindÕs parenting style model within specific
Asian American cultural groups, reporting some
similarities but also some differences. For example,
Rohner and Pettengill (1985) found that as Korean
adolescentsÕ perceptions of parental control in-
creased, so did their perceptions of parental warmth
for both mothers and fathers. Salazar, Schluder-
mann, Schludermann, and Huynh (2000) found that
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
for Filipino adolescents, their parentsÕ authoritative
parenting style did not directly influence academic
achievement, but its effect was mediated through
culturally relevant concepts such as family reputation
and internal attribution of academic success or fail-
ure. The authors also found that for Filipino parents
the expression of oneÕs opinions, the offer of rewards
for academic success, and providing the adolescent
his or her freedom were not important parenting
dimensions, suggesting that authoritative parenting
aspects such as adolescent autonomy are not con-
sidered relevant. This may be in part the result of
culturally specific parenting styles in the Philippines,
which Medina (2001) describes as ÔÔnurturant, affec-
tionate, indulgent, and supportiveÕÕ (p. 226).
According to Medina (2001), Filipino parents are
stricter regarding issues associated with the childÕs
health or safety; however, they are more permissive
when children are closely monitored. Segal (1991)
reported that Asian Indian American immigrant
parents perceived adolescence as an extension of
childhood rather than a period during which the
adolescent gains more autonomy; and parents ex-
pected adolescents to listen and to obey their deci-
sions rather than develop their own opinions. Rao,
McHale, and Pearson (2003) found in their compar-
ison of Chinese and Indian parenting practices both
similarities and differences. The authors reported that
in both cultures the valuing of filial piety was asso-
ciated with increased parental control, whereas
greater emphasis on socioemotional development was
related to increased use of authoritative practices
(e.g., emotional independence, development of social
skills). Differences between the cultures were present
in the patterns in relationships between filial piety,
socioemotional development, and authoritative par-
enting, and Hindu mothers reported positive associ-
ations among these three variables. In contrast,
Chinese mothers reported negative associations be-
tween filial piety and socioemotional development
and authoritative practices. According to Rao et al.
(2003), these differences indicate cultural variations in
childrearing perspectives; for the Hindu mothers, the
results reflected Hindu beliefs about childhood,
whereas the results for Chinese mothers indicated
their belief that encouragement of socioemotional
development in children (authoritative parenting
practices) may inhibit the childÕs adherence to filial
behavior and academic achievement. These results
thus indicate both the diversity among Asian Amer-
icans in their conceptualization of what is ‘‘norma-
tive’’ parenting style, as well as the similarities across
147
various Asian American groups that may be embed-
ded in cultural historical values.
Family obligations and the importance of inter-
dependence is another quality that characterizes
Asian American families. Fuligni, Tseng, and Lam
(1999) examined adolescent attitudes regarding fam-
ily obligations and found that Asian American and
Latino adolescents held stronger values and had
greater expectations regarding their duty to assist,
respect, and support their families, compared with
European American adolescents. The authors noted
that families with a collectivistic background tend to
emphasize interdependence and retain values such as
family obligation, family responsibility, respecting
elders, and making sacrifices for the family. Caplan,
Choy, and Whitmore (1991) observed that Asian
immigrant students are often reminded of the sacri-
fices their immigrant parents have made because they
see their parents working long hours in low-wage
menial jobs that are well below their level of training.
Especially for immigrant families, the youthsÕ focus
on succeeding academically is perceived as one way
they can fulfill family obligations. As articulated by a
Vietnamese student, ‘‘To be American you may be
able to do whatever you want. But to be a Vietnamese
you must think of your family first’’ (Zhou & Bank-
ston, 1998, p. 166).
Asian American families largely observe the
theme of interdependence and family obligation in
the emphasis on high academic achievement—an
outcome that is closely associated with self-regulation
in youth, particularly socioemotional and behavioral
control (Eccles et al., 1997; Gray & Steinberg, 1999;
Herman, Dornbusch, Herron, & Herting, 1997;
Steinberg, Elmen, & Mounts, 1989). Moreover, cur-
rent literature indicates that academic achievement
predicts high school dropout (Catterall, 1998; Fer-
nandez, Paulsen & Hirano-Nakanishi, 1989) and fu-
ture educational attainment (Jencks & Phillips, 1998).
Asian American youth have generally exhibited high
academic performance; according to the 1990 Census,
37% of Asian Americans completed at least a bach-
elorÕs degree, compared with 20% of the total pop-
ulation. Chao (1994) reports that childrenÕs success in
school is a primary parenting goal for Asian Ameri-
cans. As described in the concept of chiao shun,
parents are expected to train their children to suc-
ceed, especially in academics; and a good parent is
one whose child is successful in school.
Chao (1994) examined two main parenting
practices that contribute to childrenÕs academic suc-
cess: managerial involvement and structural involve-
148
ment. In managerial involvement, parents tutor
children with their homework, check homework,
monitor childrenÕs progress in school, and advise
children in the selection of courses. By contrast, in
structural involvement parents set up the childrenÕs
environment in ways that are intellectually and aca-
demically stimulating, such as structuring childrenÕs
after-school schedules, providing educationally
enriching experiences (e.g., music lessons, tutoring,
additional textbooks or workbooks), and assigning a
study area in the home. Kim (2002) reported that
among Korean immigrant families, children with
higher academic achievement had parents who
supervised them at home in ways such as checking
homework and setting rules about watching TV. Sy
and Schulenberg (2005) reported that Asian Ameri-
can parents set more rules for watching TV at home
and were more involved in nonhome- and nonschool-
based educational activities than were European
American parents.
The positive influence of parental involvement is
reflected in the Asian American childÕs behaviors and
attitudes about academics. Fuligni (1997) reported
that immigrant family youth earned significantly
higher grades, exhibited a strong emphasis on
achievement, and spent substantially more time and
effort on academic endeavors. Peng and Wright
(1994) reported that Asian American students spent
more time working on their homework, participated
in more extracurricular activities, and engaged in
more educational activities outside of school than did
other students. Asian American students were more
likely to take college preparatory courses, spend five
or more hours on homework each week, and have
fewer absences from school (Wong, 1990). These
studies indicate that managerial and structural
parental involvement enhances the intellectual
development of Asian American youth.
Despite the stereotype of Asian Americans as the
‘‘minority model,’’ not all Asian American youth
show successful growth in their academics. According
to Rumbart and ImaÕs study (as cited in Okagaki &
Bojczyk, 2002) on Southeast Asian refugees, Laotian
and Khmer American students performed below the
average grades of European Americans, and Hmong
American students were less likely to pursue a post-
secondary degree and scored lower than did Euro-
pean American students on standardized tests.
Bhattacharya (2000) found in her study on South
Asian immigrants that limited English skills were
critical to low achievement and school failure. The
study also reported several barriers to school success
Yasui and Dishion
such as the pressure of upholding family reputation,
fear of ‘‘losing face,’’ and guilt about failure to meet
family expectations, all of which were associated with
low self-esteem and a tendency to engage in deviant
peer association. Kim and Goto (2000) noted that for
Asian American adolescents, engagement with devi-
ant peers may be influenced by emic values; for
example, having a collectivistic orientation may
encourage youth to invest in and continue member-
ship in the peer group. Future research is needed to
examine if and how these cultural constructs serve to
promote positive psychological adjustment among
Asian American youth.
Overall, the research on Asian American parent
socialization suggests that traditional parenting con-
structs studied in developmental research have not
adequately captured culturally relevant domains of
parenting that foster healthy child development.
Examination of indigenous concepts such as guan,
chiao shun, and filial piety has revealed the central
role these constructs play in the lives of Asian
American children and families. Understanding these
culturally specific constructs sheds light on why Asian
American parents tend to exhibit authoritarian par-
enting practices and why these practices have gener-
ally not hindered the psychological adjustment of
Asian American youth (Chao, 2001; Kim, 2002;
Salazar et al., 2000, Xu et al., 2005). Interdependence
and emphasis on family have shaped adaptive
developmental trajectories for Asian American youth
such as pursuing academic success as a way to fulfill
family expectations and obligations. The examination
of culturally specific constructs is a substantial step
toward conceptualizing and developing theories
about normative child development among and
within Asian American groups. Future research
should identify, measure, and examine how these
culturally relevant constructs influence the various
developmental pathways of Asian American youth.
Latino American Families
In contrast to findings about European Ameri-
can parenting practices and child adjustment, find-
ings for Latino families have been mixed. Consistent
findings among European American families indicate
that high parental control, harsh parenting, family
conflict, and lack of parental warmth are related to
the development of problem behavior and depression
(Patterson, 1995; Reid & Patterson, 1989). However,
studies of Latino families that examine the relation-
ship between parenting practices and child outcome
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
often report mixed effects. For example, Hill, Bush,
and Roosa (2003) found that maternal acceptance
and maternal hostile control were positively associ-
ated for Spanish-speaking Mexican Americans,
unrelated for English-speaking Mexican Americans,
and negatively related for European Americans. The
authors concluded that particularly for Spanish-
speaking Mexican American families who are less
acculturated, a combination of harsh control with
high levels of parental warmth may actually buffer
adolescents from acculturative stress and life in
neighborhoods that may be dangerous or atypical.
Gonzales, Pitts, Hill, and Roosa (2000) reported that
in their multiethnic sample, high levels of hostile
control were associated with lower levels of conduct
problems for Spanish-speaking children. In a study
on Mexican immigrant families, Izzo and colleagues
(2000) reported strong positive correlations between
parental warmth and control, with higher parental
control predicting positive child adjustment.
Mixed findings have also been reported for La-
tino families regarding their use of authoritarian
versus authoritative parenting styles. Florsheim, To-
lan, and Gorman-Smith (1996) found that Hispanic
parents were more controlling and autonomy-grant-
ing than were African American parents, and His-
panic boys were more submissive and deferential
compared with African American boys. The authors
reported negative associations between parental
nurturing and adolescent assertiveness, indicating
that autonomous behavior is discouraged among
Hispanic families. Varela and colleagues (2004)
compared the parenting styles of Mexican, Mexican
American, and Caucasian families and found that
parents of Mexican descent reported more use of
authoritarian parenting style than did Caucasian
parents, with Mexican parents reporting the highest
levels of use.
These findings suggest that adaptive parenting
styles and practices for Latinos do not completely
map onto what is commonly defined as adaptive
parenting among European American families. Cul-
tural influences such as ethnic minority status and
cultural values specific to the Latino culture, includ-
ing familism, machismo, and respeto, are core aspects
of Latino parenting that mediate the relationships of
parenting and child adjustment.
Familism is a Latino cultural value that plays an
important role in family structure and relationships.
Unger and colleagues (2002) defined familism as ‘‘a
sense of obligation to and connectedness with oneÕs
immediate and extended family’’ (p. 259). Zayas
149
(1992) describes it as ‘‘family unity, with a sense of
obligation among family members, reverence for the
elderly, and responsibility to care for all members,
especially children’’ (as cited in Ferrari, 2002, p. 794).
Thus, familism emphasizes the importance of main-
taining family cohesiveness through family support,
and sacrificing individual needs in favor of family
needs.
The centrality of familism to Latinos is often
depicted in their representation of family and family
relationships. Latinos place priority on the family
over the individual, and it is expected that family
members support or help other family members who
are less successful, such as looking after other family
membersÕ children during times of crisis (Arcaya,
1999; Garcia-Preto, 1996a; Zea, Mason, & Murguia,
2000).The value of familism is reflected in the pres-
ence of strong family support not only from nuclear
family members but also from members of the ex-
tended family network such as grandparents, aunts,
uncles, cousins, and godparents (Unger et al., 2002).
Findings report that support in child rearing by both
nuclear and extended family members buffers Latino
children from engaging in high-risk behaviors (Gar-
cia Coll et al., 1996) and promotes positive school
and social outcomes (Franco & Levitt, 1998; Levitt,
Guacci-Franco, & Levitt, 1994). Contreras and col-
leagues (1999) reported that among less-acculturated
Puerto Rican American adolescent mothers, grand-
mother involvement was associated with decreased
stress and fewer negative psychological symptoms.
Roosa and colleagues (2005), Gil-Rivas, Greenber-
ger, Chen, and Lopez-Lena (2003), and Eamon and
Muler (2005) explained that the sense of family
cohesion and the presence of a family network may
protect against the negative impact parent–child
conflict has on the development of adolescent prob-
lem behavior or adolescent depression. In addition,
Belsky and MacKinnon (1994) reported that Latino
family relationships play a critical role in the social
and cognitive performance of Latino youth and
children. In a qualitative study of 30 undergraduates
of Mexican descent, Arellano and Padilla (1996) re-
ported that students identified familial support and
encouragement of pursuing educational goals as
critical to their educational success.
Current research on Latino cultural values has
reported the importance of familism on child socio-
emotional adjustment. Ramirez and colleagues (2004)
conducted a study examining the relationships be-
tween familism, acculturation, parental monitoring,
and adolescent substance use among Hispanic and
150
European Americans. They found that only for the
Hispanic adolescents did a high degree of familism
predict low incidence of marijuana and of inhalant
use. In addition, the authors reported that high levels
of parental monitoring and familism played a unique
role in the prevention of substance use. Gil, Wagner,
and Vega (2000) compared US-born and immigrant
Latino adolescent males and found that for adoles-
cents who reported higher levels of acculturative
stress, decreases in familism were associated with a
greater disposition to deviance, which led to more
alcohol use.
Respeto is another cultural value that is charac-
teristic of Latino families. According to Marin and
Vanoss-Marin (1991), respeto emphasizes obedience
and respect toward parents and elders. Latino chil-
dren are taught to respect and not to question, but
comply with authority figures. Unfortunately, within
the American school context these behaviors are met
with some concern; for example, Rotheram-Borus
and Phinney (1990) found that compared with Afri-
can American children, Mexican American children
relied more on authority figures in decision making.
Marin and Vanoss-Marin (1991) reported that many
Latino children are taught that it is disrespectful to
question authority or make eye contact when spoken
to, and teachers interpret this behavior as a lack of
interest. The emphasis on deferring to authority may
also prevent Latino parents from questioning or di-
rectly intervening with teachers and school staff,
which teachers may interpret as lack of parent
involvement (Sue & Sue, 1987). Similar findings
reported by Kao and Tienda (1995) indicated that
immigrant parents are less likely to join PTA, vol-
unteer at school, speak to teachers, or attend class
events. Some researchers have indicated that the
cultural practices and values of Latino parents are
incongruent with the American school system; for
example, although Latino parents presume that res-
peto will facilitate school success, studies have indi-
cated that a focus on obedience among Latino
families may actually inhibit academic achievement
among Latino youth (Steinberg, Dornbusch, &
Brown, 1992).
Latino parents apply distinct gender-driven
expectations to the socialization of their children.
Machismo is considered important in the socialization
of boys and encompasses qualities such as mascu-
linity, male dominance, responsibility as the protector
of the family, sexual prowess, and physical strength
(Cuéllar, Arnold, & Gonzales, 1995; Sorenson &
Siegel, 1992). In contrast, marianismo requires that
Yasui and Dishion
women model or emulate the Virgin Mary by sacri-
ficing their own needs for their husbandÕs and chil-
drenÕs needs, valuing sexual purity, providing
emotional and instrumental support to family mem-
bers, and maintaining traditional gender roles (Gil &
Vasquez, 1996; Ginorio, Gutierrez, Cauce, & Acosta,
1995). In addition, marianismo involves the ability to
maintain strong family traditions of familism, respe-
to, and personalismo (attending to othersÕ needs and
wishes).
The differential roles of machismo and marian-
ismo influence parental roles—mothers are assigned
the primary responsibility of caring for and disci-
plining the children, whereas fathers are more distant
and less involved in parenting (Garcia-Preto, 1996b).
Several studies have shown that Latino fathers
emphasize authoritarian parenting compared with
mothers, who are less authoritarian and show higher
levels of authoritative parenting (Bird & Canino,
1982; Figueroa-Torres & Pearson, 1979). Ferrari
(2002) reported that in her multiethnic sample, His-
panic fathers were the least nurturing among His-
panic, European American, and African American
fathers. Deyoung and Zigler (1994) found among
their sample of Guyanese fathers and mothers, par-
ents with high levels of machismo exhibited higher
levels of controlling and punitive disciplinary strate-
gies. The studies did not address the impact of these
strategies on child behavior; however, current litera-
ture suggests that the influence of cultural values such
as familism, respeto, machismo, and marianismo may
provide a foundation for Latino children in which
harsh or authoritarian parenting adheres with cul-
tural norms and expectations and therefore is not
associated with negative child adjustment as found in
European American children and families (Gonzales
et al., 2000; Hill et al., 2003).
Research using mainstream theories and meth-
odologies of child development has reported differ-
ential outcomes between European American and
Latino American children and families in which a
positive association between harsh and controlling
parenting practices and externalizing or internalizing
problems is not replicated among Latino youth. The
differential outcomes reflect the important roles cul-
tural values such as familism and respeto play in the
lives of Latino children and families. This centrality of
culture in the socialization processes of children
therefore emphasizes the importance of conducting
culturally anchored research that is based on cultur-
ally specific theories and assessments that identify risk
and resilience factors among Latino American youth.
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
African American Families
Literature about African American socialization
practices has shown a trend similar to that about
Latino and Asian American families in that a large
portion of African American parents are authoritar-
ian or restrictive in their parenting, compared with
European American families (Dornbusch, Ritter,
Leiderman, Roberts, & Fraleigh, 1987; Furstenberg,
Cook, Eccles, Elder, & Sameroff, 1999). Some
researchers argue that the parenting styles model is
inadequate for African Americans because the con-
structs are not culturally relevant (Bradley, 1998;
Deater-Deckard, Dodge, Bates, & Pettit, 1996;
McLoyd, Cauce, Takeuchi, & Wilson, 2000).
Several studies suggest the protective effects of
restrictive parental control among African American
families. Lamborn, Dornbusch, and Steinberg (1996)
reported that unilateral parental decision making,
which is conceptualized as a form of authoritarian
parenting, predicted decreased involvement in deviant
activity among African American youth. In contrast,
among European American youth, higher levels of
unilateral parental decision making were associated
with lower self-esteem and self-reliance and lower
work orientation. Baldwin, Baldwin, and Cole (1990)
found that for European American families, restrictive
parenting was negatively associated with academic
outcomes, whereas for African Americans the pattern
was inversed, and higher levels of parental restriction
predicted higher academic achievement. Clark, No-
vak, and Dupree (2002) found among African Amer-
ican youth, adolescent perceptions of high parental
strictness were associated with lower anger tempera-
ment, fewer outward expressions of anger, and de-
creased use of avoidant coping strategies.
Deater-Deckard et al. (1996) concluded that
physical discipline was associated with child exter-
nalizing problems in European American families but
not among African American families. Whaley (2000)
reported that the use of physical discipline is associ-
ated with lower levels of disruptive disorders for
African American youth, and for European Ameri-
cans, higher levels of physical discipline were related
to increased problem behaviors. The African Ameri-
can family context is one in which there is more
endorsement and reliance on the use of physical
punishment (Giles-Sims, Straus, & Sugarman, 1995).
Thus, in comparison with European Americans,
African American parents are more likely to report
that physical discipline is an appropriate discipline
strategy (Flynn, 1998).
151
Strict parenting style is perceived by African
Americans across various socioeconomic levels as
necessary to the development of effective coping
abilities in the face of harsh realities of racism and
discrimination (Julian, McKenry, & McKelvey,
1994). Contextual factors influence the decisions
about what is the optimal level of parental control for
each child. For adolescents who reside in dangerous
neighborhoods where there is gang activity and high
rates of delinquency, parents may modify their par-
enting to be more controlling than it would be if they
lived in safer neighborhoods (Furstenberg et al.,
1999). Nobles (1974) argued that parenting practices
among African American families are directed by
parentsÕ perceptions of realistic dangers and risks
such as discrimination and prejudice that African
American children may encounter.
African American families are characterized by
high levels of parental warmth that often co-occurs
with restrictive or controlling parenting practices.
