I7} "L";$‘J‘:‘é

9(74

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

THE EFFECTS OF ACCULTURATION ON ATTITUDES
TOWARD CRIME AND JUSTICE AMONG INDIVIDUALS 0F
MEXICAN DESCENT

presented by

Francisco Javier Barocio, Jr.

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

MS. degree in Criminal Justice

 

 

two ‘74;

Major Professor’s Signature

t-t-H- 0‘!

 

Date

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

 

 

IJBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

imfihtgm:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 c:IClRC/DateDue.p65-p.15

THE EFFECTS OF ACCULTURATION ON ATTITUDES TOWARD CRIME
AND JUSTICE AMONG INDIVIDUALS OF MEXICAN DESCENT

By

Francisco Javier Barocio, Jr.

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE
School of Criminal Justice

2004

ABSTRACT
THE EFFECTS OF ACCULTURATION ON ATTITUDES TOWARD CRIME
AND JUSTICE AMONG INDIVIDUALS 0F MEXICAN DESCENT
By

Francisco Javier Barocio, Jr.

Acculturation theory suggests immigrants’ attitudes and cultural sensibilities
change over time and slowly come to resemble those of the Anglo-American majority
(Berry, 1997; Vigil, 1998). A similar process is hypothesized to take place among
immigrant offspring. Through the acculturation process, immigrants and their children
become more aware and accepting of American social control institutions and practices,
and come to incorporate these mechanisms into their cultural and psychological
repertoires. This research will examine the effects of acculturation on the attitudes
toward family violence, youth deviance, and the police among individuals of Mexican-
descent. Existing acculturation studies have relied on non-probabilistic and
unrepresentative small samples, and have glossed over salient cultural differences. To
address this shortcoming, the author uses community survey data collected in 1995 from
the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods in 1995. The data file
includes 1,134 respondents of Mexican-descent. Bivariate and multivariate statistical

techniques are used to assess directional hypotheses derived from acculturation theory.

Dedico este tesis a mis padres, Francisco Barocio y Emma Uribe,

que siempreformaran parte de mi vida

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis would not have been possible without the continued support, guidance and
insights from Dr. Michael Reisi g. I thank him the utmost for his dedication, which makes
him the best professor I have ever had in my academic career. I also would like to thank
Dr. Perez McCluskey and Dr. Mahesh Nalla for their insightful comments and support. I
am also grateful to the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University for
introducing me to the academic field of criminology where I will continue to work to
develop culturally informed theoretical frameworks. I would also like to thank Dr. James
Diego Vigil, a professor in the School of Ecology at the University of California at
Irvine, for his email correspondence regarding existing literature that I benefited from. I
would also like to thank Dr. Israel Cuellar and Dr. Linda Hunt from the Julian Samora
Research Institute at Michigan State University for providing me with information that
was very helpful. On a more personal note, I would like to thank my five younger
brothers and sisters - - Louis, Arturo, Roberto, Jacqueline, and Vanesa - - for thinking of
them and encouraging me to my see that this project come to fi'uition and completion.
Last but not least, I thank my cousin, Gerardo Magallanes, and my very close friend,
Richard Lynn Mountz, for making me experience a wonderful life outside the academic
sphere as well. Thanks for letting me know to keep both feet on the ground throughout
this challenging enterprise, now finished. I expect more challenging ones in the future

and the successes when they are overcome and complete.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................... vi
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 1
ACCULTURATION THEORY & RESEARCH ....................................... 2
Facets of Acculturation ............................................................ 7
Language ................................................................... 7
Ethnic Identity ............................................................. 8
ACCULTURATION THEORY & RESEARCH ........................................ 9

Attitudes Toward the Police ....................................................... 10

Attitudes ToWard Youth Deviance ............................................... 13

Attitudes Toward Family Violence ............................................... 14

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE .................................................................. 18

RESEARCH SETTING ..................................................................... 18

METHODS .................................................................................... 19

Data .................................................................................... 19

Dependent Variables ................................................................ 20

Independent Variables .............................................................. 22

RESULTS ..................................................................................... 24

Multivariate Analysis of Variance ................................................ 24

Ethnic Identity .............................................................. 26

Language .................................................................... 26

Acculturation ............................................................... 27

Ordinary Least-Squares Regression Analysis ................................... 28

Attitudes Toward the Police .............................................. 3O

Attitudes Toward Youth Deviance ....................................... 31

Attitudes Toward Family Violence ...................................... 31

DISCUSSION ................................................................................ 32

APPENDIX ................................................................................... 38

REFERENCES ................... ' ............................................................ 4o

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for the Study Variables (N = 1,134) ............... 21
Table 2. Principal Components Analysis ............................................... 23
Table 3. MANOVA Models .............................................................. 25
Table 4. OLS Regression Analysis ....................................................... 29
Appendix. Correlation Matrix for Independent Variables ............................. 39

vi

INTRODUCTION

Acculturation takes place in all societies, among all group members, regardless of
cultural or social backgrounds. According to Redfield, Linton, and Herskovitz (1936, p.
149), acculturation concerns “those phenomena which result when groups of individuals
having different cultures come into continuous first-hand contact, with subsequent
changes in the original cultural patterns of either or both groups.” Immigrant and
minority populations in the United States experience distinctive acculturation forms. Not
only do such individuals encounter a majority Anglo-culture, they also assume different
social positions resulting in an amalgam of cultural, social, and psychological adaptations
(Berry & Annis, 1974; Berry, Kim, Minde, & Mok, 1987). The administration of justice,
especially social control practices, can benefit from a better understanding of
acculturation and its effects on attitudes toward criminality, deviance, and formal social
control.