Young (1974) describes this parenting style as ‘‘no-
nonsense parenting,’’ defined as high levels of
parental control, including use of physical control
and punishment, that occur together with high posi-
tive affect in mother–child relationships. Several
studies have indicated that high parental control with
high parental warmth fosters healthy adjustment
among African American youth. Brody and Flor
(1998) found that for African Americans, no-non-
sense parenting predicted higher levels of self-regu-
lation, which in turn predicted higher cognitive
competence and social competence and lower levels
of internalizing problems. In their sample of low-in-
come African Americans, Steele, Nesbitt-Daly,
Daniel, and Forehand (2005) reported positive cor-
relations between harsh discipline practices and
parental warmth, a reflection of no-nonsense par-
enting in which parents exhibit greater reactivity be-
cause of their high investment in their children.
The importance of both restrictive and positive
parent–child relationships for African American child
development is reflected in the study by Dearing
(2004) in which high levels of both restrictive par-
enting and supportive parenting were found to pro-
mote academic success and decrease depression
among African American children. These outcomes
represent the cultural meaning of family connected-
ness, parent involvement, and emphasis on child
obedience and respect for elders. Several studies have
indicated that supportive parenting styles that
encompass high parental involvement is related to
African American childrenÕs academic achievement
152
such as overall GPA, math and science scores, verbal
ability, and social development (Marcon, 1999;
Reynolds, 1992). Caughy and colleagues (2002)
found that African American parents who were
proactively involved in their childrenÕs development
through provision of a rich African-centered envi-
ronment (e.g., inclusion of cultural motifs, culturally
appropriate toys) had children who scored higher on
measures of cognitive development and achievement.
Parental support is also reflected in the realm of
parental warmth. Ispa and colleagues (2004) found
that maternal warmth moderated the relationship
between maternal intrusiveness and mother–child
relationship quality among African American par-
ent–child dyads, but not for European American
dyads. For African Americans, parental intrusiveness
did not affect the positive aspects of mother–child
relationship measured by child engagement with
mother and dyadic mutuality. These results suggest
that for African Americans, exhibiting high levels of
parental control is normative and beneficial, espe-
cially when it co-occurs with parental warmth.
The salience of parental control and parental
warmth for African American families reflects the
cultural values and norms embraced by African
American families. Cultural values and beliefs such as
communalism, spirituality, importance of kinship
relations, collectivism, unity, cooperation, and
awareness of racial disparities in mainstream culture
are central themes in the socialization of African
American children (Constantine, Gainor, Ahluwalia,
& Berkel, 2003; Utsey, Adams, & Bolden, 2000).
Communalism, defined as a belief in the importance of
group over the individual and cooperation rather
than competition (Belgrave, Townsend, Cherry, &
Cunningham, 1997), indicates that the self is seen as a
part of the collective whole. The emphasis on col-
lectiveness and group harmony is reflected in the
African philosophy ‘‘I am because we are and since
we are, therefore I am’’ (Mbiti, 1969, p.152).
The emphasis on communalism and intercon-
nectedness of family members, friends, and commu-
nity members, and the interrelatedness of people, is
apparent in the strong family orientation of African
Americans. African Americans value their relation-
ships and tend to have strong and close relationships
with a large network of relatives and fictive kin.
Family for African Americans may include multiple
generations and non-blood related members. For
African Americans who have faced separation from
family historically as a result of slavery, and currently
because of economic hardship or other challenges,
Yasui and Dishion
fictive kin have served a central role in preserving the
concept of family and in the rearing of children
(McAdoo, 1981). African American families often
feel a sense of obligation to kin and provide mutual
social and instrumental aid to one another such as
caretaking othersÕ children or taking in elders,
essentially ‘‘doubling up’’ (McAdoo, 1981). The so-
cial capital provided by extended kin provides posi-
tive support and influence on the developmental
pathway of the African American child, and kinship
support is associated with academic achievement,
fewer problem behaviors, and increased self-reliance
among African American youth (Taylor, 1996).
Lamborn and Nguyen (2004) found that kinship
support was related to a stronger ethnic identity,
greater self-reliance, a stronger orientation to work
and to school, and higher educational expectations
for African American youth. Taylor (1996) found
that kinship support was related to positive family
climate and higher levels of parental involvement and
organization, all of which were associated with
stronger academic performance, less problem behav-
ior, and less psychological distress.
Spirituality is another value that serves a central
role in the life of the African American family. Utsey
et al. (2000) reported that both spirituality and the
emphasis on interconnectedness with the larger
environment are traces of the African worldview that
perceives everything in the universe as functionally
connected. The emphasis on interconnectedness with
the natural and the human environments is evident in
the cultural value of communalism, which embodies
cooperation, close connections with family, and
harmony. Spirituality and communalism go hand in
hand, in that spirituality represents the individualÕs
sense of connection and oneness with the Higher
Power, people, and nature, and communalism reflects
the connection through group harmony and collec-
tivism.
Various studies have examined the important
role of spirituality in the lives of African American
children and families. Woods and Jagers (2003) found
that communalism and spirituality were positively
related to sociomoral reasoning in African American
youth. Similarly, Belgrave et al. (1994) found that the
presence of spirituality among African American
fourth and fifth graders predicted perceived drug
harmfulness and decreased drug use. Brody, Ston-
eman, & Flor (1996) reported that spirituality was
associated with higher levels of family cohesiveness
and decreased problem behavior among African
American adolescents. Spirituality, along with com-
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
munalism, serves as the foundation of the African
American family context and promotes healthy
development of youth through family cohesiveness,
harmony, intergenerational interdependence, and
collectivistic worldviews.
As members of an ethnic group that has faced a
long history of discrimination and prejudice, African
American families have developed specific socializa-
tion practices that are geared toward the promotion
of resilience in African American children. The
combination of strict parenting with high levels of
parental warmth is an example of the ways in which
African Americans have developed parenting prac-
tices that caution and protect the African American
child from external dangers, as well as provide a sense
of security. The successful integration of African
values and traditions into the family context,
including the social support of extended family and
kin and an emphasis on spirituality, provides a buffer
against hardships such as poverty, racism, and dis-
crimination and has resulted in adaptive parenting
strategies that foster resiliency in children. Future
research is needed to further identify and assess cul-
tural domains that are central to developing resilience
in the face of these sociocultural challenges.
American Indian Families
A long history of oppression has continuously
challenged the familial experience of American In-
dian families (Duran & Duran, 1995). Literature
about American Indian youth has largely focused on
their struggles with substance use, depression, and
low academic achievement, suggesting deficits asso-
ciated with their ethnicity, culture, or race. Studies
have indicated that many American Indian youth
start engaging in substance use in early childhood,
continue use after experimentation (Beauvais, 1992a,
1996), and frequently engage in binge drinking that
consists of consuming large amounts of alcohol in
short periods of time (May, 1996). Adolescent sub-
stance use is associated with other high-risk behaviors
such as adolescent delinquency (Beauvais, 1992b) and
unprotected sexual activity (Rolfe, Nansel, Baldwin,
Johnson, & Benally, 2002). Research on American
Indian youth reports higher than average levels of
depressive symptoms and suicide, and both are linked
to early onset of substance use (Beauvais, 1996;
Rieckmann, Wadsworth & Deyhle, 2004).
Several studies have suggested specific cultural
influences associated with increased-risk behavior
among American Indian youth. Kawamoto (2001)
153
reports that the underlying cause stems from the
historical and generational trauma experienced by
American Indians that results from the boarding
schools system imposed on them by the US govern-
ment. The boarding school system aimed at ‘‘civiliz-
ing’’ American Indians through changing the
behaviors and beliefs of their young, which involved
mandatory separation of American Indian children
from their families of origin. This resulted in the
disruption of cultural transmission, which in turn led
to the loss of spiritual traditions, communication
practices, parenting standards, and Indian heritage
(Kawamoto, 2001). Moreover, ethnic dislocation and
alienation from tribal communities as a result of
historical oppression continues to increase the
vulnerability of American Indian youth for develop-
ing psychological problems (Oetting, Beauvais, &
Velarde, 1982).
Despite the challenges American Indian families
have faced for multiple generations, some research
has shed light on culturally specific protective factors
that foster healthy adjustment among American In-
dian youth. Thurman and Green (1997) reported that
youth who exhibited a stronger cultural orientation
to American Indian culture engaged in lower rates of
substance use. The authors also found that American
Indian youth who participated in traditional tribal
activities and ceremonies reported lower inhalant use.
Stubben (2001) reported that 95.4% of American
Indian parents and children queried concurred that
cultural values are central to their lives. Stubben
(1996 as cited in Stubben 2001) also found that 96%
of American Indian youth in the study indicated that
cultural respect was critical to their success at school
and home. Although the literature is sparse, these
findings suggest that culturally specific familial pro-
cesses and values play a critical role in promoting
resilience among American Indian youth.
In comparison with other ethnic groups, the
American Indian family is perhaps the most diverse
in family structure and roles of family members be-
cause of variations across tribes and among families
within tribes. However, several unifying concepts
describe American Indian family life, including
interdependence, harmony, extended family, respect
of elders, spirituality, cooperation, and sharing (Wise
& Miller, 1983). The American Indian household is
the context in which interdependence, harmony,
sharing, and cooperation are highly valued and
expressed. American Indian families are generally
characterized as large and extended, and may consist
of as many as 200 members (Wise & Miller, 1983).
154
Family members may include those who are distant
relatives or who are not blood related but close to the
family (Manson et al., 1996). Family members are not
only responsible for their family, but also bear
responsibility to the clan or tribe to which they be-
long. Any problem of youth is understood to be a
problem of the family, kin, and community, and all
are expected to respond collectively to the needs of
the youth. In the community, family and friends are
important aspects of the childÕs healing process,
which is based on the understanding that problems
arise from the disruption of harmony between the
child, family, and community, and that all these areas
of the childÕs life processes must participate in the
healing process to regain harmony and balance
(Duran & Duran, 1995).
The interdependence of the family, kin, and
community is evident in the involvement of other
family members in child rearing. Grandparents, un-
cles, aunts, and other kin share the role of disciplining
and teaching American Indian children (MacPhee,
Fritz, Miller-Heyl, 1996). In certain tribes, American
Indian children are named after family or kin, with
the cultural expectation that the child will grow to
resemble that person, and also that the person will be
closely involved in the childÕs life (LaFromboise,
Berman, & Sohi, 1994). Across tribes, American In-
dian children are raised with the cultural expectation
that they will be involved with and committed to their
family, tribe, and culture rather than compete for
individual achievement. The emphasis on interde-
pendence, cooperation, and harmony is reflected in
the lack of importance American Indian parents
place on childrenÕs individual achievement. Instead,
one earns respect among family and community by
prioritizing othersÕ needs above those of the individ-
ual (Nofz, 1988).
One aspect of parenting that might be viewed by
those outside the culture as permissive or lax is the
American Indian belief that family members should
not interfere with decisions or choices made by indi-
viduals. American Indian children are expected to
make their own choices and have semi-independence
from a young age (LaFromboise & Low, 1989). This
perspective maintains that individuals should be al-
lowed to ‘‘work things out in their own manner’’
(Brendtro, Brokenleg, & Van Bockern, 1991). Thus,
family members allow children to pursue their choices
and experience the natural consequences of their
choices. Children are expected to learn from their
mistakes and change their behavior from that expe-
rience. Rather than directly pointing out the negative
Yasui and Dishion
consequences of poor choices, American Indian
families would emphasize the impact of the childÕs
behavior on others, such as the family and the com-
munity, and in turn the family would collectively
meet the needs of the child (LaFromboise & Low,
1989). This understanding of oneÕs responsibility
within the network of kin and community relation-
ships is central to oneÕs ties and sense of belonging to
the tribe. According to More (1987), these teaching
methods diverge from mainstream methods, which
often involve the use of direct verbal instruction. In
fact, American Indian children are primarily taught
cultural values or attitudes through story telling.
Moreover, children acquire skills through ‘‘watch-
then-do or listen-then-do or think-then-do’’ methods
in which the child acquires skills by being present and
participating with family in behaviors (More, 1987).
This tendency of adults to silently observe rather than
react to a childÕs behavior may be misinterpreted as
passivity and laxness (Wise & Miller, 1983).
American Indian spirituality entails the world-
view of harmony, interdependence, collectivism, and
balance. Although tribes may vary in terms of dom-
inant religion, the belief that all of nature—plants,
animals, minerals, land, sun, wind, moon, sky—is
interconnected with personhood is a central compo-
nent of American Indian spirituality (Garrett &
Garrett, 1994). The interconnectedness of life is rep-
resented in a circular worldview in which the East
represents the spirit, South represents nature, West
represents the body, and North represents the mind
(Garrett & Garrett, 1994). This spiritual perspective
on the intimate connection between the American
Indian individual and nature serves as the framework
in which children relate to family and their commu-
nity—living as if independent, yet serving by main-
taining the harmony and balance of the kinship
network and community.
Research on American Indians has mainly
examined the levels of psychopathology found among
American Indian youth. Little is known about the
normative familial processes that occur within the
family context and how these processes serve as
buffers for disadvantaged American Indian children
who face the challenges of poverty, discrimination,
alienation, and intergenerational psychological trau-
ma. The near destruction of American Indian families
by the boarding school system left a large gap in the
culturally specific notion of what constitutes an
American Indian family. However, the few findings
that we have examined suggest that culturally rele-
vant variables such as interdependence, harmony,
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
and spirituality play critical roles in family relation-
ships and functioning, indicating the importance of
the transmission of culture in the developmental
pathways of American Indian youth. Future research
on American Indian youth should examine culturally
specific domains of family processes and child
development that would reveal the importance of
developing culturally anchored theories and research
methodologies for understanding and better serving
American Indian children and families.
Racial Socialization
Among people of color in the United States,
there lies a common historical experience of racism,
oppression, and exclusion. Every ethnic group has
experienced acts of racism and discrimination rang-
ing from subtle to violent, sometimes individually or
as minority groups. These experiences have solidified
the ‘‘minority status’’ of people of color, which often
involves the stress of encountering hostility, pre-
judice, lack of access to resources, lack of social
support, alienation, and social isolation. Experiences
such as these are generally associated with increased
psychological dysfunction, especially among ethnic
minority youth.
Ethnic minority youth and families encounter
racial or ethnic discrimination as part of their daily
lives, in various contexts such as among their peers,
the school, the neighborhood, and the community. A
study by Rosenbloom and Way (2004) of a multi-
ethnic high school revealed that African American
and Latino adolescents experienced racial discrimi-
nation by teachers, police, and shopkeepers, whereas
Asian American students reported physical and ver-
bal harassment by peers. Broman, Mavaddat, and
Hsu (2000) reported that 77% of African American
youth in their study had experienced racial discrimi-
nation, with African American males experiencing
the most discrimination by police and in seeking
employment.
Several studies have documented the negative
mental health and physical health outcomes associ-
ated with experiencing acts of discrimination. Among
ethnic minority youth, a positive association between
perceived discrimination and an adolescentÕs proba-
bility of engaging in problem behavior has been re-
ported. Wong and colleagues (2003) found for
African American adolescents, perceived discrimina-
tion by peers and teachers correlated with an increase
in problem behaviors such as shoplifting, skipping
class, lying to parents, cheating, stealing cars, and
155
bringing drugs or alcohol to school. Nyborg and
Curry (2003) found that adolescent report of their
experiences of racism were related to both adolescent
and parent report externalizing symptoms. Prelow,
Danoff-Burg, Swenson, and Pulgiano (2004) found
that perceived discrimination exacerbated ecological
risk for African American youth, resulting in higher
engagement in delinquent behaviors, whereas no
association was found for European American youth.
The psychological toll of racial discrimination is
also associated with internalizing problems such as
depression, somatic symptoms, and anxiety. Simons
and colleagues (2002) found that individual experi-
ences of racial discrimination among African Amer-
ican children predicted child depressive symptoms.
Noh, Kaspar, and Chen (1998) found in their sample
of Korean immigrants that as perceived discrimina-
tion events increased, so did the levels of depression.
Schmader, Major, and Gramzow (2001) found that
among African American students, beliefs about
ethnic injustice were associated with greater devalu-
ing of oneÕs academic success and distrust in aca-
demic feedback. In a study on Puerto Rican youth,
perceived discrimination and worrying about dis-
crimination were associated with depression and
lower self-esteem (Szalacha et al., 2003). Among
American Indians, perceived discrimination was
strongly associated with higher depressive symptoms
(Whitbeck, McMorris, Hoyt, Stubben, & LaFromb-
oise, 2002).
Recent evidence indicates that the experience of
racial discrimination not only affects psychological
well being, but also the physical health of ethnic
minorities. Krieger and colleagues (1993) found that
Black adults who reported that they passively re-
sponded to racism by accepting unfair treatment had
higher systolic blood pressure than did Black adults
who challenged the unfair treatment. Bowen-Reid
and Harrell (2002) found that African Americans
who reported higher levels of perceived racial stress
exhibited more negative health symptoms. Guyll,
Matthews, and Bromberger (2001) reported that
African American women who identified racial dis-
crimination in interpersonal mistreatment showed
greater diastolic blood pressure reactivity, suggesting
that racial discrimination can adversely affect car-
diovascular health.
The stressors related to racial discrimination also
engender system-level influences, particularly in the
family context. The Mundane Extreme Environ-
mental Stress model (MEES; Peters & Massey, 1983)
describes the immediate environment of ethnic
156
minority families as one where there is ‘‘constant
threat and actual periodic occurrences of intimida-
tion, discrimination, or denial because of race. The
stresses which families face—sometimes subtle,
sometimes overt—are pervasive, continuous, and
debilitating’’ (p. 196). Daily encounters with overt
and covert racial discrimination can exacerbate the
effects of contextual stressors on family functioning
and relationships. Gibbons, Gerrard, Cleveland,
Wills, and Brody (2004) found that parental experi-
ences of racial discrimination were directly associated
with parental distress and substance use. Moreover,
parental racial discrimination experiences were di-
rectly related to child psychological distress and
indirectly related to child substance use. Murry,
Brown, Brody, Cutrona, and Simons (2001) found
that maternal report of perceived discrimination was
directly associated with lower mother–child relation-
ship quality, decreased mother nurturing, and de-
creased mother–child relationship satisfaction. As
such, for ethnic minority families, encounters with
chronic, unpredictable acts of racial discrimination
affect the individual as well as the family system and
relationships within that system (Peters & Massey,
1983).
Despite challenging conditions, ethnic minority
youth and families exhibit resilience in the ways they
cope with daily encounters of racial discrimination.
According to Peters and Massey (1983), ethnic
minority families develop culturally based practices,
behaviors, and attitudes that are embedded in the
cultureÕs value and belief system and serve as psy-
chological and social support required by the youth
and families. These culturally specific coping mecha-
nisms buffer ethnic minority families from the mul-
tiple stressors associated with racism, poverty,
minority status, and acculturation. Research that has
examined coping strategies of ethnic minority youth
and families suggests the importance of ethnic and
racial socialization for promoting bicultural compe-
tence and the development of a secure ethnic identity.
In particular, racial socialization has been identified
as a protective factor. Peters (1985) noted that racial
socialization is ‘‘the task Black parents share with all
parents—providing for and raising children … but
they include the responsibility of raising physically
and emotionally healthy children who are Black in a
society in which Black has negative connotations.’’
According to Stevenson, Cameron, Herreron-Taylor,
and Davis (2002), racial and cultural socialization
processes are essential aspects of family functioning
because they provide explanation and support for
Yasui and Dishion
‘‘appreciating the spiritual and metaphysical buffers
to being an ethnic minority in a racist world, appre-
ciating the cultural uniqueness of being and behaving
ethnic in a racist world, appreciating and internaliz-
ing the meaning-making experiences of being ethnic
in this world’’ (pp. 85–86).
Several theories about racial socialization pro-
pose an association with positive identity develop-
ment, equity, racial barriers, and egalitarian
perspectives (Thorton, Chatters, Taylor, & Allen,
1990). The African-centered model by Nobles (1973)
and Semaj (1985) explains that racial or ethnic iden-
tity is shaped first by the messages and interactions
that African American children experience in their
immediate social context, the family, and then later it
is either reinforced or disconfirmed when they inter-
act with external agents such as peers, teachers,
schools, and the general society (Burke, 1980).
Recent empirical studies suggest racial sociali-
zation is a salient aspect of parenting that promotes
identity development and positive adjustment.
Sanders-Thompson (1994) found that 79% of their
African American study participants recalled race-
related discussions with a parent. Murray and
Mandara (2001) reported that among African
American youth, ethnic pride and strategies to deal
with the broader societyÕs messages were necessary
elements in racial identity development. Among
Mexican American adolescents, increased levels of
parental ethnic socialization were associated with
ethnic identity achievement (Quintana, Castaneda-
English, & Ybarra, 1999). Immigrant Latino and
Asian American families are reported to emphasize
the socialization of traditions and values of the cul-
ture of origin (Buriel & DeMent, 1997; Garcia Coll &
Magnuson, 1997). Studies of African American,
Mexican, Chinese, and Japanese samples have indi-
cated that most parents attempt to foster the trans-
mission of cultural values, history, and practices, and
to foster the cultural pride of their children (Knight,
Bernal, Garza, Cota, & Ocampo, 1993; Ou & McA-
doo, 1993; Phinney & Chavira, 1995).
Evidence supports the centrality of ethnic and
racial socialization for ethnic minority families.
However, the frequency and content of cultural mes-
sages and the ways in which they are transmitted
appear to vary across and within ethnic groups. For
example, a childÕs developmental status plays a critical
role in whether parents engage their children in race-
related discussions. Recent literature on ethnic and
racial socialization messages report that parents are
less likely to discuss topics relevant to discrimination
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
with younger children than with adolescents or young
adults (Hughes et al., 2006). Parental socioeconomic
status (SES) has also been examined as a predictor of
parental endorsement of ethnic and racial socializa-
tion messages. Parents of higher SES are reported to
(a) perceive more prejudice and discrimination (Wil-
liams, 1999), and (b) provide familial environments
that are culturally enhancing (Caughy et al., 2002).
Another cultural variable that predicts the frequency
and the content of ethnic and racial socialization
messages is parental immigration status. Recently
immigrated parents are more likely to socialize their
children in matters associated with their culture of
origin (e.g., native language, cultural customs and
traditions) than are their acculturated counterparts
(Knight et al., 1993; Umana-Taylor & Fine, 2004).
Parental experience of discrimination and the
salience of parental ethnic/racial identity are also
critical variables that influence the endorsement of
ethnic and racial socialization messages within the
familial environment. Studies show that parents who
have experienced discrimination are more likely to
discuss issues of discrimination and teach necessary
coping skills to their children (Hughes & Chen 1997;
Umana-Taylor & Fine, 2004). In addition, parents
whose racial or ethnic membership is central to their
self-identity are more likely to emphasize cultural
socialization and further, prepare their children for
future discriminatory experiences (Hughes, 2003;
Knight et al., 1993).
Another important dimension in examining the
salience of ethnic and racial socialization in the fos-
tering of child cultural resilience is the content of
socialization messages. Current literature suggests
that cultural messages vary, ranging from the trans-
mission of cultural practices and values to discussions
concerning racial discrimination. Boykin and Toms
(1985) indicate that racial socialization consists of (a)
cultural experience (i.e., tradition, values), (b)
minority experience (i.e., social, economic, and
political influences on minorities), and (c) mainstream
experience (i.e., influences of White middle class cul-
ture). Thornton et al. (1990) suggest that racial
socialization encompasses areas of racial pride, racial
history, achievement, racism, equality, religion, self-
image, moral values, and peaceful coexistence. In one
study sample (Peters, 1985), parents believed that
compared with instilling a strong racial identity, it is
more important to learn how to cope with and sur-
vive prejudice and discrimination and understand
that equality is not always present in White–Black
relationships.
157
Studies have indicated that youth who are
socialized to be aware of racial barriers and cautioned
about interracial challenges (Thornton et al., 1990)
show more positive behavioral and psychological
outcomes than do youth who are taught nothing
about race or who receive negative in-group messages
(Bowman & Howard, 1985). Fischer and Shaw (1999)
found that receiving higher levels of racial socializa-
tion messages attenuated the relationship between
racism experiences and poor mental health. However,
other studies report that an overemphasis on racial
barriers by parents may undermine the efficacy of
ethnic minority children and lead them to withdraw
from opportunities and experiences that may enhance
their competence (Biafora, et al., 1993; Marshall,
1995). Interestingly, some studies show that despite
the importance ethnic parents place on discussing
issues having to do with racial discrimination, few
actually engage in the transmission of these messages.
In fact, parents are more likely to report messages
about ethnic pride than discussions about discrimi-
nation (Hughes & Chen, 1997; Phinney & Chavira,
1995). Parents may engage in minimal discussion
because they find it inherently difficult to introduce
children to issues of discrimination than to cultural
traditions. Ethnic minority parents may be particu-
larly reluctant to introduce children to negative eth-
nic stereotypes because of perceived negative
consequences related to the internalization of these
stereotypes, and because they are concerned that the
stereotypes may negatively influence their childrenÕs
understanding of race. Although evidence suggests
that parents see the goal of racial socialization as
discussing minority experience by which they would
prepare their children for an oppressive environment,
it is not known whether the transmission of such
messages actually influences the use of coping strat-
egies by minority children when they are faced with
discriminatory experiences (Tatum, 1987).
Current literature about adolescent coping and
stress indicates that the type of coping strategies used
in response to life stressors among youth generally
correlates with particular psychological outcomes
(Moos, 2002). Several domains of coping strategies
that have been particularly prominent in the field
include approach- or problem-focused coping, emo-
tion-focused coping, and avoidance coping strategies.
Approach-focused strategies include seeking social
support or problem solving the situation and are
generally associated with positive psychological
adjustment in adolescents (Halstead, Johnson, &
Cunningham, 1993). Emotion-focused coping entails
158
the regulation of emotional states that are associated
with the stressor. As such, emotion-focused strategies
are aimed at reducing the tension and physiological
arousal accompanying emotional reactions to stress,
whereas problem-focused coping involves proactive
efforts to change the external situation to reduce the
stress (Folkman & Lazarus, 1980, as cited in Fields &
Prinz, 1997). In particular, approach- and emotional-
focused strategies are often used with adolescents,
with an emphasis on active–cognitive coping (Armi-
stead et al., 1990; Compas, Malcarne, & Fondacaro,
1988). Avoidance coping strategies involve suppres-
sion, denial, using diversions, and externalizing, and
they are associated with greater distress and poorer
psychological adjustment (Causey & Dubow, 1992).
Parents who have experienced racial interchanges
that are mainly negative may engage in avoidant
approaches when dealing with racial discrimination,
and they may be mistrustful of other groups. They
may completely avoid discussing discrimination or
they may openly express denial of discrimination,
thereby modeling and teaching avoidant coping
strategies to their children. Parents who are less
mistrustful may model and teach problem-focused,
emotion-focused, or secondary coping strategies such
as acceptance or distraction as a method for dealing
with racial discrimination. Social learning theory
(Bandura, 1973), which purports that behavioral
influence occurs through imitation and modeling,
may explain why children in families that openly
express hostility or negativity toward other ethnic
groups may learn that these behaviors are valid and
consequently imitate them.
Despite the relevance of coping strategies for
ethnic minority youth, those used in response to ra-
cial discrimination and prejudice have not been
empirically tested. In light of the ambiguity, unpre-
dictability, and uncontrollability of discriminatory
events, approach-focused coping responses may fail
because there is little the victim can actually do to
change perpetratorsÕ behaviors. According to Com-
pas (1995), this strategy is positively associated with
perceived control or control beliefs. Thus, confront-
ing situations that are ‘‘objectively’’ viewed as
uncontrollable may lead adolescents to greater frus-
tration, feelings of helplessness, and distress.
Current empirical work on coping with dis-
crimination has indicated some variability in the use
of coping mechanisms by ethnic minorities. Scott
(2003) found that among African American youth,
the more control the youth felt he or she had over
perceived discrimination, the more likely it was that
Yasui and Dishion
he or she used approach-focused coping strategies.
African American youth who received more race-re-
lated socialization reported engaging in problem-
solving coping and seeking social support. In con-
trast, adolescents who reported higher levels of dis-
crimination distress and who had received minimal
racial socialization messages tended to use avoidance
coping strategies in response to discrimination.
Phinney and Chavira (1995) found that African
American youth who had received racial socialization
messages regarding personal achievement and coping
with racial discrimination were more likely to engage
in proactive coping strategies such as approach-or
emotion-focused coping (e.g., discussion, disapprov-
ing, or self-affirmation) than in passive or aggressive
coping strategies in the face of discrimination. Scott
(2003) also reported that African American youth
with a pronounced spiritual orientation and strong
belief in the value of effort tended to use more
problem-solving coping strategies. In addition, youth
who rated the African value of communalism as
highly important reported lower engagement in
avoidance coping strategies.
Few studies that have examined other ethnic
groupsÕ coping mechanisms indicate strong cultural
influences in the type of coping strategies individuals
use. For example, Noh, Beiser, and Kaspar (2003)
found that for Korean immigrants, problem-solving
coping, which included personal confrontation, tak-
ing formal action, and seeking social support, was
more effective for those who were more acculturated.
In a study of Southeast Asian refugees, Noh, Beiser,
Kaspar, Hou, and Rummens (1999) found that use of
emotion-focused coping or forbearance, which in-
cludes passive acceptance and emotional distraction,
weakened the link between perceived discrimination
and depression. Forbearance coping appeared to be
most effective with Asian refugees who reported a
strong ethnic identity, whereas for individuals who
did not identify with traditional ethnic values, neither
forbearance nor problem-solving coping were effec-
tive buffers against poor mental health outcomes.
These results support previous findings in which
Asians reported that the best way to respond to racial
discrimination is to ‘‘do nothing’’ and simply ignore
it or choose to regard it as part of life (Buchignani,
1982; Kuo, 1995; Noh et al., 1998). Coping strategies
used among Latinos also suggest that culture influ-
ences individual choices in coping behaviors. Gabri-
elidis and colleagues (1997) found that Latinos more
often preferred to use conflict resolution styles that
emphasized concern for the outcomes of others such
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
as accommodation and collaboration, compared with
European Americans. Thus, for Latinos who are
collectivistic in nature, avoidance may be the coping
strategy of choice when dealing with interpersonal
conflicts because it indicates a concern for others,
whereas in an individualistic culture, avoidance may
indicate a lack of concern for others.
Limited literature has described culturally spe-
cific coping strategies of ethnic minority youth. For
example, African American males use ‘‘cool pose’’
coping—a coping mechanism in which males display
behaviors such as pretending to be apathetic about
social convention, showing resistance to authorities,
and using physical expressions of male strength and
power as a means to protect oneself from internaliz-
ing negative images (Langley, 1994; Majors & Bill-
son, 1992). Morling and Fiske (1999) found that
harmony control, which is a subtype of secondary
coping, was associated with higher scores on inter-
dependence, suggesting that more collectivistic cul-
tures may use harmony control in coping with
interpersonal stressors.
Overall, these findings suggest that the trans-
mission of coping strategies occurs in a culturally
meaningful context. Only limited research addresses
how discriminatory experiences influence the trans-
mission of cross-generational negativity about racial
discrimination and, in turn, how these experiences
affect growth in adolescent problem behavior. It is yet
unclear to what extent the transmission of minority
experience serves as a protective factor for ethnic
minority youth. Future research is needed to identify
racial and ethnic socialization messages that promote
resilience against the negative impact of discrimina-
tion.
Bicultural Competence
Acculturation is becoming an increasingly
important concept as economic globalization, inter-
national migration, and modernization continue to
integrate the experiences of ethnic minorities and
immigrants into the mainstream culture. Redfield,
Linton, and Herskovits (1936) described accultura-
tion as ‘‘a phenomenon which results where groups of
individuals having different cultures come into con-
tinuous first-hand contact with subsequent changes in
the original culture patterns of either or both groups’’
(p.149). These authors observed that it is through
continuous interactions between original culture and
mainstream culture that ethnic minority individuals
experience both cultural conflict and cultural fusion,
159
which often lead to internal and sociocultural chan-
ges in the lives of ethnic minorities.
Berry (1980) describes the change process of
acculturation at the psychological level using four
dimensions of adaptation: (a) assimilation, (b) inte-
gration, (c) separation, and (d) marginalization.
Assimilation occurs when individuals seek incorpo-
ration and absorption into the mainstream society
rather than maintain a cultural identity that differ-
entiates them from the dominant culture. On the
other hand, separation occurs when individuals
choose to maintain their cultural identity by mini-
mizing contact and interaction with mainstream
society. Separated individuals tend to lead their lives
within the spheres of their culture of origin and are
minimally involved with members of other groups.
Integration occurs when individuals are involved in
both culture of origin and mainstream culture. Inte-
grated individuals maintain their cultural identity
while interacting and integrating with mainstream
society. Integrated individuals have bicultural iden-
tities in that they maintain a sense of belonging and
membership in both the culture of origin and main-
stream society. Last, marginalized individuals are
those who show little interest in the maintenance of
their cultural identity or integration into mainstream
culture. Marginalization often occurs as a result of
enforced cultural loss and discrimination or exclusion
from mainstream culture or even culture of origin.
LaFromboise, Coleman, and Gerton (1993) de-
scribe another framework of acculturation using five
separate models: (a) assimilation, (b) acculturation,
(c) fusion, (d) alternation, and (e) multiculturalism.
The assimilation model demonstrates an ongoing
process of absorption into the dominant or main-
stream culture, and the goal is to adapt oneÕs atti-
tudes and behaviors to become socially accepted by
mainstream society. Assimilated individuals lose ele-
ments of their culture of origin or their attachment to
it as they embrace and internalize mainstream culture
and eventually acquire a new mainstream identity.
The psychological and societal costs associated with
the process of assimilation include possible rejection
from the mainstream culture and culture of origin,
loss of oneÕs cultural identity, and attendant stress
and anxiety of incorporating new sets of cultural
beliefs and behaviors while discarding those of the
culture of origin (LaFromboise et al., 1993).
The acculturation model describes individuals
who are competent in the dominant culture, but who
will always be identified as a member of the culture of
origin. In contrast to individuals who assimilate by
160
gaining full membership in mainstream culture but
lose their cultural identity, individuals who accultur-
ate often come to the United States involuntarily and
choose to learn to integrate themselves with the
mainstream culture in order to survive. Models of
acculturation describe the process as stressful in that
they never acquire first-class citizenship in main-
stream culture and experience alienation from both
the culture of origin and dominant cultures (Kim,
1979; Padilla, 1980; Szapocznik, Kurtines, & Fer-
nandez, 1980). In contrast to assimilation, accultur-
ation involves reminders of the culture of origin
regardless of efforts to integrate into mainstream
culture.
The fusion model is based on the ideology be-
hind the melting pot theory. The model indicates that
cultures that share economic, geographic, or political
resources will ‘‘fuse’’ together to create a new culture.
The integrative nature of the fusion model assumes
that there is no hierarchy between mainstream and
other minority cultures, as opposed to the levels of
power clearly represented by the assimilation and
acculturation models (LaFromboise et al., 1993).
The alternation model represents an individualÕs
competence in both mainstream and minority cul-
tures. In contrast to the linear acculturative process
represented in the assimilation and acculturation
models, in which individuals shift their identity and
membership from the culture of origin to mainstream
culture, the alternation model suggests that the indi-
vidual maintains a bidirectional and orthogonal
relationship with each culture. An example is biling-
ualsÕ use of code switching (Saville-Troike, as cited in
LaFromboise et al., 1993), whereby individuals
alternate their behavior and attitudes depending on
cultural context. This model suggests the coexistence
of both cultures within the individual, and that the
individual is able to choose and alter behavior or
attitude on the basis of sociocultural context. La-
Fromboise et al. (1993) observed that this model is
the optimal model for psychological and sociocul-
tural functioning.
Finally, the multicultural model implies the
maintenance of distinct cultural identities while
individuals of different cultural backgrounds work
together in a single multicultural social structure.
According to Berry (1980), in a multicultural society
the various social groups are encouraged to maintain
and develop their identities, accept and tolerate other
groups, engage in intergroup communication, and
learn languages of the other groups. Questions have
been raised, however, about the likelihood that a
Yasui and Dishion
multicultural society can be maintained, because
separation of cultural groups often requires institu-
tional protection.
Each of these models of acculturation provides a
general framework from which we can understand
the psychological impact, social experiences, and
individual challenges associated with being bicultural.
It should be noted, however, that these models of
acculturation are not mutually exclusive. LaF-
rombroise et al. (1993) indicate that individual char-
acteristics and particular situations can largely
influence how adaptive each model of acculturation is
for a particular individual. According to LaFromb-
oise et al. (1993), ‘‘any one of these models may
represent an adequate explanation for a personÕs
experience as he or she acquires competency in a new
culture’’ (p. 401). Thus, it is not the acculturation
model or level per se, but the ways in which the
acculturative process is experienced and effectively
managed by specific individuals that are potential
target areas in culturally adaptive interventions for
ethnic minority youth and families. Understanding
the impact of the daily challenges of negotiating and
adapting oneÕs perspective and behaviors between
bicultural worlds is an essential step toward catering
interventions and intervention components to ade-
quately meet the specific needs of ethnic minority
populations. Thus, incorporating culturally grounded
intervention components such as bicultural compe-
tence or intergenerational differences in acculturation
is a critical step toward developing effective inter-
ventions that are culturally adaptive and sensitive.
The majority of ethnic minorities who undergo
these acculturative processes experience stress as part
of the adaptation process. Acculturative stress that
directly results from the adaptation experience is
characterized by perceived discrimination, language
barriers, perceived cultural conflicts, lack of mainte-
nance of cultural values, differences in acculturation
levels among family members, and lack of knowledge
of culture of origin or mainstream culture (Szapocz-
nik et al., 1989; Vega, Zimmerman, Gil, Warheit, &
Apospori, 1993; Williams & Berry, 1991).
The psychological impact of acculturation has
been documented (Hovey & King, 1996; Hovey &
Magaña, 2000). Acculturative stress is associated
with higher levels of depression (Salgado de Snyder,
1987; Vega, Kolody, Valle, & Hough, 1986), anxiety
(Hovey & Magaña, 2002), suicidal ideation (Hovey &
King, 1996), and increased drug use (Gil et al., 2000).
Assimilation of immigrant youth into mainstream
culture is associated with higher rates of substance
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
use (Vega & Gil, 1998), delinquency (Buriel, Calzada,
& Vazquez, 1982; Szapocznik et al., 1980), and
depression (Kaplan & Marks, 1990).
The impact of the acculturation process is
also mediated through family systems such as mari-
tal and parent–child subsystems and individual
family members. For example, changes in family
socialization processes are felt strongly among youth.
Adaptations in child-rearing practices, parental dis-
ciplining methods, and parental expectations are
common when families live in more than one culture.
Gil et al. (2000) found that acculturative stress was
associated with lower levels of familism and parental
respect among immigrant and US-born Latino ado-
lescent males. The authors also found that the impact
of acculturation on extent of alcohol use was medi-
ated by decreases in familism and increased adoles-
cent disposition to deviance. Among Mexican
American adolescents, increased levels of accultura-
tion were associated with decreases in parental
monitoring, increases in family conflict, and higher
levels of adolescent delinquency (Samaniego &
Gonzales, 1999). Both family conflict and parental
monitoring mediated the effect of acculturation on
delinquency, indicating the significance of the family
context for these youth. Dinh, Roosa, Tein, and
Lopez (2002) reported that acculturation had an
indirect effect on levels of problem behavior by means
of parental involvement and adolescent self-esteem.
Parental involvement was a significant mediator of
acculturation on behavior of Hispanic youth.
Intergenerational conflict reported by ethnic
minority adolescents and their parents reveals the
impact of acculturation on the family system (Gil,
Vegas, & Dimas, 1994; Vega, Khoury, Zimmerman,
Gil, & Warheit, 1995). The friction often stems from
differences among family members in terms of cul-
tural values and familial roles or responsibilities.