Extant research has examined the effects of acculturation on delinquency,
substance abuse, and intimate partner violence using self-report data (Firestone, Lambert,
& Vega, 1999; Samaniego & Gonzales, 1999; Zayas, Rojas, & Malgady, 1998). Despite
their contributions, these studies are not without limitations. For example, some studies
have relied on non-probability and convenience sampling techniques (Vega, Khoury,
Zimmerman, Gil, & Warheit, 1995; Wall, Power, & Arbona, 1993; Zule, Desmond,
Medrano, & Hatch, 2001). This is a real concern because such procedures often yield
results that cannot be generalized to larger populations. Another concern, especially in
the area of intimate partner/ family violence, is the use of dichotomous acculturation

measures, such as “language,” and crude ethnic markers (e. g., Latino or Hispanic)

(Caetano, Schafer, Field & Nelson, 2002). These primitive ethnic categorizations
disabuse the central tenets of acculturation theory (Ponce & Comer, 2003), and disservice
the study of matters related to crime and criminal justice. |

To fill the void in the literature regarding minority and disparate cultural
populations, especially Mexicans, Mexican-Americans, and Chicanos, this project will
investigate variation in attitudes toward the police, family violence, and youth deviance
among individuals of Mexican-decent. Accordingly, this research will take into account
intra-cultural differences, and also inform the debate regarding the need for culture-
sensitive practices of formal social control. Finally, it is also h0ped that this project will
augur well for the importance of cultural frameworks in criminology. To accomplish
these objectives, the author will use community survey data collected in 1995 from “The

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods.”
ACCULTURATION THEORY & RESEARCH

Contemporary criminal justice systems in the United States exist within pluralist
cultural settings. Traditionally, monolithic theories of crime and deviance have exerted
too much influence in criminological research. This is unfortunate because such theories
presume a unitary form of cultural acquisition across individuals (Myers, Cintron, & I
Scarborough, 1994). Reliance on Eurocentric theoretical frameworks in criminological
research has decreased (albeit slightly) over the past five decades (LaFree & Russell,
1993; Stanfield, 1993; Takagi, 1981). Despite this gradual change, our understanding of
variations between Latino subgroups in criminology remains limited (Garcia, 1994). To

contribute to the development of “cultural criminology,” this research seeks to move

away from criminological theories that disregard differences within and between cultural
groups.

Cultural deviance theories (i.e., social disorganization, differential association,
culture conflict, and subculture formation) promulgate cultural diversity wherein social
classes exhibit different cultural mores and conflict with those of a unitary, middle-class,
and predominately White culture (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 1991). While such
frameworks take into account racial and ethnic diversity, they also suffer from the
“fallacy of homogeneity” (Stanfield, 1993, p. 21). Put simply, these frameworks include
overarching assumptions about uniform differences between cultural groups. Similar
shortcomings can also be seen in official data sources compiled by the government. For
example, the UCR and the NCVS recently began to include Latino ethnic identity
classifications. Due to the prevalence of such ethnic identity markers as “Hispanic,”

’9 66

“Latino, other,” and “non-white,” these official statistics may perpetuate stereotypic
notions of a unidirnensional culture (Myers et al., 1995). Padilla (1986) argues that this
naming process of an all-encompassing Latino label, which includes Mexicans, Cubans,
Puerto Ricans, as well as other Latino subgroups, lacks independent life and real
existence. This research will inform criminal justice officials about variations that exist
within Mexican culture specifically, and also reveal problems associated with using gross
naming processes.

To investigate the complexities of ethnic and cultural factors among individuals
of Mexican-heritage, the author will examine the relationship between such factors and

attitudes toward crime and justice. Specifically, previous concerns regarding the

incompatibility of the “race” notion with Latino subpopulations - - an assumption that

Black and White racial dichotomies have impinged upon Latino ethnic naming processes
- - will be critically examined (see LaFree & Russell, 1993; Myers et al., 1994).

The importance of cultural differences within Mexican-heritage groups can be
studied using acculturation theory, which Olmeda (1979, p. 1061) deems “one of the
more elusive, albeit ubiquitous constructs in the behavioral sciences.” Contact between
Anglo culture and Mexican-oriented culture can occur firsthand or through the media
(Berry, 1997; Redfield, Linton, & Herskovitz, 1936). In the context of the acculturation,
Mexican-origin individuals’ minority status, when compared to the sociocultural and
political majority status of Anglo-Americans, results in cultural and psychological
changes (Berry, 1997).