Among the challenges ethnic minority parents asso-
ciate with rearing a child in ‘‘two cultures’’ is the need
to balance the integration of mainstream lifestyle and
perspectives that seem necessary for succeeding in
school and society, with preserving their cultural
identity (Nah, 1993). Intergenerational conflict is also
rooted in the differing expectations that mainstream
and ethnic minority cultures have regarding adoles-
cent autonomy and freedom, and familial roles and
obligations (Arnett, 1998). For example, Rohner and
Pettengill (1985) found that for Korean immigrant
families, strong parental control increased conflict
between parents and their adolescents. In contrast,
adolescents in Korea perceived high parental control
161
to be associated with more parental warmth and
absence of neglect. Min (1995) found that Korean
immigrant parents suffered problems of parental
authority because of the shift in family roles and
power structures caused by language barriers, their
long hours of employment, and inadequate parental
knowledge of mainstream culture. Chan and Leong
(1994) found that more-acculturated Chinese children
who were fluent in English acted as translators, cul-
tural experts, and representatives of the family.
Matusoka (1990) found that prior to immigrating to
the United States, Vietnamese youth reported having
had a sense of self that adhered with family values
and relationships, whereas after a few years of
residing in the United States, the same youth reported
that their sense of identity was secured in their peers.
Other studies have examined how differences in
acculturation levels between parents and adolescents
impact the family system. Farver, Narang, and Bhada
(2002) found that American-born Asian Indian ado-
lescents whose parents exhibited either a separated or
marginalized acculturation style reported more fam-
ily conflict. On the other hand, families in which child
and parent acculturation levels were similar reported
lower levels of family conflict, less adolescent anxiety,
and greater adolescent self-esteem. Coatsworth,
Maldonado-Molina, Pantin, and Szapocznik (2005)
found that assimilated Hispanic youth reported sig-
nificantly higher levels of adolescent problem
behavior and lower levels of parental monitoring
compared with youth who reported a separated or
bicultural acculturation style. Of all acculturation
groups, youth who reported bicultural adaptation
had the highest academic competence, peer-level so-
cial competence, and parental monitoring, suggesting
that the bicultural acculturation style was the optimal
style in terms of positive youth adjustment and use of
effective family management strategies.
The majority of the literature about acculturation
suggests that biculturalism is the most adaptive form.
BerryÕs (1980) model of integration and LaFromboise
et al.Õs (1993) model of alternation propose that
acculturation to a new culture can be independent of
identification with oneÕs culture of origin, in which
case individuals hold a bidirectional and orthogonal
relationship with each culture. Bicultural individuals
maintain relationships with both cultures rather than
choose membership in one over the other.
The model of biculturalism proposed by Birman
(1994) suggests that bicultural individuals display
varying patterns of behavior and identification with
the culture of origin and with the host culture and
162
proposes a typology of biculturalism that includes
blended as well as integrated biculturalism. Accord-
ing to this model, blended biculturals highly identify
with and behaviorally engage in both ethnic and
mainstream cultures and thus develop a new ‘‘fused’’
identity that is a combination of both cultures.
Blended biculturals do not perceive their ethnic cul-
ture to be distinct from the mainstream culture, and
do not see conflict between the cultures. In the
statements from study participants, ‘‘It really doesnÕt
seem like two cultures to me,’’ and ‘‘I see them as
one,’’ Phinney and Devich-Navarro (1997) provide
examples of blended individualsÕ experience.
In contrast, integrated biculturals are those who
are highly behaviorally involved in both ethnic and
mainstream cultures, yet they hold a firm sense of
identity as a member of their ethnic group. Integrated
biculturals (Phinney & Devich-Navarro, 1997) do not
experience the overlap in their identity as do their
blended counterparts; they feel comfortable func-
tioning in both circles. In the study by Phinney and
Devich-Navarro (1997), alternating biculturals were
quoted as saying, ‘‘I put myself as a mixture. It works
as me accepting some of their culture and I keep my
culture too,’’ and ‘‘You are not as American as an-
other White person.’’ In another study, integrated
biculturals reported that it is easier to be either ethnic
or mainstream but hard to be both at the same time
(Vivero & Jenkins, 1999). Integrated biculturals are
very aware of the variability of their two cultural
identities and are able to competently switch their
behaviors between cultures.
Empirical evidence supports the important role
biculturalism plays in the positive adjustment of
ethnic minority youth (Szapocznik, Kurtines, &
Fernandez, 1980). Bicultural competence involves the
ability to function competently in various do-
mains—e.g., identity development, cultural aware-
ness and knowledge, intergroup attitudes, bicultural
efficacy, bicultural communication, role repertoire,
and groundedness. Individuals who have a secure,
integrated bicultural identity are more likely to ex-
hibit adaptive coping in both culture of origin and
mainstream culture (La Fromboise et al., 1993).
Studies have reported the psychological advantage of
maintaining a bicultural identity; for example, Lang,
Munoz, Bernal, and Sorenson (1982) found that
Hispanics with a bicultural identity indicated better
psychological well being, less depression, and better
academic achievement. The achievement of a bicul-
tural identity provides the foundation for individuals
to develop an awareness of their attitudes about both
Yasui and Dishion
mainstream and ethnic groups. The ability to perceive
both mainstream and ethnic cultures as positive yet
distinct entities is central to successfully identifying
and maintaining membership in two or more cultures
(Palleja, 1987).
Bicultural efficacy, which is ‘‘the belief, or con-
fidence, that one can live effectively and in a satisfying
manner, within two groups without compromising
oneÕs sense of cultural identity’’ (LaFromboise et al.,
1993, p. 404), is an integral aspect of effective func-
tioning in mainstream culture and culture of origin.
Szapocznik et al. (1980) indicated that biculturalism
is the most advantageous style for acculturating
persons because of its flexibility—individuals can use
skills that are appropriate to specific cultural de-
mands of varying situations. It allows individualsÕ
roles and behaviors to vary according to the culture
of contact (McFee, 1968; Szapocznik et al., 1980).
La Fromboise and colleagues (1993) found that
bicultural competence is most successful when one is
grounded in an extensive social network in both
mainstream and ethnic cultures. The ability to inte-
grate into a social network that serves as a support
system and enhances oneÕs sense of connection and
belonging to the culture is crucial for maintaining a
healthy bicultural lifestyle (La Fromboise et al., 1993).
Several studies suggest the importance of communal
support. For example, Palinkas (1982) maintained
that a solid social network that (a) grounds individ-
uals in their original culture, and (b) supports their
adjustment to mainstream culture significantly
dampens the negative impact of acculturation.
The literature about biculturalism underscores
its importance as a protective factor for ethnic
minority youth who may face multiple challenges in
social, political, and economic domains. Bicultural
competence gained through exploring and interacting
with both culture of origin and mainstream culture
appears to be a significant aspect of resilience for
ethnic minority youth. The development of bicultural
competence that necessarily involves investigation,
integration, and the learning of behavioral expecta-
tions and attitudes of both cultures, begins in the very
immediate context of the family home, where parents,
extended family, and kin transmit their cultural
worldview through knowledge, behavior, and role
modeling.
Summary
Current literature about the socialization prac-
tices of ethnic minority families emphasizes cultural
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
variation in the conceptualization of adaptive and
functional parenting practices, when comparing
adaptive adjustment among ethnic minority and
mainstream European American children. Our over-
view of ethnic minority familial socialization thus
emphasizes the centrality of culture in the ecology of
ethnic minority youth. Culture touches every con-
textual level of the ecology of these youth, from
parental socialization practices to larger sociocultural
challenges, including poverty, discrimination, and
acculturation. Across Asian American, Latino, Afri-
can American, and American Indian families, we
have witnessed great variability in parenting prac-
tices, cultural values, familial expectations, and soci-
etal influences, revealing the differences in
socialization goals that are determined by each cul-
tureÕs conceptualization of adaptive or functional
behaviors associated with psychosocial competence in
children. This diversity among ethnic minority fami-
lies in their conceptualization of ‘‘appropriate child
development’’ thus underscores the necessity for
developmental research to place cultural variability at
the core of the research framework. It is imperative
that future developmental research examine central
cultural variables in order to develop culturally rele-
vant theories and research methodologies that
examine both risk and resiliency in the developmental
trajectory of ethnic minority children.
CHILD AND FAMILY INTERVENTIONS
Overview
The vast majority of research about intervention
and prevention programs for children and adoles-
cents stems from European American theories of
normative child development and uses predominantly
European American middle class samples (Hammond
& Yung, 1993). Despite the inclusion of ethnic
minorities in study samples, little is known about
whether these interventions are effective with specific
ethnic minority groups and the extent to which
intervention effectiveness could be enhanced by tai-
loring interventions to diverse cultural features
(Ashery, Robertson, & Kumpfer, 1999; Biglan, 1998;
Hawkins, 1998; Spoth, 1998 as cited in Spoth, Guyll,
Chao, & Molgaard, 2003). Moreover, because many
models of psychopathology and problem behavior
are developed primarily using European American
populations, interventions have targeted behaviors,
attitudes, and beliefs that are more typical of Euro-
pean American families. It is often left to the discre-
163
tion of the clinician to adapt or modify the
intervention to fit the needs of the minority popula-
tion with whom they are working.
Two approaches can be taken to improve the
link between empirically supported interventions
and the growing needs and interests of diverse
children and families. One approach is to develop
‘‘fixed’’ manualized intervention programs that are
specific to an ethnic minority group. This approach
fits within an etic approach of behavioral science
that examines universal or pancultural truths or
principles (Berry, 1969), rather than addresses vari-
ations within and across cultural groups. An etic
approach to interventions suggests that all individ-
uals are the same and that any differences in psy-
chological outcomes stems from the individual
characteristics rather than group-level differences.
Thus, ethnically specific characteristics such as re-
cency of immigration, socioeconomic status, and
country of origin are generally not assessed, and
further, not included in the interpretation of inter-
vention outcomes. The second approach to linking
cultural diversity issues and empirically supported
interventions is to create a general intervention
strategy that explicitly tailors the intervention to the
assessed needs of an individual child and family, and
thus inherently provides the flexibility to address
cultural variation. The latter approach is advocated
in this review.
In response to the call for understanding how
individual intervention needs influence intervention
effectiveness, researchers have developed a research-
based intervention/system of preventions referred to
as adaptive interventions (Collins, Murphy, & Bier-
man, 2004). This approach entails adapting or shap-
ing the intervention to the specific intervention needs
of individuals, whether it means assigning different
dosages or varying the intervention components
according to the presenting problems of each indi-
vidual. Tailoring interventions to familiesÕ particular
needs is consistent with an emic approach to behavior
science that focuses on the aspects that appear to
differ across cultures (Berry, 1969), but it also retains
the benefits of etic science (e.g., model building). In
these interventions, the assignment of treatment
components is determined by examining the effect of
tailoring variables (variables of the individual that are
expected to moderate intervention effects) on the
client. Collins et al. (2004) indicate that tailoring
variables generally includes identifying characteristics
specific to the individual, family, or context that
‘‘represent risk or protective factors that influence
164
preferences for various types or intensity of pre-
ventive interventions’’ (p.186).
Adaptive interventions may be one of the most
optimal research designs for developing culturally
sensitive or culturally adaptive intervention pro-
grams. The key principle is that interventions are
tailored and adapted on the basis of systematic
assessment (Dishion & Stormshak, 2007). The
framework allows for integration of both etic and
emic approaches in that specific risk and protective
factors are measured and used to determine the
appropriate intervention for the overarching etic
concern (e.g., adolescent problem behavior). The
processes of choosing and measuring tailoring vari-
ables, and further, using the data from tailoring
variables as a tool for making decisions about
appropriate interventions are all critical research
stages relevant to developing culturally sensitive
treatments.
Second, the flexible structure of adaptive inter-
ventions is advantageous for intervention research
with ethnic minority children and families because the
decisions about intervention targets are driven by
participant data. In contrast to fixed interventions, in
which the decisions regarding appropriate treatment
considerations are previously determined (e.g., prior
research findings), adaptive interventions use the
information from tailoring variables as a guide to
determine the more appropriate treatment choices for
a specific individual. This approach allows research-
ers the flexibility to test whether particular cultural
constructs or variables will moderate or mediate
intervention effects. Empirically testing the effects
may lead to the development of new ideas, theories,
and research methodologies for interventions with
ethnic minority populations.
Using assessments to make subsequent decisions
regarding the nature and quality of interventions is
key to the adaptive intervention approach. For
example, the EcoFIT model (see Fig. 3), an ecological
approach to family intervention and treatment
(Dishion and Stormshak, 2007), uses the Family
Check-Up assessment that facilitates the develop-
ment of a collaborative set for change on the basis of
clinical interviews and a structured family assessment.
This intervention model has been used with families
of diverse ethnic backgrounds with demonstrated
effectiveness for reducing child (Shaw, Dishion,
Supplee, Gardner, & Arnds, 2006) and adolescent
(Connell et al., 2007, in press; Dishion, Kavanagh,
Schneiger, Nelson, & Kaufman, 2002) problem
behavior.
Yasui and Dishion
Brief Interventions
The Family Check-Up Parent Groups
Initial Feedback
Family Therapy
Intake Ecological &
Interview Assessment Motivation Child Interventions
School Interventions
Ecological Management
(e.g. , community referrals)
Fig. 3 An overview of the ecological strategy
Although all aspects of the intervention model
are grounded empirically, several specific features are
relevant to promoting a culturally sensitive and
effective intervention for diverse families. These issues
will be discussed in more detail with respect to
assessment, client–therapist interaction dynamics,
and the intervention menu.
Family Assessments
The effectiveness of interventions depends lar-
gely on both the quality of the assessments and what
variables are measured. Assessments successful in
measuring the key needs of the population are more
likely to promote motivation to change and guide the
adaptive and tailoring process for intervention
(EcoFIT model, Dishion & Stormshak, 2007). To
stimulate motivation to change for many families of
color, it is necessary to assess features of their lives
that are unique to their groupsÕ historical perspective
in the United States as well as features of their cul-
tural values relevant to how they function as a family.
We propose that constructs such as ethnic identity
and racial socialization are in fact integral to the
assessment of all families, including European
American families. As discussed previously, there is a
growing acceptance and endorsement of multicul-
turalism, and White families are encouraged to reflect
on their own culture and heritage with respect to
these issues, and to consider how their cultural con-
text affects parenting.
In the following pages, we will review assess-
ments dimensions that play a central role in the reli-
ability and the validity of assessments. In particular,
we will use examples from current literature about
ethnic minority research and intervention research to
review critical assessment domains that are integral in
the development of effective, culturally adaptive
interventions (Fig. 4).
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior 165

Conceptual Teacher Parent Child Directly

Construct equivalence or conceptual equivalence
Domain Report Report Report Observe refers to the similarity in conceptual meaning among
Child Behavior, Behavior, Behavior, Compliance, two or more cultural groups (Okazaki & Sue, 1995).
Adjustment Emotion Emotion Emotion behavior with
Coping, Coping, Coping, parents and While examining a construct across ethnic groups, it
Ethnic Identity Ethnic Identity Ethnic Identity peers
is important to know if it has the same or similar
Peer Acceptance, Acceptance, Acceptance, Playground meaning across both comparison groups. The
Stigmatization, Stigmatization, Stigmatization, behavior
Relations
Network Network Network
equivalence of a construct may be highly dependent
Family
Fa Depression on the cultural context in which the construct and
Context Ethnic Identity assessment are developed. When comparing con-
SES
Family Parenting Parenting,
structs across cultural groups that differ in cultural
Management Racial communication
Racial
worldviews, values, beliefs, traditions, history,
Socialization
socialization sociopolitical backgrounds, and economic status, it is
critical that researchers consider how these sociocul-
Fig. 4 A culturally informed assessment battery tural influences affect the meaning and functionality
of the construct for the groups of interest.
Multiagent, Multimethod Assessment In developmental psychology, the majority of
child development constructs examined are those
The use of multiple sources of information has founded on principles of normative child develop-
played a critical role in family-centered interventions ment in mainstream society. As a result, develop-
(Conger, Patterson, & Ge, 1995; Dishion & Kava- mental studies with ethnic minorities have largely
nagh, 2002; Reid, Baldwin, Patterson, & Dishion, focused on the comparison of ethnic minority chil-
1988). Integrating information from various sources dren with European American middle class standards
such as teachers, parents, children, elders, and or samples because of an underlying assumption that
observers allows the interventionist to make valid and they represent universal standards (McLoyd & Ran-
reliable conceptualizations of the childÕs ecological dolph, 1984). For example, the common use of
context. Moreover, the use of multiple assessment authoritarian parenting styles among Asian, Latino,
procedures (e.g., surveys, interviews, direct observa- and African American families may be interpreted as
tions) further enhances case conceptualization, in that maladaptive, because European American samples
different measurement methods may capture aspects have shown a positive association between
of the family ecology that may not have been reported authoritarian parenting and externalizing problems
or were not apparent in certain measures (e.g., direct (Chao & Kim, 2000; Deater-Deckard et al., 1996;
observations capturing family processes that are not McLoyd et al., 2000). This is but one example of the
reported in self-report or in interviews). For example, obvious need for culturally anchored research meth-
the EcoFIT model uses a multiagent, multimethod ods to operationalize constructs so they are mean-
assessment battery for intervention research that also ingful to ethnic minority children and families.
integrates cultural constructs identified as central to Several researchers have implemented culturally
ethnic minority child development (Fig. 4). sensitive ways to achieve construct equivalence across
groups. Hughes and DuMont (1993) used focus
Construct Equivalence or Conceptual Equivalence group interviews to tap into cultural constructs and
further define their meanings. Fisher and Ball (2002)
Cultural sensitivity of assessment measures is a integrated community members as research staff who
growing area of concern in developmental psychol- examined whether assessments and intervention
ogy. Particularly in the area of standardized testing, components addressed the concerns of the commu-
the consistently poor performance and dispropor- nity. The inclusion of community members is bene-
tionate displacement of ethnic minority children have ficial because they can help determine the cultural
resulted in the enactment of federal mandates such as validity of the assessments.
Public Law 94–142 that requires school districts to Linguistic equivalence is another area of impor-
ensure nondiscriminatory assessments (Guerra & tance when administering assessments across ethnic
Jagers, 1998). Problems that arise from lack of con- minority groups, particularly those whose native
struct equivalence, linguistic equivalence, and mea- language is not English. Administration of assess-
surement equivalence are rooted in cultural bias in ments in English may result in poorer performance or
assessments (Okazaki & Sue, 1995). outcomes for ethnic minority youth because they
166
misinterpret information or do not understand the
assessment. To ensure linguistic equivalence, assess-
ments should be translated (e.g., English version
translated to Spanish), then back translated (Spanish
version translated back to English), followed by a
comparison of the two English versions (Brislin,
1993). However, researchers should not assume that
because a measure has been translated and back
translated it is equivalent across cultures. Diaz-
Guerrero and Diaz-Loving (1990) found that three
personality constructs derived in European American
samples were not replicated in Mexican samples even
after the measure was translated and back translated.
The factor analysis with the Mexican sample failed to
confirm the original factor structure and resulted in
an uninterpretable factor structure. The authors
concluded that the translations were not sensitive to
the differences in construct meanings across cultures.
Furthermore, even among cultural groups that speak
English as their native language (e.g., African
Americans), certain linguistic components that are
culturally specific should be accounted for in assess-
ments (Okazaki & Sue, 1995).
Measurement equivalence is the extent to which a
particular measure elicits the same responses across
groups. Findings have indicated the danger of
assuming that a particular assessment or assessment
administration procedure will elicit the same type of
information from respondents of varying back-
grounds. For example, in behavioral observation
measures, Gonzales and colleagues (1996) found that
African American coders rated African American
parents as more effective in parenting, whereas non-
African American coders rated African American
families as significantly higher in family conflict and
parental control. Terrell, Terrell, and Taylor (1980)
found that the ethnicity and the interactional style of
the examiner significantly influenced the scores on
intellectual performance of African American but not
of European American children.
Other areas of assessment equivalence include
scalar equivalence, item equivalence, and task equiv-
alence. Knight and Hill (1998) described scalar
equivalence as the point at which a ‘‘given score on a
measure refers to the same degree, intensity, or mag-
nitude of the construct across ethnic or racial groups’’
(p. 184). Several studies have documented the lack of
scalar equivalence in assessments; for example, Bach-
man and OÕMalley (1984) found evidence of extreme
response styles among African Americans compared
with European American respondents. Chen, Lee, and
Stevenson (1995) found that compared with North
Yasui and Dishion
American students, Chinese and Japanese students
responded using the midpoint scores on the scales. The
authors suggest that ethnic and cultural differences in
response sets may reflect differences in cultural norms
in responding to stimuli; for example, the modest
responses of Chinese and Japanese students align
with their cultural expectations and behaviors. Ethnic
differences in response sets may also reflect differences
in how respondents translate subjective experiences
into numerical, categorical responses which for some
may be a very foreign concept.
Item equivalence describes the extent to which
items on the measure have the same meaning across
ethnic groups (Knight & Hill, 1998). Expressions
common in mainstream culture may not be interpreted
in the same way by an ethnic minority respondent who
has never heard or used those particular expressions.
It is critical that researchers use cultural perspective to
scrutinize items and modify expressions to match the
understanding of the cultural group.
Finally, task equivalence describes the respon-
dentÕs familiarity with the assessment procedure
(Knight & Hill, 1998). For many ethnic minority
participants, rating oneÕs thoughts or feelings or
interacting with family members while being video-
taped are experiences that are outside their cultural
context. As a result, some respondents may behave in
ways they believe are desirable to the experimenter.
The observational study by Gonzales and colleagues
(1996) reported that for Asian American families,
obtaining reliable ratings of family interactions was
difficult because of the inhibited responses of the
families. The authors reported that for the Asian
American sample the observational paradigm may
have been inappropriate ‘‘because it asks families to do
something that is not just potentially ÔartificialÕ . . . but
perhaps culturally prohibited’’ (p. 280). These findings
indicate the need to carefully examine the cultural
context of the participants and design or modify
assessments so they are relevant to the target popula-
tion. Fisher and Ball (2002) incorporated the use of
storytelling of American Indian legends into their
behavior observation task because it serves as a means
for American Indian youth and families to connect
with the task, and also provides a culturally sanctioned
method to discuss problematic topics with youth.
Evaluating assessment equivalence plays a criti-
cal role in obtaining culturally reliable and valid data.
As such, researchers have increasingly focused on
implementing several methodological procedures for
developing culturally sensitive assessments and
assessment procedures that align with the cultural
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
framework of ethnic minority populations. First,
researchers must conduct extensive testing of both
assessments and assessment procedures in the culture
of interest. Piloting of assessments will provide
researchers with information that can help identify
areas needing implementation of culturally appro-
priate methods. Examples of culturally sensitive
methods include the integration of cultural traditions,
history, and practices into the assessment; use of
ethnographic assessment procedures such as partici-
pant observation or interviewing local informants; or
use of focus groups recruited from the community of
interest. Second, the inclusion of members from the
culture or community as research staff can increase
the cultural sensitivity of the assessments because
they provide insight into participantsÕ experiences of
engaging in research. Last, researchers should obtain
information from a variety of sources to create an
accurate picture of a childÕs adjustment. Use of a
multiagent, multimethod approach enables the col-
lection of information on a variety of levels, including
from the individual (child), family members (parent,
siblings), school informants (teachers, peers), and
observers (coders in research), thus allowing the re-
searcher to effectively obtain an accurate picture of
the childÕs development.
Intervention Menu
Work by Collins et al. (2004) supports the effi-
cacy of adaptive intervention designs for interven-
tions targeting ethnic minority youth and families. In
the following section we discuss ways that ‘‘cultural’’
adaptations can be incorporated into adaptive inter-
vention research to develop culturally sensitive
treatments for ethnic minority populations. Bernal
and colleagues (1995) identified eight core dimensions
that are necessary for the development of cultural
adaptive psychosocial treatments: (a) language of
intervention, (b) persons of intervention, (c) meta-
phors used in intervention, (d) content or cultural
knowledge, (e) concepts, (f) goals of treatment, (g)
methods for treatment, and (h) context. We will re-
view these following dimensions using examples from
existing interventions and discuss the implementation
of these cultural adaptations relevant to culturally
sensitive adaptive interventions.
Language
Understanding the significance of language is
central to interventions with immigrant populations
167
whose primary language is not English. Language is
more than a means of communication; culture is
inherent in language through its symbols, words, and
euphemisms (Bernal, Bonilla, & Bellido, 1995).
Knowing a language also increases awareness and
knowledge of the culture, which can heighten the
effectiveness of culturally sensitive interventions
(Dolgin, Salazar, & Cruz, 1987; Sue & Zane, 1987).
For example, one study showed that matching the
language of the therapist and client was associated
with decreased client treatment drop out and in-
creased treatment outcomes for Asian American and
Mexican American individuals whose primary lan-
guage was not English (Sue, Fujino, Hu, Takeuchi, &
Zane, 1991). Using cultural terms during communi-
cation also has been shown to increase treatment
involvement; for example, Spoth et al., (2003) named
their prevention program for African American
youth ‘‘Harambee,’’ a Swahili word that means
‘‘pulling together.’’ Language in intervention tran-
scends the mechanical practicality of communicating
the intervention and includes the ‘‘use of cultural
syntonic languages, particularly within inner-city,
regional, or subcultural groups’’ (Bernal et al., 1995,
p. 74).
Person
In intervention, the person dimension refers to
the client and therapist variables and the therapeutic
relationship (Bernal et al., 1995). A growing body of
literature suggests that therapist effects are a critical
feature of intervention efficacy. Indeed, ground-
breaking research by Wampold (2001) revealed that
therapist ‘‘school’’ (i.e., cognitive behavior, interper-
sonal therapy) was minimally associated with inter-
vention effects; however, nonspecific therapist factors
accounted for a substantial proportion of the vari-
ance in treatment outcome (12%). This suggests that
unmeasured factors associated with client and ther-
apist interactions are critical for engaging and moti-
vating change. We hypothesize that for ethnic
minority families, the therapistÕs awareness of and
sensitivity to the familyÕs culture, experiences as a
minority member, historical issues regarding educa-
tion, and mental health and the like are critical to the
change process. Figure 5 provides an overview of
how these effects might play out from the time of the
initial contact through treatment.
Significant work on the beneficial effects of eth-
nic matching between therapist and client was
undertaken by Gamst, Dana, Der-Karabetian, &
168
Initial Clinical
Initial
Telephone Contacts Assessment
Informed Session
Contacts
Consent
Nonspecific Professional Behavior:
Respect, appropriate dress, empathy, warmth, cultural sensitivity,
clear boundaries, and structuring skill
Time
Fig. 5 Overview of steps toward meaningful clinical engagement
and change
Kramer (2000). They found that for Asian American,
African American, and Latino clients, ethnic match
between therapist and clients predicted higher psy-
chological functioning at termination for clients with
schizophrenia and mood disorders, whereas no
association was found for Caucasian clients. Gamst
and colleagues (2004) also found that for adolescent
Latino and African American clients, having a ther-
apist of similar ethnic or racial background predicted
significant increases in psychological functioning at
termination. McCabe (2002) studied factors that
predicted premature termination among Mexican
American children and found that ethnic matching of
therapist and client was associated with lower drop
out rates.
Some studies have investigated other culturally
relevant variables within the therapist domain that
contribute to treatment outcome with ethnic minor-
ities. Recently, Constantine (2001) examined whether
therapist ethnicity, ethnic match, previous academic
multicultural training, and self-reported multicul-
tural competence predicted observer ratings of ther-
apistsÕ multicultural competence. Interestingly, after
accounting for the ethnicity of client or therapist, the
number of formal multicultural counseling courses
completed by the therapist predicted the ratings of
therapistsÕ cultural competence above and beyond the
effect of therapist or client ethnicity. Atkinson, Casas,
and Abreu (1992) found that in their sample of
Latinos, perceptions of cultural sensitivity in the
therapist was the single most important variable,
independent of ethnicity or clientÕs level of accultur-
ation.
Several studies have examined the influences of
client cultural variables on treatment preference.
Johnson and Lashley (1989) and Bennet and Big-
Foot-Sipes (1991) found that greater commitment to
American Indian culture increased preference for
ethnic matching. Atkinson and Lowe (1995) found
that African Americans immersed in pro-Black racial
Yasui and Dishion
Clinical
identity preferred an ethnically similar therapist,
Engagement whereas those at the internalization level of racial
& Motivated
Change identity development based their preference on fac-
tors other than ethnicity. Lopez and colleagues (1991)
found that moderately acculturated Hispanic male
college students had the strongest preference for a
therapist from the same background and that His-
panic students with the lowest acculturation indicated
a preference for a European American therapist.
Although matching client and therapist ethnicity may
be an advantage, in most service settings exact
matching is not possible. Therefore, it is necessary to
train child and family intervention staff to provide
culturally sensitive interventions, and through their
awareness of cultural issues translate and tailor
empirically supported interventions to fit familiesÕ
cultural perspective.
Metaphors
One critical therapeutic skill a therapist can use
to tailor an intervention to the needs of diverse
families is the use of language metaphors. Language
metaphors include cultural symbols and concepts
that are meaningful to ethnic minority families and
are shared by the targeted population (Bernal et al.,
1995). For example, in their culturally adapted parent
management training interventions with Latino
populations, Martinez and Eddy (2005) reported
coining the interventionists as entrenadores rather
than by titles that would suggest ‘‘parent expert.’’ In
the Families Unidas intervention (Pantin et al., 2003),
facilitators modified the delivery of the parent group
session to include social engagement time for parents
prior to sessions—a common custom among Latinos.
The intervention staff also addressed the mothers and
fathers in the parent group formally as ‘‘Mr.’’ and
‘‘Mrs.’’ as a way to show respect for the families
(Tapia, Schwartz, Prado, Lopez, & Pantin, 2006).
These subtle adaptations are ways to maintain and
respect Latino cultural values of deferring to
authority (respeto) and promote the cohesive social
networks of Latino families (familism). Incorpora-
tion of artwork or pictures of the ethnic group are
also symbols that reflect cultural sensitivity. For
example, Spoth and colleagues (2003) used African
artwork and pictures of African American staff and
participants in the intervention materials that
were presented to the adolescents and families. In
Belgrave and colleaguesÕ (2004) cultural intervention
for African American girls, the intervention staff,
called mzees—which refers to respected elders in
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
Kiswahili—served as role models for the girls in the
sessions. The mzeesÕ role was to function as a ‘‘sister
mentor’’ to the girls. The mzees facilitated engage-
ment in the group sessions while modeling behavior
that would promote the maintenance of healthy
relationships.
Cultural Knowledge
Cultural knowledge—awareness and under-
standing of cultural values, beliefs, customs, tradi-
tions, and norms—is central in the deliverance of
culturally sensitive interventions to ethnic minority
families. This dimension is particularly important in
the development of adaptive interventions because
cultural content provides the basis for identifying
important tailoring variables necessary for the inter-
vention. For example, Stevenson (2002) developed a
multisystemic intervention, Preventing Long-term
Anger and Aggression in Youth (PLAAY) that tar-
gets anger and aggression among African American
adolescent boys. PLAAY incorporates cultural ele-
ments through several components: a martial arts
aggression reduction curriculum, basketball play that
involves face-to-face in-vivo anger management
coaching, community-based parent empowerment
education, and a rites of passage program. According
to Stevenson (2002), PLAAY was developed through
integrating cultural dimensions central to the African
American experience such as empowerment, cultural
history and traditions, racial identity development,
psycho-historical racism, and within-race differences.
Racial socialization was also included as one of four
key parenting processes targeted in the Strong Afri-
can American Families (SAAF) program by Brody
and colleagues (2005). Parents in SAAF were taught
consistent nurturing parenting practices, adaptive
racial socialization strategies, and strategies for clear
communication and limit setting. Racial socialization
strategies involved parents teaching their children
the realities of racial oppression while promoting
success in the face of these social barriers (Brody
et al., 2005). In Familias Unidas (Pantin et al., 2003),
‘‘joining’’ the Hispanic families is described as an
important social–cultural process. The therapist
enters the familyÕs world through acknowledging
the acculturative stress that faces the parents and
adolescents. Through this process the therapist
gradually blends into the social support network of
the family and becomes ‘‘part of the family.’’ The
integration of the therapist into the familyÕs social
network is actively acknowledging familism. In the
169
Indian Family Wellness project (Fisher & Ball, 2002),
the intervention aimed to recreate tribal traditions
such as storytelling, inclusion of extended family, and
the incorporation of indigenous beliefs and values.
Concepts
Evaluating the concepts of an intervention
entails understanding the fundamental theories or
models underlying the intervention and their limita-
tions with respect to the cultural group being served
(Bernal et al., 1995). Within cross-cultural psychol-
ogy, etic versus emic and individualism–collectivism
are examples of overarching concepts that can largely
influence how mental health is conceptualized and
treated. The importance of integrating etic and emic
approaches to ethnic minority intervention has
already been discussed. Similarly, conceptualizing the
treatment research from an individualistic or collec-
tivistic perspective will impact every level of the
intervention, from conceptualization of the core
issues, choice of assessment materials, intervention
delivery, to interpretation of the findings. For
example, Sue and Zane (1987) argue that the com-
patibility between the therapistÕs conceptualization of
the presenting issues and the clientÕs belief systems is
essential for increasing therapist credibility and
treatment efficacy. Thus, evaluating the overarching
concepts of the intervention, whether it be etic versus
emic, or a combination of etic and emic, is critical for
developing culturally appropriate interventions.
Goals
The goals of an intervention are influenced by
cultural values. Determining the goals of the inter-
vention calls for consensus between the therapist and
client as they identify the problem and the areas
needing intervention, and the goals must be deter-
mined prior to intervention development (Bernal
et al., 1995). Culturally sensitive treatments are those
that successfully set compatible therapist and client
goals by means of cultural informants and integration
of cultural research personnel. Cultural informants
can be members of the community or neighborhood,
focus group members, or ethnic minority researchers,
and they gather culturally relevant information nec-
essary to developing the intervention (Dumas, Rol-
lack, Prinz, Hops, & Blechman, 1999). Focus groups
are particularly important for providing researchers
the perceptions and expectations of the population of
interest (Hughes & DuMont, 1993). Incorporation of
170
research personnel from the culture of interest can
also help establish valid intervention goals because
they provide bridges between the science in research
and application of the intervention research to the
cultural groupÕs needs. Fisher and Ball (2002) indicate
that having research staff from the culture or com-
munity is advantageous because they ‘‘already have
an established acceptance in the community, under-
stand the community, and are committed to the
intervention projects that can promote positive
changes to their community’’ (p. 236). In developing
interventions, it is critical that the treatment goals are
formed within the cultural framework of the client,
and that they reflect cultural beliefs, values, practices,
and traditions.
Methods
The procedures used to achieve intervention
goals may vary as a function of family ethnicity and
cultural appropriateness (Bernal et al., 1995). For
example, in Familias Unidas, a participatory format
was used for the parent groups because Hispanic
immigrants tend to be submissive to authorities or
experts and respond passively, which would work
against group cohesion and engagement (Pantin
et al., 2003). The Indian Family Wellness Project in-
cluded an intervention curriculum based on six tribal
legends (Fisher & Ball, 2002). The authors reported
that storytelling based on these legends was the pri-
mary parenting tool used to share cultural knowledge
and values, to indirectly address child problem
behaviors, and to encourage positive behavior. Ste-
vensonÕs (2002) PLAAY intervention used athletics to
reduce anger and aggression by targeting the ‘‘cool
pose’’ coping strategy that is common among African
American boys (Langley, 1994; Majors & Billson,
1992). Using athletics as a medium for intervention is
highly effective because cool pose behaviors are
actually used in sports—in PLAAY, martial arts or
basketball teaches boys ways to regulate their emo-
tions through exercise or physical contact (Stevenson,
2002). While examining Black low-income families,
Slaughter (1983) showed recognition for the Black
family structure by delivering the intervention
through a mentorship program in which older or
more experienced Black mothers provided support in
the implementation of new skills. In Families Unidas
(Pantin et al., 2003), communicating to parents about
their parenting skills was carefully considered so that
the presentation of information adhered to family
hierarchy and structure; for example, for authoritar-
Yasui and Dishion
ian Latino families, intervention staff were careful to
protect the status quo of the family system by not
challenging the fatherÕs authority (Pantin et al., 2003).
Context
It is critical that the therapist be aware of the
social, political, and economic contexts of the ethnic
minority group targeted for an intervention. For
example, mental health services that focus on par-
enting practices within an American Indian reserva-
tion community are likely to be received with
suspicion because of the legacy of boarding schools
and the recent history of efforts by the majority
government to attack the language and the spiritual
and cultural traditions of American Indian families
(Duran & Duran, 1995). Many ethnic minority fam-
ilies face the challenges of low socioeconomic status
and minority status, including unemployment, effects
of immigration policies, changes in policies governing
welfare, poverty, social disorganization in neighbor-
hoods, acculturative stress, and inconsistencies in the
availability of social support systems (Bursik &
Grasmick, 1996; Myers, 1989; Sampson & Groves,
1989). These macrosystem-level factors impact the
developmental trajectory of ethnic minority youth
through the interactions of all other layers. Aware-
ness of the effects of contextual influences is critical
for conceptualizing the presenting issues and further
for the development of the intervention.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
This article has addressed the critical role of
culture in the developmental pathway of the ethnic
minority child. Cultural influences permeate each
contextual level in the ecology of ethnic minority
youth—from internal processes (e.g., ethnic identity)
and primary socializing contexts (e.g., socialization of
cultural values, racial socialization) to their relation-
ships with larger societal contexts (e.g., acculturation,
biculturalism, coping with discrimination). The cen-
trality of culture in shaping ethnic minority youthÕs
psychological adjustment and identity development
thus challenges developmental researchers to reach
beyond current mainstream methodology by inte-
grating into their work culturally sensitive theories,
methods, and research paradigms that adequately
address the unique influences of ethnicity or culture.
This article offers several key points that are
critical to the future development and use of cultur-
ally anchored theory and research methodology.
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
First, researchers must display cultural sensitivity in
the formulation of their research questions, research
design, and definition of the population by expanding
their knowledge base concerning the cultural contexts
of the population of interest. Through examination of
existing literature and engagement of multiple cul-
tural informants (e.g., community members, cultural
experts in ethnic minority research, community
organizations), developmental researchers can iden-
tify culturally appropriate theories of child develop-
ment. Moreover, integrating knowledge from cultural
informants can help one develop culturally sensitive
methods that accurately address issues relevant to
specific groups. Second, researchers must establish
cultural equivalence of assessments through the
implementation of several methodological proce-
dures. This strategy includes extensively testing both
assessments and assessment procedures by using
members of the cultural group as research staff to
increase construct, measurement, and linguistic
equivalence, and using multiagent, multimethod
assessments to examine the cultural validity of
assessments. Last, in developing effective interven-
tions, researchers must identify research designs that
integrate etic and emic approaches of research that
assess culturally meaningful variables and examine
their influences on youth development. The integra-
tion of emic and etic approaches in these research
designs will allow the researcher to better understand
the similarities and differences in developmental
processes among various ethnic groups, and to inte-
grate this knowledge into their interventions.
As we launch into a future of increasing popu-
lation of ethnic minority youth, it is critical that
intervention researchers step away from the current
‘‘cultural deviant’’ perspective that identifies differ-
ences between ethnic minorities and mainstream
culture as ‘‘deficits’’ or ‘‘deviations to the norm.’’
Rather than strictly adhering to theoretically and
methodologically strong research that is culturally
irrelevant and potentially harmful for ethnic minority
youth, intervention researchers must integrate culture
into each level of the intervention research process as
a means to achieve cultural competence. Family
structure, culturally specific values and beliefs, level
of acculturation, and experiences of discrimination
are all elements that impact the ecology of the ethnic
minority child, and they must be addressed in inter-
ventions in culturally sensitive ways. Especially in
intervention, ignorance about cultural sensitivity can
be dangerous and produce highly unethical or even
harmful outcomes. In this era of rapidly changing
171
ethnic demographics in which ethnic minority
issues touch virtually every area of psychological
research, training, and practice, it is essential that
researchers incorporate cultural diversity and its
implications into their research to develop programs
that truly benefit the growing multiethnic US popu-
lation.