Mexican-descent individuals (unlike political refugees and indigenous people),
according to Berry (1997), voluntarily immigrate into the United States and enter the
acculturation process willingly. Individuals of Mexican-origin espouse three general
degrees of acculturation that are saturated along the acculturation spectrum of Mexican,
Mexican-American, and Chicano psycho-cultural identifications and orientations, all of
which intimate the permanence or duration of their residence in the United States.
Mexican-descent individuals choose from two general acculturating strategies during
their everyday contact with Anglo-oriented culture: (1) cultural maintenance (e. g.,
maintaining Mexican identity and characteristics in daily interactions), or (2) contact and
participation (e. g., involvement in non-Mexican cultural groups) (Berry, 1997). Further,
Mexican-origin individuals in the United States select from four acculturation sub-

strategies: Assimilation, integration, separation, or marginalization (Berry, 1997).

One moderating factor prior to acculturation and eventual assimilation is “cultural
distance,” which is defined as the extent of dissimilarity that exists between host cultures
and the individuals in contact (Berry, 1997). Cultural distance helps explain why
individuals of European-descent have historically acculturated more quickly than their
Mexican-descent counterparts, and why the latter have been able to acculturate more
rapidly than individuals of African-descent (Rosenfeld, 2001; Vigil, 1998). The
experience of Mexican immigrants within the American assimilationist context (Berry &
Sam, 1996; Berry, 1997; Vigil, 1997) - - also known as the host or “new” culture - -
directly affects their adaptive and integrationist possibilities that could inhibit or facilitate
acculturation and assimilation.

Sociologists (e.g., Johnson, 2000; Rosenfeld, 2001) and some psychologists (e. g.,
Vasquez, 1984) have used the concept of acculturation synonymously with the concept of
assimilation. Anthropologists (Kottack, 2002; Vigil, 1997, 1998) and intercultural
psychologists (e. g., Berry, 1997; Fiske, 1996; Ward, 1996), on the other hand,
differentiate between the two terms. Assimilation concerns the “process of change that a
minority ethnic group may experience when it moves to a country where another culture
dominates” (emphasis added) (Kottack, 2002, p. 298). In other words, assimilation is, by
definition, a form of acculturation. Assimilation represents the last stage of acculturation,
wherein the Chicano, in this case, would acquiesce completely to Anglo-culture,

shedding completing any trace of Mexican culture whatsoever.l Because of the current

 

l Acculturation must not be confused with enculturation. In the anthropological sense, enculturation is the
process by which a child learns his or her culture (Kottack, 2002). For instance, a first-generation child
living in a Mexican-oriented household will learn Mexican culture before being exposed to the majority
and dominant Anglo culture. Enculturation is synonymous with the concept of socialization in cultural
anthropology. Inter-cultural psychologists differentiate between socialization and enculturation (Berry,
1992). Socialization is defined as vertical social learning (culture learned from parents or guardians of

study’s aim for cultural relativism and sensitivity, it sides with the anthropological
interpretation of acculturation.

Mexican-origin individuals settling in the United States experience deep cultural
change, which cause subsequent changes in language use, religious beliefs and practices,
ethnic identity, and alterations to preexisting value systems. These shifts are the product
of three processes: culture shedding, culture learning, and culture conflict (Berry, 1992).
The first two processes involve accidental or deliberate changes in behaviors, which
allow the individual, to “fit” the Anglo culture. However, when individuals experience
“fitting” conflict, acculturative stress ensues (Berry & Sam, 1996; Vigil, 1998), wherein
they feel that intercultural contact cannot be dealt with by simply adjusting their beliefs
and/or behaviors. In this research, acculturation is interpreted, not unlike Berry’s
assessment (1997), as culturally and psychologically driven (Fiske, 1991; Ward, 1996).

Several factors influence culture shedding in individuals who form part of a
cultural minority group in the United States (i.e., Mexican, Cuban, Chinese, etc.).
Females shed their original minority culture at slower rates than do males, thus
decreasing the rate of biculturalism among the former and increasing the risk for them to
conflict with their heritage culture once they further acculturate (Berry, 1997; Zentella,
1997). Schools or education represent important conduits and facilitators for more rapid
acculturation (Vigil, 1997). Among immigrants, younger individuals (specifically 12 or
younger) acculturate faster than do their older counterparts, as illustrated by the prevalent

cultural gap between traditional Mexican parents and their Mexican-American children

 

child), whereas enculturation represents horizontal learning (culture learned from extra-household agents,
i.e., schools, media, peers, etc.). Nonetheless, socialization and enculturation has no direct relationship with
acculturation

(Vega et al., 1995). Class hastens the rate of culture shedding, namely higher class
individuals are more acculturated than their lower class counterparts (Aycan & Berry,
1996). Locus of control, introversion/extraversion (Ward & Kennedy, 1992), and self-
efficacy (Schwarzer, Hahn, & Schroder, 1994) are personality factors that also have been
found to affect the course of acculturation. Migration motivation and expectations on the
part of immigrants also directly influence acculturation outcomes (Richmond, 1993).
Finally, the political context of the country may also be a salient factor. For instance, the
United States and Canada are plural and multicultural societies wherein cultural groups
are encouraged (or discouraged), and therefore retain more distinctiveness and self-

identity (Berry, 1997; Kottack, 2002; Vigil, 1997).

Facets of Acculturation

Researchers have identified many facets of the acculturation process. Among
these factors include language and etimic identity. It is important that research endeavors
that attempt to investigate the effects of acculturation take these different facets into
account.