REFERENCES
Arcaya, J. (1999). Hispanic American boys and adolescent males.
In A. M. Horne, & M. S. Kiselica (Eds.), Handbook of
counseling boys and adolescent males: A practitionerÕs guide
(pp. 101–116). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Arellano, A. R., and Padilla, A. M. (1996). Academic invulnera-
bility among a select group of Latino university students.
Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 18: 485–507.
Armistead, L., McCombs, A., Forehand, R., Wierson, M., Long,
N., and Fauber, R. (1990). Coping with divorce: A study of
young adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology 19:
79–84.
Arnett, J. J. (1998). Learning to stand alone: The contemporary
American transition to adulthood in cultural and historical
context. Human Development 41: 295–315.
Atkinson, D. R., Casas, A., and Abreu, J. (1992). Mexican-
American acculturation, counselor ethnicity and cultural
sensitivity, and perceived counselor competence. Journal of
Counseling Psychology 39: 515–520.
Atkinson, D. R., and Lowe, S. M. (1995). The role of ethnicity,
cultural knowledge, and conventional techniques in counsel-
ing, psychotherapy. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A.
Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural
counseling (pp. 387–414). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publica-
tions.
Atkinson, D. R., Morten, G., and Sue, D. W. (1993). Counseling
American minorities: Across-cultural perspective, Madison, WI,
England: Brown & Benchmark.
Bachman, J. G, and OÕMalley, P. M. (1984). .Yes-saying, nay-
saying, and going to extremes: Black–White differences in
response styles. Public Opinion Quarterly 48: 491–509.
Baldwin, A. L., Baldwin, C., and Cole, R. E. (1990). Stress-
resistant families and stress-resistant children. In J. Rolf, A. S.
Masten, D. Chichetti, K. H. Neuchterlein, & S. Weintraub
(Eds.), Risk and protective factors in the development of
psychopathology (pp. 257–280). New York: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis, Oxford,
England: Prentice-Hall.
Bargh, J. A., and Williams, E. L. (2006). The automaticity of social
life. Current Directions in Psychological Science 15: 1–4.
Barkley, R. A. (2001). The inattentive type of ADHD as a distinct
disorder: What remains to be done. Clinical Psychology:
Science and Practice 8: 489–493.
Barrera, M. Jr., Li, S. A., and Chassin, L. (1995). Effects of
parental alcoholism and life stress on Hispanic and non-
Hispanic Caucasian adolescents: A prospective study. Amer-
ican Journal of Community Psychology 23: 479–507.
Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority.
Developmental Psychology Monograph, 4(1, Part 2).
Beauvais, F. (1992). Trends in Indian adolescent drug and alcohol
use. American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health
Research 5: 1–12.
Beauvais, F. (1992). The consequences of drug and alcohol use for
Indian youth. American Indian and Alaska Native Mental
Health Research 5: 32–37.
172
Beauvais, F. (1996). Trends in drug use among American Indian
students and dropouts, 1975–1994. American Journal of Public
Health 8: 1594–1598.
Belgrave, F. Z., Cherry, V. R., Cunningham, D., Walwyn, W.,
Letlaka-Rennert, K., and Phillips, F. (1994). The influence of
Africentric values, self-esteem, and Black identity on drug
attitudes among African American fifth graders: A preliminary
study. Journal of Black Psychology 20: 143–156.
Belgrave, F. Z., Reed, M. C., Plybon, L. E., Butler, D. S., Allison,
K. W., and Davis, T. (2004). An evaluation of Sisters of Nia: A
cultural program for African American girls. Journal of Black
Psychology 30: 329–343.
Belgrave, F. Z., Townsend, T., Cherry, V. R., and Cunningham, D.
(1997). The influence of an Africentric worldview and demo-
graphic variables on drug knowledge, attitudes, and use
among African American youth. Journal of Community
Psychology 25: 421–433.
Belsky, J., and MacKinnon, C. (1994). Transition to school:
Developmental trajectories and school experiences. Early
Education and Development 5: 106–119.
Bennett, S. K., and BigFoot-Sipes, D. S. (1991). American Indian
and White college student preferences for counselor charac-
teristics. Journal of Counseling Psychology 38: 440–445.
Bernal, G., Bonilla, J., and Bellido, C. (1995). Ecological validity
and cultural sensitivity for outcome research: Issues for the
cultural adaptation and development of psychosocial treat-
ments with Hispanics. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
23: 67–82.
John, W. (1969). On cross-cultural comparability. International
Journal of Psychology 4: 119–128.
Berry, J. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In A.
Padilla (Ed.), Acculturation: Theory, models and findings (pp.
9–25). Boulder, CO: Westview.
Bhattacharya, G. (2000). Adjustment of South Asian immigrant
children to schools in the United States. Adolescence 35(137):
77–85.
Biafora, F. A., Warheit, G. J., Zimmerman, R. S., Gil, A. G.,
Apospori, E. Taylor, D., et al. (1993). Racial mistrust and
deviant behaviors among ethnically diverse Black adolescent
boys. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 23: 891–910.
Bird, H., and Canino, G. (1982). The Puerto Rican family: Cultural
factors and family intervention strategies. Journal of the
American Academy of Psychoanalysis 10: 257–268.
Birman, D. (1994). Acculturation and human diversity in a
multicultural society. In E. Trickett, R. Watts, & D. Birman
(Eds.), Human diversity: Perspective on people in context (pp.
261–284). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bond, M. H., and Hwang, K. (1995). The social psychology of the
Chinese people. In M.H. Bond (Ed.), The psychology of the
Chinese people (pp. 213–266). Hong Kong: Oxford University
Press.
Bowen-Reid, T. L., and Harrell, J. P. (2002). Racist experiences
and health outcomes: An examination of spirituality as a
buffer. Journal of Black Psychology 28: 18–36.
Bowman, P. J., and Howard, C. (1985). Race-related socialization,
motivation, and academic achievement: A study of Black
youths in three-generation families. Journal of the American
Academy of Child Psychiatry 24: 134–141.
Boykin, A. W., and Toms, F. D. (1985). Black child socialization:
A conceptual framework. In H. P. McAdoo, & J. L. McAdoo
(Eds.), Black children: Social, educational, and parental envi-
ronments (pp. 33–51). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Bradley, C. R. (1998). Child rearing in African American families:
A study of the disciplinary practices of African American
parents. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development
26: 273–281.
Brendtro, L., Brokenleg, M., and Van Bockern, S. (1991). Courage
for the discouraged: Reclaiming youth at risk. In M. Mitchell,
C. L. Tobin, C. M. Johnson, & M. Rocco (Eds.), Proceedings
Yasui and Dishion
of the XII World (Congress of the International Association of
Workers for Troubled Children and Youth). Albion, Michi-
gan: The Starr Commonwealth Schools.
Brislin, R. (1993). Understanding cultureÕs influence on behavior. San
Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace.
Brody, G. H., and Flor, D. L. M. (1998). Maternal resources,
parenting practices, and child competence in rural, single-
parent African American families. Child Development 69: 803–
816.
Brody, G. H., Murry, V. M., McNair, L., Chen, Y., Gibbons, F.
X., Gerrard, M., and Wills, T. (2005). Linking changes in
parenting to parent–child relationship quality and youth self-
control: The Strong African American Families program.
Journal of Research on Adolescence 15: 47–69.
Brody, G. H., Stoneman, Z., and Flor, D. (1996). Family wages,
family processes, and youth competence in rural married
African American families. In E. M. Hetherington, & E. A.
Blechman (Eds.), Stress, coping, and resiliency in children and
families (pp. 173–188). Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Broman, C. L., Mavaddat, R., and Hsu, S-Y. (2000). The
experience and consequences of perceived racial discrimina-
tion: A study of African-Americans. Journal of Black Psy-
chology 26: 165–180.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development,
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for
human development: Research perspectives. Developmental
Psychology 22: 723–742.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory. In R. Vasta
(Ed.), Annals of child development, 6 (pp. 187–251). Greenwich,
CT: JAI.
Buchignani, N. (1982). Canadian ethnic research and multicultur-
alism. Journal of Canadian Studies 17: 16–34.
Buriel, R., Calzada, S., and Vasquez, R. (1982). The relationship of
traditional Mexican American culture to adjustment and
delinquency among three generations of Mexican American
male adolescents. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 4:
41–55.
Buriel, R., and DeMent, T. (1997). Immigration and sociocultural
changes in Mexican, Chinese, Vietnamese American families.
In A. Booth, A. C. Crouter, & N. Landale (Eds.), Immigration
and the family: Research and policy on U.S. immigrants
Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum.
Burke, P. J. (1980). The self: Measurement requirements from
an interactionist perspective. Social Psychology Quarterly 43:
18–29.
Burlew, K., Nelly, D., Johnson, C., Hucks, T. C., Purnell, B.
Butler, J., et al. (2000). Drug attitudes, racial identity, and
alcohol use among African American adolescents. Journal of
Black Psychology 26: 402–420.
Bursik, R. J., and Grasmick, H. G. (1996). The use of contextual
analysis in models of criminal behavior. In J. D. Hawkins
(Ed.), Delinquency and crime: Current theories. Cambridge
criminology.
Caplan, N., Choy, M. H., and Whitmore, J. K. (1991). Indochinese
refugee families and academic achievement. Scientific Ameri-
can, 266, 36–42 .
Castro, F. G., Sharp, E. V., Barrington, E. H., Walton, M., and
Rawson, R. (1991). Drug abuse and identity in Mexican
Americans: Theoretical and empirical considerations. Hispanic
Journal of Behavioral Sciences 13: 209–225.
Catalano, R. F., Morrison, D. M., Wells, E. A., and Gillmore, M.
R. (1992). Ethnic differences in family factors related to early
drug initiation. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 53: 208–217.
Catterall, J. S. (1998). Risk and resilience in student transitions to
high school. American Journal of Education 106(2): 302–333.
Caughy, M. O., OÕCampo, P. J., Randolph, S. M., and Nickerson,
K. (2002). The Influence of racial socialization practices on the
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
cognitive and behavioral competence of African American
preschoolers. Child Development 73: 1611–1625.
Causey, D. L., and Dubow, E. F. (1992). Development of a self-
report coping measure for elementary school children. Journal
of Clinical Child Psychology 21: 47–59.
Census of population and housing. (1990).Washington: U.S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
Chan, S., and Leong, C. W. (1994). Chinese families in transition:
Cultural conflicts and adjustment problem. Journal of Social
Distress and the Homeless 3(3): 263–281.
Chao, R. K. (1994). Beyond parental control and authoritarian
parenting style: Understanding Chinese parenting through the
cultural notion of training. Child Development 65: 1111–1119.
Chao, R. K. (2001). Extending research on the consequences of
parenting style for Chinese Americans and European Amer-
icans. Child Development 72: 1832–1843.
Chao, R. K., and Kim, K. (2000). Parenting differences among
immigrant Chinese fathers and mothers in the United States.
Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies 1: 71–91.
Chen, C., Lee, S. Y., and Stevenson, H. W. (1995). Response style
and cross-cultural comparisons of rating scales among East
Asian and North American students. Psychological Science 6:
170–175.
Clark, R., Novak, J. D., and Dupree, D. (2002). Perceptions of
parenting practices as predictors of coping strategies in
African American adolescents. Journal of Adolescence 25:
373–384.
Coatsworth, J. D., Maldonado-Molina, M., Pantin, H., and
Szapocznik, J. (2005). A person-centered and ecological
investigation of acculturation strategies in Hispanic immigrant
youth. Journal of Community Psychology 33: 157–174.
Collins, L. M., Murphy, S. A., and Bierman, K. L. (2004). A
conceptual framework for adaptive preventive interventions.
Prevention Science 5: 185–196.
Compas, B. E. (1995). Promoting successful coping during adoles-
cence. In M. Rutter (Ed.), Psychosocial disturbances in young
people: Challenges for prevention (pp. 247–273). New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Compas, B. E., Malcarne, V. L., and Fondacaro, K. M. (1988).
Coping with stressful events in older children and young
adolescents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 56:
405–411.
Conger, R. D., Patterson, G. R., and Xiaojia Ge, X. (1995). It takes
two to replicate: A mediational model for the impact of
parentsÕ stress on adolescent adjustment. Child Development
66: 80–97.
Connell, A., Dishion, T., Yasui, M., and Kavanagh, K (2007). An
ecological approach to family intervention to reduce adoles-
cent problem behavior: Intervention engagement and longitu-
dinal change. In S. Evans (Ed.), Advances in school-based
mental health (Vol. 2). Kingston, New Jersey: Civic Research
Institute, in press.
Constantine, M. G. (2001). Predictors of observer ratings of
multicultural counseling competence in Black, Latino, and
White American trainees. Journal of Counseling Psychology 48:
456–462.
Constantine, M. G., Gainor, K. A., Ahluwalia, M. K., and Berkel,
L. A. (2003). Independent and interdependent self-construals,
individualism, collectivism, and harmony control in African
Americans. Journal of Black Psychology 29: 87–101.
Contreras, J. M., Lopez, I. R., Rivera-Mosquera, E. T., Raymong-
Smith, L., and Rothstein, K. (1999). Social support and
adjustment among Puerto Rican adolescent mothers: The
moderating effect of acculturation. Journal of Family Psychol-
ogy 13: 228–243.
Cross, W. (1978). The Thomas and Cross models of psychological
nigrescence: A literature review. Journal of Black Psychology 4:
12–31.
173
Cross, W. (1991). Shades of black: Diversity in African American
identity, Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Cross, W. E., Parham, T. A., and Helms, J. E. (1998). Nigrescence
revisited: Theory and research. In R.L. Jones (Ed.), African
American identity development: Theory, research, and interven-
tion (pp. 3–71). Hampton, VA: Cobb and Henry.
Cuéllar, I., Arnold, B., and González, G. (1995). Cognitive
referents of acculturation: Assessment of cultural constructs
in Mexican-Americans. Journal of Community Psychology 23:
339–356.
Dearing, E. (2004). The developmental implications of restrictive
and supportive parenting across neighborhoods and ethnici-
ties: Exceptions are the rule. Applied Developmental Psychol-
ogy 25: 555–575.
Deater-Deckard, K., Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., and Pettit, G. S.
(1996). Physical discipline among African-American and
European-American mothers: Links to childrenÕs externalizing
behaviors. Developmental Psychology 32: 1065–1072.
Deyoung, Y., and Zigler, E. F. (1994). Machismo in two cultures:
Relation to punitive child-rearing practices. American Journal
of Orthopsychiatry 64: 386–395.
Diaz-Guerrero, R., and Diaz-Loving, P. (1990). Interpretation in
cross-cultural personality assessment. In C. R. Reynolds, & R.
W. Kamphouse (Eds.), Handbook of psychological and educa-
tional assessment of children: Personality, behavior and context
(pp. 491–523). New York: Guilford.
Dinh, K. T., Roosa, M. W., Tein, J., and Lopez, V. A. (2002). The
relationship between acculturation and problem behavior
proneness in a Hispanic youth sample: A longitudinal medi-
ation model. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 30: 295–
309.
Dishion, T. J., and Kavanagh, K. (2002). The adolescent transi-
tions program: A family-centered prevention strategy for
schools. In J. B. Reid, J. J. Snyder, & G. R. Patterson (Eds.),
Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: A developmental
analysis and the Oregon Model for Intervention (pp. 257–272).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Dishion, T. J., Kavanagh, K., Schneiger, A., Nelson, S., &
Kaufman, N. (2002). Preventing early adolescent substance
use: A family-centered strategy for public middle school. In R.
L. Spoth, K. Kavanagh, & T. J. Dishion (Eds.), Universal
family-centered prevention strategies: Current findings and
critical issues for public health impact (Special Issue). Preven-
tion Science, 3, 191–201.
Dishion, T. J., and Patterson, G. R. (2006). The development and
ecology of antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. In
D. Cicchetti, & J. Donald (Eds.), Developmental psychopathol-
ogy, Vol 3: Risk, disorder, and adaptation (2nd ed., pp. 503–
541). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Dishion, T. J., and Stormshak, E. (2007). Intervening in childrenÕs
lives: An ecological, family-centered approach to mental health
care, Washington, DC: APA Books.
Dolgin, D. L., Salazar, A., and Cruz, S. (1987). The Hispanic
treatment program: Principles of effective psychotherapy.
Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy 17: 285–299.
Dornbusch, S., Ritter, P., Leiderman, P., Roberts, D., and
Fraleigh, M. (1987). The relation of parenting style to
adolescent school performance. Child Development 58: 1244–
1257.
Dumas, J. E., Rollock, D., Prinz, R. J., Hops, H., and Blechman,
E.A. (1999). Cultural sensitivity: Problems and solutions in
applied and preventive intervention. Applied & Preventive
Psychology 8: 175–196.
Duran, E., and Duran, B. (1995). Native American postcolonial
psychology, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Eamon, M. K., and Muler, C. (2005). Predicting antisocial behavior
among Latino young adolescents: An ecological systems
analysis. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 75: 117–127.
174
Eccles, J. S., Lord, S. E., Roeser, R. W., Barber, B. L., and
Jozefowicz, D. M. (1997). The association of school transitions
in early adolescence with developmental trajectories through
high school. In J. Schulenberg, J. L. Maggs, & K. Hurrelmann
(Eds.), Health risks and developmental transitions during
adolescence (pp. 283–320). New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Eisenberg, N., and Fabes, R. A. (1998). Prosocial development. In
W. Damon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook
of child psychology, Vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality
development (5th ed., pp. 701–778). New York: John Wiley.
Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Guthrie, I. K., and Reiser, M. (2000).
Dispositional emotionality and regulation: Their role in
predicting quality of social functioning. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology 78: 136–157.
Farver, J. A. M., Narang, S. K., and Bhadha, B. R. (2002). East
meets West: Ethnic identity, acculturation, and conflict in
Asian Indian families. Journal of Family Psychology 16: 338–
350.
Fernandez, R. M., Paulsen, R., and Hirano-Nakanishi, M. (1989).
Dropping out among Hispanic youth. Social Science Research
18: 21–52.
Ferrari, A. M. (2002). The impact of culture upon child rearing
practices and definitions of maltreatment. Child Abuse and
Neglect 26: 793–813.
Fields, L., and Prinz, R. J. (1997). Coping and adjustment during
childhood and adolescence. Clinical Psychology Review 71:
937–976.
Figueroa-Torres, J., and Pearson, R. E. (1979). Effects of
structured learning therapy upon self-control of aggressive
Puerto Rican fathers. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences
1: 345–354.
Fischer, A. R., and Shaw, C. M. (1999). African AmericansÕ mental
health and perceptions of racist discrimination: The moderat-
ing effects of racial socialization experiences and self-esteem.
Journal of Counseling Psychology 46: 395–407.
Fisher, P. A., and Ball, T. J. (2002). The Indian Wellness Project:
An application of the tribal participatory research model.
Prevention Science 3: 235–240.
Florsheim, P., Tolan, P. H., and Gorman-Smith, D. (1996). Family
processes and risk for externalizing behavior problems among
African American and Hispanic boys. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology 64: 1222–1230.
Flynn, C. P. (1998). To spank or not to spank: The effect of
situation and age of child on support for corporal punishment.
Journal of Family Violence 13: 21–37.
Franco, N., and Levitt, M. J. (1998). The social ecology of middle
childhood: Family support, friendship quality, and self-esteem.
Family Relations 47: 315–321.
Fuligni, A. J. (1997). The academic achievement of adolescents
from immigrant families: The role of family background,
attitudes, and behavior. Child Development 68: 351–363.
Fuligni, A. J., Tseng, V., and Lam, M. (1999). Attitudes toward
family obligations among American adolescents with Latin,
American and European background. Child Development 70:
1030–1044.
Furstenberg, F. Jr., Cook, T., Eccles, J., Elder, G. Jr., and
Sameroff, A. (1999). Managing to make it: Urban families and
adolescent success, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gabrielidis, C., Stephan, W., Ybarra, O., Dos Santos Pearson, V.
M., and Villareal, L. (1997). Preferred styles of conflict
resolution in Mexico and the United States. Journal of
Cross-cultural Psychology 28(6): 661–677.
Gamst, G., Dana, R. H., Der-Karabetian, A., and Kramer, T.
(2000). Ethnic match and client ethnicity effects on global
assessment and visitation. Journal of Community Psychology
28: 547–564.
Gamst, G., Dana, R. H., Der-Karabetian, A., and Kramer, T.
(2004). Ethnic match and treatment outcomes for child and
Yasui and Dishion
adolescent mental health center clients. Journal of Counseling
& Development 82: 457–465.
Garcı́a Coll, C. T. (1990). Developmental outcome of minority
infants: A process oriented look into our beginnings. Child
Development 61: 270–289.
Garcı́a Coll, C., Lamberty, G., Jenkins, R., McAdoo, H. P., Crnic,
K. Wasik, B.H., et al. (1996). An integrative model for the
study of developmental competencies in minority children.
Child Development 67: 1891–1914.
Garcı́a Coll, C.T., and Magnuson, K. (1997). The psychological
experience of immigration: A developmental perspective. In A.
Booth (Ed.), Immigration and the family: Research and policy
on U.S. immigrants (pp. 91–131). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Garcia-Preto, N. (1996a). Latino families: An overview. In M.
McGoldrick, J. Giordano, & J. K. Pearce (Eds.), Ethnicity and
family therapy (pp. 141–154). New York: Guilford Press.
Garcia-Preto, N. (1996b). Puerto Rican families. In M. McGold-
rick, J. Giordano, & J. K. Pearce (Eds.), Ethnicity and family
therapy (pp. 183–189). New York: Guilford.
Garrett, J. T., and Garrett, M. W. (1994). The path of good
medicine: Understanding and counseling Native American
Indians. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development
22(3): 134–144.
Gary, L., and Berry, G. (1984). Predicting attitudes toward
substance use in a Black community: Implication for preven-
tion. Community Mental Health Journal 21: 42–51.
Gibbons, F. A., Gerrard, M., Cleveland, M. J., Wills, T. A., and
Brody, G. (2004). Perceived discrimination and substance use
in African American parents and their children: A panel study.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 86: 517–529.
Gil, R. M., and Vasquez, C. I. (1996). The Maria paradox, New
York: G. P. Putnam.
Gil, A. G., Vegas, W. A., and Dimas, J. M. (1994). Acculturative
stress and personal adjustment among Hispanic adolescent
boys. Journal of Community Psychology 22: 43–54.
Gil, A. G., Wagner, E. F., and Vega, W. A. (2000). Acculturation,
familism, and alcohol use among Latino adolescent males:
Longitudinal relations. Journal of Community Psychology 28:
443–358.
Gil-Rivas, V., Greenberger, E., Chen, C., and Lopez-Lena, M. M.
(2003). Understanding depressed mood in the context of a
family-oriented culture. Adolescence 38: 93–109.
Giles-Sims, J., Straus, M., and Sugarman, D. (1995). Child,
maternal and family characteristics associated with spanking.
Family Relations 44: 1170–1176.
Ginorio, A. B., Gutierrez, L., Cauce, A. M., and Acosta, M.
(1995). Psychological issues for Latinas. In H. Landrine (Ed.),
Bringing cultural diversity to feminist psychology (pp. 241–263).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Gonzales, N. A., Cauce, A. M., and Mason, C. A. (1996).
Interobserver agreement in the assessment of parental behav-
ior and parent–adolescent conflict: African American mothers,
daughters and independent observers. Child Development 67:
1483–1498.
Gonzales, N. A., Pitts, S. C., Hill, N. E., and Roosa, M. W. (2000).
A mediational model of the impact of interparental conflict on
child adjustment in a multiethnic low-income sample. Journal
of Family Psychology 14: 365–379.
Gray, M. R., and Steinberg, L. (1999). Unpacking authoritative
parenting: Reassessing a multidimensional construct. Journal
of Marriage and Family 61: 574–587.
Guerra, N. G., and Jagers, R. (1998). The importance of culture in
the assessment of children and youth. In V. C. McLoyd, & L.
Steinberg (Eds.), Studying minority adolescents: Conceptual,
methodological, and theoretical issues (pp. 167–181). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Guyll, M., Matthews, K. A., and Bromberger, J. T. (2001).
Discrimination and unfair treatment: Relationship to cardio-
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
vascular reactivity among African American and European
American women. Health Psychology 20: 315–325.
Halstead, M., Johnson, S. B., and Cunningham, W. (1993).
Measuring coping in adolescents: An application of the Ways
of Coping Checklist. Journal of Clinical Psychology 22(3): 337–
344.
Hammond, W. R., and Yung, B. (1993). PsychologyÕs role in public
health response to assaultive violence among young African
American men. American Psychologist 48: 142–154.
Harrison, A. O., Wilson, M. N., Pine, C. J., Chan, S. Q., and
Buriel, R. (1990). Family ecologies of ethnic minority children.
Child Development 61: 347–362.
Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., and Roche, B. (Eds.), (2001).
Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human
language and cognition. New York: Kluwer.
Helms, J. E. (1995). An update of HelmsÕs white and people of
color racial identity models. In J. Ponterotto, L. A. Suzuki, &
C. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp.
181–198). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Herman, M. R., Dornbusch, S. M., Herron, M. C., and Herting, J.
R. (1997). The influence of family regulation, connection, and
psychological autonomy on six measures of adolescent func-
tioning. Journal of Adolescent Research 12: 34–67.
Hill, K. G., Howell, J. C., Hawkins, J. D., and Battin-Pearson, S.
R. (1999). Childhood risk factors for adolescent gang mem-
bership: Results from the Seattle Social Development Project.
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 36: 300–322.
Hill, N. E, Bush, K. R, and Roosa, M. W. (2003). Parenting and
family socialization strategies and childrenÕs mental health:
Low-income, Mexican-American and Euro-American mothers
and children. Child Development 74: 189–204.
Hirschi, T. (2004). Self-control and crime. In R. F. Baumeister, &
K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research,
theory, and applications (pp. 537–552). New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
Hirschi-Ho, D. Y. F. (1982). Asian concepts in behavioral science.
Psychologia 25: 228–235.
Hovey, J., and King, C. (1996). Acculturative stress, depression,
and suicidal ideation among immigrant and second-generation
Latino adolescents. Journal of the American Academy of Child
and Adolescent Psychiatry 35(9): 1183–1193.
Hovey, J. D., and Magaña, C. (2000). Acculturative stress, anxiety,
and depression among Mexican immigrant farmworkers in the
Midwest United States. Journal of Immigrants Health 2: 119–
131.
Hovey, J. D., and Magaña, C. (2002). Exploring the mental health
of Mexican migrant farmworkers in the Midwest: Psychosocial
predictors of psychological distress and suggestions for
prevention and treatment. The Journal of Psychology 136:
493–513.
Hughes, D. (2003). A comparative study of racial socialization
among urban African African American and Latino parents.
American Journal of Community Psychology 31(1): 80–92.
Hughes, D. L., and Chen, L.A. (1997). When and what parents tell
children about race: An examination of race-related socializa-
tion among African American families. Applied Developmental
Science 1: 198–212.
Hughes, D., and Dumont, K. (1993). Using focus groups to
facilitate culturally anchored research. American Journal of
Community Psychology 21(4): 775–806.
Hughes, D., Rodriguez, J., Smith, E. P., Johnson, D. J., Stevenson,
H. C., and Spicer, P. (2006). ParentsÕ ethnic-racial socialization
practices: A review of research and directions for future study.
Developmental Psychology 42: 747–770.
Ispa, J. M., Fine, M. A., Halgunseth, L. C., Harper, S., Robinson,
J. Boyce, L., et al. (2004). Maternal intrusiveness, maternal
warmth, and mother–toddler relationship outcomes: Varia-
tions across low-income ethnic and acculturation groups.
Child Development 75: 1613–1631.
175
Izzo, C., Weiss, L., Shanahan, T., and Rodrugruez-Brown, F.
(2000). Parental self-efficacy and social support as predictors
of parenting practices and childrenÕs socioemotional adjust-
ment in Mexican immigrant families. Diverse Families, Com-
petent Families 20: 197–213.
Jencks, C., and Phillips, M. (1998). The Black–White test score gap,
Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Jenkins, J. M., and Smith, M. (1990). Factors protecting children
living in disharmonious homes: Maternal reports. Journal of
the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 29:
60–69.
Johnson, M., and Lashley, K. (1989). Influences of Native
AmericanÕs cultural commitment on preferences for counselor
ethnicity and expectations about counseling. Journal of Mul-
ticultural Counseling and Development 17(3): 115–122.
Julian, T. W., McKenry, P. C., and McKelvey, M. W. (1994).
Cultural variations in parenting: Perceptions of Caucasian,
African-American, Hispanic, and Asian-American parents.
Family Relations 43(1): 30–37.
Kao, G., and Tienda, M. (1995). Optimism and achievement: The
educational performance of immigrant youth. Social Science
Quarterly 76: 1–19.
Kaplan, M. S., and Marks, G. (1990). Adverse effects of accultur-
ation: Psychological distress among Mexican American young
adults. Social Science and Medicine 31: 1313–1319.
Kawamoto, W. T. (2001). Community mental health and family
issues in sociohistorical context. American Behavioral Scientist
44: 1482–1491.
Kazdin, A. (1994). Behavior modification in applied settings, Pacific
Grove CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Kim, E. (2002). The relationship between parental involvement and
childrenÕs educational achievement in the Korean immigrant
family. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 33(4), 529–540.
Kim, T. E., and Goto, S. G. (2000). Peer delinquency and parental
social support as predictors of Asian American adolescent
delinquency. Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal 21:
331–347.
Kim, Y. Y. (1979). Toward an interactive theory of communica-
tion–acculturation. Communication Yearbook 3: 435–453.
Knight, G. P., Bernal, M. E., Garza, C. A., Cota, M. K., and
Ocampo, K. A. (1993). Family socialization and the ethnic
identity of Mexican-American children. Journal of Cross-
Cultural Psychology 24: 273–285.
Knight, G. P., and Hill, N. E. (1998). Measurement equivalence in
research involving minority adolescents. In V. C. McLoyd, &
L. Steinberg (Eds.), Studying minority adolescents: Conceptual,
methodological, and theoretical issues (pp. 183–210). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Krieger, N., Rowley, D. L., Herman, A. A. Avery, B., et al. (1993).
Racism, sexism, and social class: Implications for studies of
health, disease, and well being. American Journal of Preventive
Medicine 9: 82–122.
Kuo, W. H. (1995). Coping with racial discrimination: The case of
Asian Americans. Ethnic and Racial Studies 18: 109–127.
LaFromboise, T. D., Berman, J. S., and Sohi, B. K. (1994).
American Indian women. In L. Comas-Diaz, & B. Greene
(Eds.), Psychotherapy with women of color (pp. 30–71). New
York: Guilford.
LaFromboise, T., Coleman, H. L. K., and Gerton, J. (1993).
Psychological impact of biculturalism: Evidence and theory.
Psychological Bulletin 114: 395–412.
LaFromboise, T. D., and Low, K. G. (1989). American Indian
children and adolescents. In J. T. Gibbs, & L. N. Huang
(Eds.), Children of color (pp. 114–147). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Lahey, B. B., Gordon, R. A., Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M.,
and Farrington, D. P. (1999). Boys who join gangs: A
prospective study of predictors of first gang entry. Journal of
Abnormal Child Psychology 27: 261–276.
176
Lamborn, S. D., Dornbusch, S. M., and Steinberg, L. (1996).
Ethnicity and community context as moderators of the
relations between family decision making and adolescent
adjustment. Child Development 67: 283–301.
Lamborn, S. D., and Nguyen, D. T. (2004). African American
adolescentsÕ perceptions of family interactions: Kinship sup-
port, parent–child relationships and teen adjustment. Journal
of Youth and Adolescence 33: 547–558.
Lang, J. G., Munoz, R. F., Bernal, G., and Sorenson, J. L. (1982).
Quality of life and psychological well being in a bicultural
Latino community. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 4:
433–450.
Langley, M. R. (1994). The cool pose: An Africentric analysis. In
R. G. Majors, & J. Gordon (Eds.), The American Black male:
His present status and his future (pp. 231–244). Chicago:
Nelson-Hall.
Levitt, M. J., Guacci-Franco, N., and Levitt, J. L. (1994). Social
support and achievement in childhood and early adolescence:
A multicultural study. Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology 15: 207–222.
Lopez, S. R., Lopez, A. A., and Fong, K. T. (1991). Mexican
AmericansÕ initial preferences for counselors: The role of
ethnic factors. Journal of Counseling Psychology 38: 487–496.
Luria, A. R. (1966). Higher cortical functions in man, New York:
Consultants Bureau.
Maccoby, E. E., and Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the
context of the family: Parent–child interaction. In E. M.
Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Socializa-
tion, personality and social development New York: Wiley.
MacPhee, D., Fritz, J., and Miller-Heyl, J. (1996). Ethnic varia-
tions in personal social networks and parenting. Child Devel-
opment 67: 3278–3295.
Majors, R., and Billson, J. M. (1992). Cool pose: The dilemmas of
Black manhood in America, New York: Lexington Books.
Manson, S., Beals, J., OÕNell, T., Piasecki, J., Bechtold, D. Keane,
E., et al. (1996). Wounded spirits, ailing hearts: PTSD and
related disorders among American Indians. In A. Marsella, M.
J. Friedman, E. T .Gerrity, & R. W. Scurfield (Eds.),
Ethnocultural aspects of posttraumatic stress disorder: Issues,
research, and clinical applications (pp. 255–283). Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association.
Marcon, R. A. (1999). Positive relationships between parent school
involvement and public school inner-city preschoolersÕ devel-
opment and academic performance. School Psychology Review
28: 395–412.
Marin, G., and Vanoss Marin, B. (1991). Research with Hispanic
populations, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Marshall, S. (1995). Ethnic socialization of African American
children: Implications for parenting, identity development,
and academic achievement. Journal of Youth and Adolescence
24: 377–396.
Martinez, C. R., and Eddy, J. M. (2005). Effects of culturally
adapted parent management training on Latino youth behav-
ioral health outcomes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology 73: 841–851.
Mason, C. A., Cauce, A. M., Gonzales, N., Hiraga, Y., and Grove,
K. (1994). An ecological model of externalizing in African
American adolescents: No family is an island. Journal of
Research on Adolescents 4: 639–655.
Matusoka, J. K. (1990). Differential acculturation among Viet-
namese refugees. Social Work 35: 341–345.
May, P. A. (1996). Overview of alcohol abuse epidemiology for
American Indian populations. In G. D. Sandefur, R. R.
Rindfuss, & B. Cohen (Eds.), Changing numbers, changing
needs: American Indian demography and public health (pp. 235–
261). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Mbiti, J. S. (1969). African religions and philosophy, London:
Heinmann.
McAdoo, H. P. (1981). Black families, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Yasui and Dishion
McCabe, K. M. (2002). Factors that predict premature termination
among Mexican American children in outpatient psychother-
apy. Journal of Child and Family Studies 11: 347–359.
McFee, M. (1968). The 150% man, a product of Blackfeet
acculturation. American Anthropologist 70: 1096–1107.
McLoyd, V. C., Cauce, A. M., Takeuchi, D., and Wilson, L.
(2000). Marital processes and parental socialization in families
of color. A decade review of research 62: 1070–1093.
McLoyd, V. C., and Randolph, S. M. (1984). The conduct and
publication of research on Afro-American children: A content
analysis. Human Development 27: 65–75.
Medina, B. T. G. (2001). The Filipino family (2nd ed.). Quezon
City: University of the Philippines Press.
Min, P. G. (1995). Asian Americans: Contemporary trends and
issues, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Moos, H. R. (2002). Life stressors, social resources, and coping
skills in youth: Applications to adolescents with chronic
disorders. Journal of Adolescent Health 30: 22–29.
More, A. J. (1987). Native Indian learning styles: A review for
researchers and teachers. Journal of American Indian Education
26: 17–29.
Morling, B., and Fiske, S. T. (1999). Defining and measuring
harmony control. Journal of Research in Personality 33: 379–
414.
Murray, C. B., and Mandara, J. (2001). Racial identity develop-
ment in African American children: Cognitive and experiential
antecedents. In H. P. McAdoo (Ed.), Black children: Social,
educational, and parental environments (pp. 73–96). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Murry, V. M., Brown, P. A., Brody, G. H., Cutrona, C. E., and
Simons, R. L. (2001). Racial discrimination as a moderator of
the links among stress, maternal psychological functioning,
and family relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family 63:
915–926.
Myers, H. F. (1989). Urban stress and mental health of Afro-
American youth: An epidemiologic and conceptual update. In
R. L. Jones (Ed.), Black adolescents (pp. 123–152). Berkeley,
CA: Cobbs & Henry.
Nobles, W. W. (1973). Psychological research and the Black self-
concept: A critical review. Journal of Social Issues 29: 11–31.
Nobles, W. W. (1974). African root and American fruit: The Black
family. Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences 20: 52–64.
Nah, K. (1993). Perceived problems and service delivery for
Korean Americans. Social Work 38: 289–296.
Nofz, M. P. (1988). Alcohol abuse and culturally marginal
American Indians. Social Casework 69(2): 67–73.
Noh, S., Beiser, M., and Kaspar, V. (2003). Perceived discrimina-
tion and depression: Moderating effects of coping, accultur-
ation, and ethnic support. American Journal of Public Health
93: 232–238.
Noh, S., Beiser, M., Kaspar, V., Hou, F., and Rummens, J. (1999).
Perceived racial discrimination, depression, and coping: A
study of Southeast Asian refugees in Canada. Journal of
Health and Social Behavior 40: 193–207.
Noh, S., Kasper, V., and Chen, X. (1998). Measuring depression in
Korean immigrants: Assessing validity of the translated
Korean version of the CES-D scale. Cross-Cultural Research:
The Journal of Comparative Social Science 32: 358–377.
Nyborg, V. M., and Curry, J. F. (2003). The impact of perceived
racism: Psychological symptoms among African American
boys. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology 32:
258–266.
Oetting, E. R., Beauvais, F., and Velarde, J. (1982). Marijuana use
by reservation Native American youth. Listening Post Indian
Health Services 4: 25–28.
Ogbu, J. U. (1981). Origins of human competence: A cultural–
ecological perspective. Child Development 52: 413–429.
Okagaki, L., and Bojczyk., K. E. (2002). Perspectives on Asian
American development. In G. N. Hall, & S. Okazaki (Eds.),
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
Asian American psychology (pp. 67–104). Washington DC:
American Psychological Association.
Okazaki, S., and Sue, S. (1995). Methodological issues in assess-
ment research with ethnic minorities. Psychological Assessment
7: 367–375.
Ou, Y. S., and McAdoo, H. P. (1993). Socialization of Chinese
American children. In H. P. McAdoo (Ed.), Ethnicity:
Strength in diversity (pp. 245–270). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Padilla, A. M. (1980). The role of cultural awareness and ethnic
loyalty. In A. M. Padilla (Ed.), Acculturation: Theory, models
and some new findings (pp. 47–84). Boulder, CO: Westview
Press.
Palinkas, L. A. (1982). Ethnicity, identity and mental health: The
use of rhetoric in an immigrant Chinese church. The Journal of
Psychoanalytic Anthropology 5: 235–258.
Palleja, J. (1987). The impact of cultural identification on the
behavior of second generation Puerto Rican adolescents.
Dissertation Abstracts International 48(6-A): 1541–1542.
Pantin, H., Coatsworth, J. D., Feaster, D. J., Newman, F. L.,
Briones, E. Prado, G., et al. (2003). Familias Unidas: The
efficacy of an intervention to promote parental investment in
Hispanic immigrant families. Prevention Science 4: 189–201.