Language. Acculturation, by definition, represents forms of cultural processes
and changes. Linguistic anthropologists argue that without culture, language represents
an empty epiphenomenon (Duranti, 1994; Kroskrity, 1993; Zentella, 1997). In numerous
studies language is specified as a major indicator of acculturation in that it accounts for
most of the variance associated with acculturation (Cuellar, Arnold, & Maldonado, 1995;
Marin, Sabogal, Marin, Ortero-Sabogal, & Perez-Stable, 1987). In short, both the
theoretical and research literature supports the notion that language is a key component of

acculturation. Many individuals of Mexican-origin, especially first and second

generation, master both Spanish and English (Buriel, Perez, De Ment, Chavez, & Moran,
1998). Accordingly, language use fails to represent the all-encompassing indicator of
acculturation, so another factor must also be identified and incorporated.

Ethnic Identity. A second dimension of acculturation is ethnic identity. Because
Mexican-descent individuals’ distinct physical appearance (Vigil, 1998), their perception
of ethnic discrimination (Horowitz, 1983; Vigil, 1997, 1998), and their historical and
continued presence in the United States (Chavez, 1998; Vigil, 1998), a strong social
identity among individual of Mexican-origin has emerged and persisted. Nevertheless,
heterogeneity exists among these social identities.

Individuals of Mexican-origin trace their descent to Indian, African, and Spanish
cultural groups. A mixture of all three groups, in turn, creates a unique cultural
syncretism2 that manifests itself in individuals of Mexican-decent, what Vigil (1998,

p. 141) calls “meztisaje.” Previous research supports the notion that a majority of first,
second, third, and even fourth generation Mexican-Americans identify themselves as
“Mexicans” and “Mexican-Americans” (Buriel & Cardoz, 1993; Phinney & Devich-
Navarro, 1997).

Acculturation levels can be gauged by different social identities. Research shows
that those who identify themselves as “Mexican” represent those who have experienced
the lowest level of acculturation (Cuellar, Amold, & Maldonado, 1995; Phinney, 1992).
Those who adopt the “Mexican-American” ethnic label, in comparison, reflect medium

levels of acculturation (sometimes referred to as “biculturalism”)(Buriel et al., 1998).

 

2 Syncretisrn, by definition, represents a more abstract phenomenon that anthropologists use to describe the
intermingling and corrrmingling of cultures at the group level more so than the individual one. Cultures
become mixed to form a hybrid “new” culture. This cultural process must not be confused with cultural
diffusion wherein cultural attributes, are shared, and diffuse themselves vis-a-vis individuals to other
geographic and disparate areas. The assumption is that culture is shared, learned, and transferred.

Indicative of the highest level of acculturation is the “Chicano” ethnic label. Due to its
difficulty to gauge, the latter ethnic descriptor has received the least amount of attention
in the acculturation literature.

Individuals who subscribe to a “Chicano” ethnic identity defend Mexican-
American values, are politically active, and view their own culture as “better” than the
majority Anglo-culture (Horowitz, 1983; Penalosa, 1973). Some criminologists use
“Chicano” and “Mexican-American” interchangeably (Mirande, 1987; Perez-McCluskey,
2002; Trujillo, 1974). However, common to all definitions of the “Chicano” ethnic
identity is its political charge (Meier & Ribera, 1993; Vigil, 1998). Arguably it exhibits
pre-conditions attached to it (i.e., political involvement, advocacy, English proficiency,
and US. citizenship), mitigating and lessening the cultural distance between Anglo-
culture and Mexican-oriented culture. Nonetheless, Chicanos are ethnically different
from white Americans.

Taken together, language use and ethnic identity represent the most salient
measures in the current study for distinguishing acculturation levels among Mexican-
origin individuals. These items can be used to answer recent calls for the development of
more sophisticated measures for acculturation, and assess the influence of acculturation

on attitudes related to crime and justice.

ACCULTURATION, CRIME, & JUSTICE

“Studies on the impact of race or ethnicity in the criminal justice system have
teIlded to focus on narrower issues such as bail determinations, jury selection, and

sentencing decisions” (Garcia, 1994, p. 19). Criminological literature on gang activity,

drug use, and violence among Latinos has been largely atheoretical (Rebach, 1992),
acultural (Blea, 1988; Mirande, 1987), and empirically deficient (Garcia, 1994). Studies
that do investigate how “Hispanics” view matters related to crime and justice are
peripherally considered due to the same putative similar race-motivated disj uncture that
Blacks (or all other “races”) experience with the criminal justice system (e. g., Sampson &
J eglum-Bartusch, 1998). Some studies rely on problematic polling data (e.g., Di Rado,
1993). Other studies lack an adequate description of the methodological and the
theoretical strategies implemented (Bedard, Escholtz, & Gertz, 1994; Palerrn, Vincent, &
Vincent, 1999). In the present study, acculturation theory is used to explain attitudes

toward crime and justice among Mexican-descent individuals.