Patterson, G. R. (1995). Coercion as a basis for early age of onset
for arrest. In J. McCord (Ed.), Coercion and punishment in long
term perspectives (pp. 81–105). New York: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Peng, S. S., and Wright, D. (1994). Explanation of academic
achievement of Asian American students. Journal of Educa-
tional Research 87: 346–352.
Peters, M. F. (1985). Racial socialization of Black children. In H.
P. McAdoo, & J. L. McAdoo (Eds.), Black children: Social,
educational, and parental environments (pp. 33–51). Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage.
Peters, M. F., and Massey, G. (1983). Mundane extreme environ-
mental stress in family stress theories: The case of Black
families in White America. In H. I. McCubbin, M. B.
Sussman, & J. M. Patterson (Eds.), Social stress and the
family: Advance and developments in family stress theory and
research (pp. 193–218). New York: Halworth.
Phinney, J. S. (1989). Stages of ethnic identity development in
minority group adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence 9:
34–49.
Phinney, J. S. (1996). When we talk about American ethnic groups,
what do we mean? American Psychologist 51: 918–927.
Phinney, J. S., and Alipuria, L. (1990). Ethnic identity in college
students from four ethnic groups. Journal of Adolescence 13:
171–184.
Phinney, J. S., Cantu, C. L., and Kurtz, D. A. (1997). Ethnic and
American identity as predictors of self-esteem among African
American, Latino, and White adolescents. Journal of Youth
and Adolescence 26: 165–185.
Phinney, J., and Chavira, V. (1982). Ethnic identity and self-
esteem: An explanatory longitudinal study. Journal of Adoles-
cence 15: 271–281.
Phinney, J., and Chavira, V. (1995). Parental ethnic socialization
and adolescent outcomes in ethnic minority families. Journal
of Research on Adolescents 5: 13–53.
Phinney, J., and Devich-Navarro, M. (1997). Variations in bicul-
tural identification among African American and Mexican
American adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence 7:
3–32.
Phinney, J., Ferguson, D., and Tate, J. (1997). Intergroup attitudes
among ethnic minority adolescents: A causal model. Child
Development 68: 955–969.
Phinney, J., and Kohatsu, E. (1997). Ethnic and racial identity
development and mental health. In J. Schulenberg, J. Maggs,
& K. Hurrelman (Eds.), Health risks and developmental
transitions in adolescence (pp. 420–443). New York: Cam-
bridge University Press.
177
Prelow, H. M., Danoff-Burg, S., Swenson, R. R., and Pulgiano, D.
(2004). The impact of ecological risk and perceived discrim-
ination on the psychological adjustment of African American
and European American youth. Journal of Community Psy-
chology 32(4): 375–389.
Prinz, R. J., Blechman, E. A., and Dumas, J. E. (1994). An
evaluation of peer coping–skills training for childhood aggres-
sion. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology 23: 193–203.
Pyant, C. T., and Yanico, B. J. (1991). Relationship of racial
identity and gender-role attitudes to Black womenÕs psycho-
logical well being. Journal of Counseling Psychology 38: 315–
322.
Quintana, S. M., Castaneda-English, P., and Ybarra, V. C. (1999).
Role of perspective-taking abilities and ethnic socialization in
development of adolescent ethnic identity. Journal of Research
on Adolescence 9: 161–184.
Ramirez, J. R., Crano, W. D., Quist, R., Burgon, M., Alvaro, E.
M., and Grandpre, J. (2004). Acculturation, familism, parental
monitoring, and knowledge as predictors of marijuana and
inhalant use in adolescents. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors
18: 2–11.
Rao, N., McHale, J. P., and Pearson, E. (2003). Links between
socialization goals and child-rearing practices in Chinese and
Indian mothers. Infant and Child Development 12: 475–492.
Redfield, R., Linton, R., and Herskovits, M. (1936). Memorandum
on the study of acculturation. American Anthropologist 38:
149–152.
Reid, J. B., Baldwin, D. V., Patterson, G. R., and Dishion, T. J.
(1988). Observations in the assessment of childhood disorders.
In M. Rutter, A. H. Tuma, & I. S. Lann (Eds.), Assessment and
diagnosis in child psychopathology (pp. 156–195). New York:
Guilford.
Reid, J. B., and Patterson, G. R. (1989). The development of
antisocial behavior patterns in childhood and adolescence.
European Journal of Personality 3: 107–119.
Resnicow, K., Soler, R., Braithwaite, R., Ben Selassie, M., and
Smith, M. (1999). Development of a racial and ethnic identity
scale for African American adolescents: The survey of Black
life. Journal of Black Psychology 25: 171–188.
Reynolds, A. J. (1992). Comparing measures of parental involve-
ment and their effects on academic achievement. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly 7: 441–462.
Rieckmann, T. R., Wadsworth, M. E., and Deyhle, D. (2004).
Cultural identity, explanatory style, and depression in Navajo
adolescents. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology
10: 365–382.
Rohner, R. P., and Pettengill, S. M. (1985). Perceived parental
acceptance–rejection and parental control among Korean
adolescents. Child Development 56: 524–528.
Rolfe, J. E., Nansel, T. R., Baldwin, J. A., Johnson, J. L., and
Benally, C. C. (2002). HIV/AIDS and alcohol and other drug
abuse prevention in American Indian communities: Behavioral
and community effects. In P. D. Mail, S. Heurtin-Roberts, S.E.
Martin, & J. Howard (Eds.), Alcohol use among American
Indians: Multiple perspectives on a complex problem (NIAAA
Research Monograph, No. 37, pp. 295–319). Bethseda, MD:
National Institutes on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
Roosa, M. W., Deng, S., Ryu, E., Burrell, G. L., Tein, J. Jones, S.,
et al. (2005). Family and child characteristics linking neigh-
borhood context and child externalizing behavior. Journal of
Marriage and Family 67: 515–529.
Rosenbloom, S. R., and Way, N. (2004). Experiences of discrim-
ination among African American, Asian American, and
Latino Adolescents in an urban high school. Youth & Society
35: 420–451.
Rothbart, M. K., and Bates, J. (1998). Temperament. In W.
Damon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of
child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality
development (pp. 105–176). New York: Wiley.
178
Rothbart, M. K., Ellis, L. K., and Posner, M. I. (2004).
Temperament and self-regulation. In R. F. Baumeister, &
K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research,
theory, and applications (pp. 357–370). New York: Guilford
Press.
Rotheram-Borus, M. J., and Phinney, J. S. (1990). Patterns of
social expectations among Black and Mexican American
children. Child Development 61: 542–556.
Salazar, L. P., Schludermann, S. M., Schludermann, E. H., and
Huynh, C. (2000). Filipino adolescentsÕ parental socialization
for academic achievement in the United States. Journal of
Adolescent Research 15: 564–586.
de Salgado Snyder, V. N. (1987). Factors associated with accul-
turative stress and depressive symptomatology among married
Mexican immigrant women. Psychology of Women Quarterly
11: 475–488.
Samaniego, R. Y., and Gonzales, N. A. (1999). Multiple mediators
of the effects of acculturation status on delinquency for
Mexican-American adolescents. American Journal of Commu-
nity Psychology 27: 189–210.
Sampson, R. J., and Groves, W. B. (1989). Community structure
and crime: Testing social–disorganization theory. American
Journal of Sociology 94: 774–802.
Sanders, M. R., Dadds, M. R., Johnston, B. M., and Cash, R.
(1992). Childhood depression and conduct disorder: I. Behav-
ioral, affective, and cognitive aspects of family problem
solving interactions. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 101:
495–504.
Sanders-Thompson, V. L. (1994). Socialization to race and its
relationship to racial identification among African Americans.
Journal of Black Psychology 20: 175–188.
Schmader, T., Major, B., and Gramzow, R. H. (2001). Coping with
ethnic stereotypes in the academic domain: Perceived injustice
and psychological disengagement. Journal of Social Issues 57:
93–111.
Scott, L. D. (2003). The relation of racial identity and racial
socialization to coping with discrimination among African
American adolescents. Journal of Black Studies 33: 520–538.
Segal, U. A. (1991). Cultural variables in Asian-Indian families.
Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human
Services 72: 233–242.
Semaj, L. T. (1985). Afrikananity, cognition, and external self-
identity. In M. Spencer, G. Brookin, & W. Allen (Eds.),
Beginnings: The social and affective development (pp. 59–72).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Shaw, D. S., Dishion, T. J., Supplee, L., Gardner, F., and Arnds,
K. (2006). Randomized trial of a family-centered approach to
the prevention of early conduct problems: 2-year effects of the
Family Check-Up in early childhood. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology 74: 1–9.
Simons, R. L., Murry, V., McLoyd, V., Lin, K., Cutrona, C., and
Conger, R. D. (2002). Discrimination, crime, ethnic identity
and parenting as correlates of depressive symptoms among
African American children: A multilevel analysis. Develop-
mental and Psychopathology 14: 371–393.
Slaughter, D. T. (1983). Early intervention and its effects on
maternal and child development. Monographs for the Society
for Research in Child Development 48: 1–83.
Sorenson, S. B., and Siegel, J. M. (1992). Gender, ethnicity, and
sexual assault: Findings from a Los Angeles study. Journal of
Social Issues 48: 93–104.
Spoth, R., Guyll, M., Chao, W., and Molgaard, V. (2003).
Exploratory study of a preventive intervention with general
population African American families. Journal of Early
Adolescence 23: 435–468.
Steele, R. G., Nesbitt-Daly, B. A., Daniel, B. A., and Forehand, R.
(2005). Factor structure of parenting scale in low-income
African American sample. Journal of Child and Family Studies
14: 535–549.
Yasui and Dishion
Steinberg, L., Dornbusch, S. M., and Brown, B. B. (1992). Ethnic
differences in adolescent achievement: An ecological perspec-
tive. American Psychologist 47: 723–729.
Steinberg, L., Elmen, J. D., and Mounts, N. S. (1989). Authori-
tative parenting, psycho-social maturity, and academic success
among adolescents. Child Development 60: 1424–1436.
Stevenson, H. C. (2002). Wrestling with destiny: The cultural
socialization of anger and healing in African American males.
Journal of Psychology and Christianity 21: 357–364.
Stevenson, H. C., Cameron, R., Herrero-Taylor, T., and Davis, G.
Y. (2002). Development of the teenager experience of racial
socialization scale: Correlates of race-related socialization
frequency from the perspective of Black youth. Journal of
Black Psychology 28: 84–106.
Stubben, J. D. (2001). Working with and conducting research
among American Indian families. American Behavioral Scien-
tist 44: 1466–1481.
Sue, S., Fujino, D. C., Hu, L., Takeuchi, D. T., and Zane, N. W. S.
(1991). Community mental health services for ethnic minority
groups: A test of the cultural responsiveness hypothesis.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 59: 533–540.
Sue, D., and Sue, S. (1987). Cultural factors in the clinical
assessment of Asian Americans. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology 55: 479–487.
Sue, S., and Zane, N. (1987). The role of culture and cultural
techniques in psychotherapy: A critique and reformation.
American Psychologist 42: 37–45.
Super, C. M., and Harkness, S. (1986). The developmental niche: A
conceptualization at the interface of child and culture.
International Journal of Behavioral Development 9: 545–569.
Sy, R., and Schulenberg, J. E. (2005). Parent involvement and
childrenÕs achievement trajectories during the transition to
school in Asian American and European American families
(Special Issue). Parenting practices and childrenÕs adjustment
across cultures. International Journal of Behavioral Develop-
ment 29: 505–515.
Szalacha, L. A., Erkut, S., Garcia Coll, C., Alarcon, O., Fields, J.
P., and Ceder, I. (2003). Discrimination and Puerto Rican
childrenÕs and adolescentsÕ mental health. Cultural Diversity
and Ethnic Minority Psychology 9: 141–155.
Szapocznik, J., Kurtines, W. M., and Fernandez, T. (1980).
Bicultural involvement and adjustment in Hispanic-American
youth. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 4: 353–
365.
Szapocznik, J., Kurtines, W., Santisteban, D. A., Pantin, H.,
Scopetta, M. Mancilla, Y., et al. (1997). The evolution of
structural ecosystemic theory for working with Latino fami-
lies. In J. Garcia, & M. C. Zea (Eds.), Psychological interven-
tions and research with Latino populations (pp. 156–180).
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Szapocznik, J., Santisteban, D., Rio, A., Perez-Vidal, A., et al.
(1989). Family effectiveness training: An intervention to
prevent drug abuse and problem behaviors in Hispanic
adolescents. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 11, 4–27.
Tapia, M. I., Schwartz, S. J., Prado, G., Lopez, B., and Pantin, H.
(2006). Parent-centered intervention: A practical approach for
preventing drug abuse in Hispanic adolescent. Research on
Social Work Practice 16: 146–165.
Tatum, B. D. (1987). Assimilation blues: Black families in a White
community, Northhampton, MA: Hazel–Maxwell.
Taylor, R. D. (1996). Kinship support, family management, and
adolescent adjustment and competence in African American
families. Developmental Psychology 32: 687–695.
Terrell, F., Terrell, S. L., and Taylor, J. (1980). Effects of type of
reinforcement on the intelligence test performance of Black
children. Psychology in the Schools 20: 367–369.
Thomas, D. S. (1929). Some new techniques for studying social
behavior. Child development monographs (No.1). New York:
Teachers College, Columbia University.
Ethnic Context and Problem Behavior
Thornton, M. C., Chatters, L. M., Taylor, R. J., and Allen, W. R.
(1990). Sociodemographic and environmental correlates of
racial socialization. Child Development 61: 401–409.
Thurman, P. J., and Green, V. A. (1997). American Indian inhalant
use. American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health
Research 8: 24–40.
Tobin, J. J., Wu, D. Y. H., and Davidson, D. H. (1989). Preschool
in three cultures, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Umana-Taylor, A. J., and Fine, M. A. (2004). Examining ethnic
identity among Mexican-origin adolescents living in the
United States. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 26:
36–59.
Unger, J. B., Ritt-Olson, A., Teran, L., Huang, T., Hoffman, B. R.,
and Palmer, P. (2002). Cultural values and substance use in a
multiethnic sample of California adolescents. Addiction
Research and Theory 10: 257–279.
Utsey, S. O., Adams., E. P., and Bolden, M. (2000). Development
and initial validation of the Africultural coping systems
inventory. Journal of Black Psychology 26: 194–215.
Varela, R. E., Vernberg, E. M., Sanches-Sosa, J. J., Riveros, A.,
Mitchell, M., and Mashunkashey, J. (2004). Parenting style of
Mexican, Mexican American and Caucasian–non-Hispanic
families: Social context and cultural influences. Journal of
Family Psychology 18: 651–657.
Vega, W. A., and Gil, A. G. (1998). Drug use and ethnicity in early
adolescence, New York: Plenum Press.
Vega, W. A., Khoury, E. L., Zimmerman, R. S., Gil, A. G., and
Warheit, G. J. (1995). Cultural conflicts and problem behav-
iors of Latino adolescents in home and school environments.
Journal of Community Psychology 23: 167–179.
Vega, W. A., Kolody, B., Valle, J. R., and Hough, R. (1986).
Depressive symptoms and their correlates among immigrant
Mexican women in the United States. Social Science &
Medicine 22: 645–652.
Vega, W. A., Zimmerman, R., Gil, A. G., Warheit, G., and
Apospori, E. (1993). Acculturative strain theory: Its applica-
tion in explaining drug use behavior among Cuban and non-
Cuban Hispanic youth. In M. De La Rosa (Ed.), Drug abuse
among minority youth: Advances in research and methodology
(pp. 163–182). Rockville, MD: National Institute of Drug
Abuse.
Vivero, V. N., and Jenkins, S. R. (1999). Existential hazards of the
multicultural individual: Defining and understanding ‘‘cultural
homelessness’’. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psy-
chology 5: 6–26.
Walker-Barnes, C. J., and Mason, C. A. (2001). Perceptions of risk
factors for female gang involvement among African American
and Hispanic women. Youth and Society 32: 303–336.
Walters, K. L., Simoni, J. M., and Evans-Campbell, T. (2002).
Substance abuse among American Indians and Alaska
Natives: Incorporating culture in an ‘‘Indigenist’’ stress-coping
paradigm. Public Health Reports 117(Suppl. 1): S104–S117.
Wampold, B. E. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate: Models,
methods, and findings, Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Watson, J. B. (1929). ‘‘Is thinking merely the action of language
mechanisms?’’ Journal of Psychology 11: 87–104.
Webster-Stratton, C., and Hammond, M. (1988). Maternal depres-
sion and its relationship to life stress, perceptions of child
behavior problems, parenting behaviors, and child conduct
problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 16(3): 299–
315.
Weinraub, M., and Wolf, B. M. (1983). Effects of stress and social
supports on mother–child interactions in single- and two-
parent families. Child Development 54: 1297–1311.
Whaley, A. L. (2000). Sociocultural differences in the developmen-
tal consequences of the use of physical discipline during
179
childhood for African Americans. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic
Minority Psychology 6(1): 5–12.
Whitbeck, L. B., McMorris, B. J., Hoyt, D. R., Stubben, J. D., and
LaFromboise, T. (2002). Perceived discrimination, traditional
practices, and depressive symptoms among American Indians
in the Upper Midwest. Journal of Health and Social Behavior
43: 400–418.
White, J. L., and Parham, T.A. (1990). The psychology of Blacks:
An African-American perspective (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice Hall.
Williams, C. L., and Berry, J. W. (1991). Primary prevention of
acculturative stress among refugees: Application of psycho-
logical theory and practice. American Psychologist 46: 632–
641.
Williams, D. R. (1999). Race, socioeconomic status, and health:
The added effects of racism and discrimination. In N. Adler, &
M. Marmot (Eds.), Socioeconomic starus and health in indus-
trial nations: Social, psychological, and biological pathways:
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (Vol. 896,
pp.173–188). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
Wills, T. A., and Dishion, T. J. (2003). Temperament and
adolescent substance use: A transactional analysis of emerging
self-control. In P. Frick & W. Silverman (Eds.), Temperament
and childhood psychopathology (Special Issue). Journal of
Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33(1), 69–81.
Wills, T. A., and Dishion, T. J. (2004). Temperament and
adolescent substance use: A transactional analysis of emerging
self-control. In P. Frick, & W. Silverman (Eds.), Temperament
and childhood psychopathology [Special Issue]. Journal of
Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33(1), 69–81.
Wise, F., and Miller, N. B. (1983). The mental health of the
American Indian child. In G. J. Powell (Ed.), The psychosocial
development of minority group children (pp. 344–361). New
York: Bnumer/Mazel.
Wong, C. A., Eccles, J. S., and Sameroff, A. (2003). The influence
of ethnic discrimination and ethnic identification on African
American adolescentsÕ school and socioemotional adjustment.
Journal of Personality 71: 1197–1232.
Wong, M. G. (1990). The education of White, Chinese, Filipino,
and Japanese students: A look at ‘‘High School and Beyond’’.
Sociological Perspectives 33: 353–374.
Woods, L. N., and Jagers, R. J. (2003). Are cultural values
predictors of moral reasoning in African American adoles-
cents? Journal of Black Psychology 29: 102–118.
Wright, B. (1985). The effects of racial self-esteem on the personal
self-esteem of Black youth. International Journal of Intercul-
tural Relations 9: 19–30.
Xu, Y., Farver, A. M., Zhang, Z., Zeng, Q., Yu, L., and Cai, B.
(2005). Mainland Chinese parenting styles and parent–child
interaction. International Journal of Behavioral Development
29: 524–531.
Young, V. H. (1974). A Black American socialization pattern.
American Ethnologist 1: 405–413.
Zayas, L. H. (1992). Childrearing, social stress and child abuse:
Clinical considerations with Hispanic families. Journal of
Social Distress and the Homeless 1: 291–309.
Zea, M. C., Mason, M. A., and Murguia, A. (2000). Latino/Latina
religious traditions: Implications for psychotherapy. In A. E.
Bergin, & P. S. Richards (Eds.), Psychotherapy and religious
diversity: A guide for mental health professionals (pp. 397–419).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
M. Zhou, and C. L. Bankston (Eds.). (1998). Growing up American:
How Vietnamese children adapt to life in the United States
(p. 166). New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press.