Attitudes Toward the Police

Criminologists and police reformers argue that police agencies need to be more
culturally relativistic and sensitive to the needs and values of the ethnic communities that
they serve (Carter, 1988, 1985; Dunham & Alpert, 1988; Mirande, 1980; Safford, 1977;
Tagaki, 1981). Tyler (1990) argues that police agencies that process and treat suspects
fairly enjoy higher levels of police-civilian cooperation, as well as legitimacy in the eyes
of local community members. Variation exists among individuals of Mexican-decent
with regards to how they view the police. For example, newly immigrated Mexicans may
be very suspicious of the police, whereas Chicanos may express more favorable views.
Acculturation theory can be used to understand how individuals of Mexican-decent view
agents of formal social control in the United States.

Many observers have commented that corruption is widespread in Mexican

political systems and among government officials (Buffington, 2000; Chevigny, 1995,

10

1999; Palerm et al., 1999). For example, Botello and Rivera (2000, p. 61) note that
corruption in the Mexican government is “thoroughly institutionalized and operates at the
local and state as well as federal levels.” Corruptive practices, such as accepting bribes,
have also been observed among police officers (Chevigny, 1999). Focus groups
composed of Mexican citizens conducted in one locale in Mexico revealed that citizens
truly feared the police (Palerm et al., 1999, p. 80). The State Judicial Police is but one
government agency that is frequently cited by international and domestic human rights
organizations (Palerm etal., 1999). It is safe to conclude, then, that the Mexican police
do not enjoy a high level of legitimacy in the eyes of Mexican citizens.

Considerable cultural distance - - especially with regards to language and ethnic
identity - - exists between the least acculturated Mexican-heritage individuals and Euro-
Americans in the United States. Acculturation theory predicts that the least acculturated
individuals, because of their distrust in police to begin with, will view police institutions
in the United States less favorably when compared to their more acculturated
counterparts. Several studies with representative samples in the US. reveal that Anglo-
Americans, when compared to Blacks and Latinos, view police officials more positively,
yielding higher levels of satisfaction (Reisig & Parks, 2000; Sampson & J eglum-
Bartusch, 1999; Skogan, Steiner, DuBois, Gudell, & Pagan, 2002; Tyler, 1990; Weitzer
& Tuch, 1999). Because of the cultural similarity between Chicanos and Euro-Americans
in the United States, highly acculturated Mexican-origin individuals exhibit the most
accepting orientation regarding the police. It should be noted that such an expectation is
counter to Mirande’s (1987) contention that the sustained culture conflict inherent in the

administration of j ustice in the United States among Mexican-descent individuals has a

ll

blanket effect, and will adversely influence attitudes among all individuals of Mexican-
origin regardless of acculturation processes.

For a variety of reasons, existing research has shed little light on whether
acculturation theory or the culture conflict hypothesis provides a better understanding of
Mexican-decent individuals’ attitudes toward the police. First, the sample sizes used in
many studies are fairly small. For example, Torres and Vogel’s (2001) sample is limited
to less than 63 “Latinos,” Mirande (1980, 1981) relies on 170 “Chicanos,” Garza’s (1974)
sample includes only 68 “Chicano” participants, and Cheurprakobkit’s (2000) sample
comprises 251 “Hispanics.” Second, the reliance on nonprobabilistic sampling
techniques, by definition, produces samples that are not representative of larger
populations. Even when probabilistic techniques have been used, other features of the
sampling process call into question the generalizability of the researchers’ samples. For
example, Carter (1983, 1985) drew a random probability sample of 500 potential
respondents by selecting persons with Spanish surnames from a Department of Public
Safety’s database in Texas. People possessing a current driver’s licenses and/or an
official identification card qualified for selection. Such a process would likely result in a
biased sample in that the least acculturated (or recently immigrant) Mexican-descent
individuals were likely excluded. Finally, studies that do use representative samples to .
investigate Mexican-origin individuals attitudes toward the police frequently rely on

9’ “

unidirnensional ethnic descriptors, such as “Hispanic, new immigrants,” or “Latinos”
(Skogan et al., 2002; Tyler, 1990). Doing so fails to differentiate between Latino

subgroups, thus potentially masking evidence of differential levels of acculturation.

12

These are a few of the shortcomings inherent in existing studies that the present study
seeks to overcome.

Tyler (1990) and Skogan and his associates (2002) reported that Hispanics and
Latinos were more apathetic toward police officials than Anglo-Americans but less
apathetic than African-American individuals. Contact with police and fairness of
treatment are variables that are known to affect attitudes toward police among Latinos
(Langan, Greenfield, Smith, Durose, & Levin, 2001). Dunham and Alpert (1988), in a
study that investigates the influence of neighborhood culture and attitudes toward police
in Dade County, find that the less acculturated Cuban-descent individuals are less
concerned with police profiling, are more distrustful and wary about police discretion and
autonomy, and are more apathetic toward active police strategies than their more
acculturated Cuban-descent counterparts. Acculturation and cultural distance affected
attitudes toward police strategies among Latinos. Does the concept of acculturation

equally apply well to Mexican-descent individuals?

Attitudes Toward Youth Deviance

Mexican families are characterized by a strong sense of interdependence and
collectivism within their extended and nuclear familial relationships (Keefe & Padilla,-
1987; Marin & Marin, 1991; Sabogal, Marin, & Otero-Sabogal, 1987). Caucasian
Americans, on the other hand, more strongly value independence and individualism
(Gordan, 1964; Vigil, 1998). What is more, at least in comparative terms, traditional
Mexican parents tend to be overprotective and highly suspect of aversive extra-familial
Social control mechanisms aimed at their children (Horowitz, 1983; Vigil, 1997). When

Compared to Anglo-Americans, Mexican parents are also more authoritarian, which

13

sometimes results in stricter discipline and less child autonomy (Zapata & J aramillo,
1981). Sampson & J eglum-Bartusch (1999) found that Latinos were more intolerant of
thirteen-year-old deviance when compared to Caucasians. However, the authors did not
investigate potential intra-cultural among Latinos. As Mexican parents or adults
acculturate and become more “Americanized,” they become less consistent in their use of
discipline, less effective at monitoring their children’s whereabouts and activities, which
can make their children more vulnerable to deviant peer group influences (Zapata &
Jaramillo, 1981).

Research supports the link between delinquent behavior and low parental control
and regulation (Patterson & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1984; Snyder & Patterson, 1987). The
author is unaware, however, of existing research that has investigates the relationship
between adult social control practices and acculturation among Mexican-heritage
populations. The proposed research project will examine whether more acculturated
individuals of Mexican-origin express more lax and tolerant attitudes toward juvenile

deviance than their less acculturated counterparts.

Attitudes Toward Family Violence

Familismo, considered one of the most important culture-specific values in
Mexican culture (Alvirez & Bean, 1976), promotes and encourages individuals to
strongly identify with and attach themselves to their nuclear and extended families
(Marin & Marin, 1991). Familismo is composed of three dimensions: Perceived
obligations to provide material and emotional support to the members of the extended
family, reliance on relatives for help and support, and the perception of relatives as

attitudinal referents (Sabogal, Marin, & Otero-Sabogal, 1987). It is important to

14

distinguish between attitudinal and behavioral components of familismo (also called
familialism and farnilism). Attitudinal aspects of familismo refer to beliefs and attitudes
that Mexican-descent individuals uphold, wherein strong feelings of loyalty, reciprocity,
and solidarity among members of the same family pervade (Sabogal et al., 1987). If the
everyday lives of Mexican-oriented individuals lack such bonds, they are more subject to
the deleterious effects of acculturative stresses. For example, there is substantial
evidence that mothers who mistreat their children perceive their kinship network to be
less supportive than do non-abusive mothers (Coohey, 1996). Behavioral familismo, on
the other hand, refers to behaviors associated with feelings of familial interdependence
(i.e., visiting with or the exchange of favors between family members). In the proposed
study, the author will investigate attitudinal familismo.

Supporting the hypotheses regarding attitudes toward police, a Mexican national
study based on a random sample found that only 20% of Mexican citizens called upon the
assistance of public authorities to resolve and mitigate violence within the home (Editor,
1996). Eleven percent of all respondents reported police corruption and inefficiency
(among other reasons) as representing obstacles against quelling and mitigating family
violence. Paradoxically, nine out of ten Mexican citizens agreed that public protection
and regulation was still necessary to resolve and mitigate family violence. In order of
preference, respondents invited legal and physical protection of well being from the
prosecutor’s office (23%), the commission on human rights (17%), DIF (equivalent to the
US FBI) (15%), city police departments (13%), police patrol officers (9 %), state police
officers (9 %), and family court judges (7%). Further, 68% of all respondents agreed that

victims of family violence must learn to seek help from public authorities. Clearly, this

15

study reveals that there is a significant difference between the rejection of public
intervention (when family is experienced) and acceptance of police authority (irregardless
of individual experience with family violence). Attitudes and behavior strongly differ in
the Mexican context. Similarly, the current study realizes that attitudes toward family
violence are not indicative of actual behavior. However, it is expected that Mexican
oriented respondents will more likely report family violence as a private concern than
their more acculturated counterparts.

Further, 92% of the respondents in Tijuana, Mexico reported that children were
the worst off victims who suffered in violent households, whereas only 70% responded
similarly in Oaxaca, Mexico, one of the southern most cities in Mexico. Family violence
is more likely to be reported by more acculturated and urbanized Mexicans living in
Tijuana. F arty-six percent of the respondents in Guadalajara, while 35% of the
respondents in Morelia, Mexico reported that mothers were the family members who
were most frequently physically abused in the household. Generally, violence against
women was more likely to be reported and identified in Guadalajara, which is a city
located north of the Morelia, Mexico, and is more urbanized and more Americanized.

In line with occurrences in Mexico, increased acculturation is reported to have a
significant effect on the way “Latino” families seek help or assistance for troubled family
members in the United States (Chun & Akutsu, 1999). Among Mexican-Americans,
higher levels of acculturation are associated with an increase of help-seeking efforts from
extended family members (Keefe, Padilla, & Carlos, 1979; Rogler & Cooney, 1991;
Marin & Marin, 1991). Put simply, more acculturated individuals are more likely to seek

help outside of their immediate familial network.

16

 

 

. :i EDD—Ly I.

 

 

 

.. V... ...,_.... ._.J

Criminologists have yet to study the insular effects that (attitudinal) familism has
on family violence and its commensurability with help seeking efforts and acceptance of
outside formal intervention. Most criminological research examines “Latino” attitudes
toward substance abuse treatment and domestic violence interventions (Firestone et al.,
1999; Torres, 1991; West, Kantor, & J asinski, 1998). Studies on substance abusing
“Latinas” (Shearer, Myer, & Ogan, 2001) and “Latinos” (Laureano & Poliandro, 1991)
conclude that language barriers and cultural values contribute to their high rates of
distrust and cynicism toward formal interventions. However, no theoretical explanations
were proffered to explain such differences. In the domestic violence literature, West and
associates (1998) found that low acculturation levels, measured by preference for the
Spanish language, among “Latinas” are related to their lack of help seeking efforts. This
research supports Baker, Perilla, and Norris’s (2001) contention that research on
family/domestic violence has been disproportionately focused on female respondents.
The use of a unidirnensional measurement of acculturation impinges on the validity of
acculturation research.

Clearly, not unlike the reasons why “Hispanic” and “Latino” individuals distrust
police agencies (Carter, 1985; Safford, 1977) and criminal justice formal interventions
(Laureano et al., 1994; Shearer et al., 2001; West et al., 1998), observers from other
academic spheres have found that the least acculturated “Latinos” are relatively less
willing to access formal sources of help, such as mental and health care resources in the
United States (Altarriba & Santiago-Rivera, 1994; Horwitz, 1987). Kanuha (1994)
proposed that more acculturated, second- and third-generation Latinos may be more

. familiar with and accepting of mental health services (and criminal justice interventions),

17

and thus more likely to seek assistance. This study investigates the effects of
acculturation on attitudes toward family violence and acceptance of formal and informal
interventions beyond the nuclear family among Mexican-descent men and women. The
author hypothesizes that as acculturation rates increase, family violence will be

increasingly perceived as a public concern.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of the proposed research is to investigate the differential
effects that acculturation has on attitudes toward police officials, youth deviance, and
family violence. Accordingly, attention will focus on intra-cultural attitudinal differences
among Mexican-descent individuals. For example, differential attitudes toward crime
and justice will be assessed between Mexicans, Mexican-Americans, and Chicanos.
Finally, the author will conduct a robust test of the effects of acculturation on attitudes
toward crime and justice among Mexican-origin individuals by assessing the predictive
validity of a multi-item acculturation variable consisting of language use and ethnic

identity in a multivariate context.
RESEARCH SETTING

Because of Chicago’s rich cultural, ethnic, and racial diversity (i.e., Blacks,
Whites, and Latinos each represent one-third of the population), it is characteristic of
other locales in the United States experiencing surges of pluralism and multiculturalism.
Having arrived in the city during World War I, Mexican-Americans are considered

Chicago’s first group of Spanish-speaking people (Padilla, 1985). In 1990, 90.5 percent

18

of the Mexican population in the United States was urban (Gonzales, 2000). Echoing the
2000 Census Bureau’s national data on Mexican-descent individuals, Mexicans and
Chicanos in Chicago are concentrated in “low-skills” occupations, with roughly half
holding jobs as industrial operatives, fabricators, and other types of manual laborers (De
Genova, 2003). Mexican-origin individuals represent 60% of the national “Latino”
population (U .S. Bureau of Census, 2001). In Chicago, individuals of Mexican-heritage
form part of 64% of the “Latino” population (Perlmann & Waldinger, 2000). About half
of the Mexican-descent population of Chicago is foreign born (Michelson, 2001; US.
Bureau of the Census, 1991). In 2000, the city’s “Latino” population (754,000) exceeded
the total population of all but 13 American cities (Skogan, Steiner, DuBois, Gudell, &
Fagan, 2002, p. 1). With regards to age, education, and income, the Mexican-descent
population of Chicago is very representative of the Mexican-descent population in the
entire United States (Michelson, 2001; US. Bureau of the Census, 1991). Because of the
intra-cultural diversity of Mexican-oriented Chicagoans, the city provides an ideal

research setting for testing hypotheses derived from acculturation theory.

METHODS

Data

This project uses survey data collected in 1995 from the “The Project on Human
Development in Chicago Neighborhoods.” The in-person survey was administered to
8,782 Chicago residents. The methodology employed to administer the survey consisted
of three steps: first, city blocks within each of the 343 “neighborhood clusters” were

selected. Next, residential dwelling from each block were chosen. Finally, one adult

19

resident (i.e., aged 18 or older) for each sampled residence was interviewed (Earls, 1997).
Overall, a final response rate of 75% was achieved. These data are representative of
Chicago residents. Overall, 2,054 “Latinos” were identified in the survey data where
1,303 of the participants identified themselves as Mexican-descent. Due to missing data,

the final analysis file in the current study included 1,134 respondents of Mexican-descent.

Dependent Variables

The first dependent variable, attitudes toward police, is operationalized as an
additive scale using five survey items. Survey respondents were asked how much they
agreed or disagreed with the following statements: “The police in this neighborhood are
responsive to local issues”; “The police are doing a good job in dealing with problems
that really concern people in this neighborhood”; ”The police are not doing a good job in
preventing crime in this neighborhood” (reverse coded); “The police do a good job in
responding to people in the neighborhood after they have been victims of crime”; and
“The police are not able to maintain order on the streets and sidewalks in the
neighborhood” (reverse coded). Responses to each of these survey items ranged from 1
(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.74; Mean inter-item
correlation = 0.36). Higher scores reflect more positive attitudes toward the police.

The second dependent variable, attitudes toward youth deviance, is also
operationalized as an additive scale, which uses survey questions regarding youth
deviance (i.e., children 13 years of age). Specifically, respondents were asked “how
wrong” is it for children to smoke cigarettes, use marijuana, drink alcohol, and get into

fist fights? Responses ranged from 1 (not wrong at all) to 5 (extremely wrong)

20

(Cronbach’s alpha = 0.86; Mean inter-item correlation = 0.64). Higher scores reflect less
tolerant attitudes regarding to youth deviance.

The third outcome variable, attitudes toward family violence, is operationalized
using a single survey item. Respondents were asked whether fights between “fi'iends or
within families is nobody’s business.” Responses were arranged on a five-item Likert-
scale where 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree. Higher scores reflect the
attitude that violence between family members and friends is a private matter.

Descriptive statistics for the variables used in the analyses are provided in Table 1.

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for the Study Variable (N = 1,134)

 

 

 

Range

Variables Mean SD. MIN MAX
Acculturation Items

Language 1.74 0.64 1.00 3 .00

Ethnic Identity 1.31 0.52 1.00 3.00
Sociodemographics

Education 1 .74 0.99 0.00 5 .00

Sex (1 = male) 0.46 0.50 0.00 1.00

Age (in years) 35.80 12.89 17.00 86.00

Married (1 = married) 0.57 0.50 0.00 1.00

Own Home (l = yes) 0.43 0.50 0.00 1.00

Residential Moves l .00 1 .25 0.00 10.00

Years in Neighborhood 7.00 8.33 0.00 73.00
Control Variable

Neighborhood Satisfaction 2.97 0.72 1.00 4.00
Dependent Variables

Attitudes Toward Police 16.16 3.68 5.00 25.00

Attitudes Toward Youth

Deviance 18.46 2.33 8.00 20.00
Attitudes Toward Family
Violence 2.70 1.10 1.00 5 .00

 

21

Independent Variables

The primary independent variable of interest reflects acculturation. As shown n
Table 1, acculturation is measured using two factors: ethnic identity (1 = Mexican, 2 =
Mexican-American, and 3 = Chicano) and language use at home (1 = primarily Spanish,
2 = both Spanish and English, and 3 = primarily English). In the analyses that follow, the
independent effects of each of these indicators of acculturation will be assessed
separately, and the combined effect on the dependent variables will also be investigated
in a multivariate context. To carry out the latter, it was necessary to construct a
composite measure of acculturation. Accomplishing this task involved entering each of
the acculturation indicators into a principal components analysis to create a weighted
factor score. The results, which are provided in Table 2, show that the two indicators of
acculturation (i.e., ethnic identity and language) have identical factors loadings (0.86),
which suggests that each item contributes to the latent construct to a similar degree. The
results show also that the composite measure captures approximately 73% of the variance
associated with acculturation. The values for the acculturation composite scale range
from -—1.03 to 3.06. It should be noted that the variable is standardized, so the mean is 0
and the standard deviation equals 1. The bivariate correlation between ethnic identity and

language is 0.46 (p g .01).

22

Table 2. Principal Components Analysis

 

 

 

Item Factor Loading
Ethnic Identity 0.86
Language ' 0.86
Eigenvalue l .46
% of Total Variance Explained 73.04
Bivariate Correlation Coefficient 0.46
Range -1.03 to 3.06

 

Following the lead of previous assessment of these data (Sampson & J eglum-
Bartusch, 1998), a number of demographic variables will also be included. Education is
represented as an ordinal-level variable (0 = no school, 1 = less than high school, 2 = high
school graduate, 3 = some college, 4 = college graduate, 5 = graduate school). Sex is a
dummy variable (1 = male, 0 = female). The effects of marital status will be assessed
using a single dummy variable (1 = married, 0 = otherwise). Home ownership reflects
whether the respondenthowns their home (1 = yes, 0 = no). Residential moves reflects the
number of times the respondent changed residents in the past five years. Finally, age (in
years) and years in neighborhood will be continuous variables.

One control variable will be included in the multivariate models. Previous
assessments of attitudes toward the police have shown that perceptions of neighborhood
quality of life influence how individuals view the police (Reisig & Parks, 2000). The
control variable neighborhood satisfaction is represented as a five-item additive scale.
Respondents were asked, “On the whole, do you like or dislike this neighborhood as a
place to live?” Respondents selected from four responses (0 = dislike it a lot, 1 = dislike

it, 2 = like it, and 3 = like it a lot).

23

RESULTS

Multivariate Analysis of Variance

To assess mean differences in the dependent variables between groups exhibiting
different levels of acculturation, three multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA)
models were estimated (see Table 3). Previous researchers agree that MAN OVA is
conducive to maximizing statistical power to assess differences between groups when
using correlated outcome variables (Bray & Maxwell, 1985, pp. 9-11; for an application,
see Reisig, 1998, pp'. 237-8). This approach is appropriate for the purposes of the present
study. For example, attitudes toward youth deviance is negatively and significantly
correlated with attitudes toward family violence (r = -0.64; p 5 0.05). The correlations
between the other dependent variables, however, are more modest (see Appendix). The
Wilks’ Lambda statistic for all three models reveals that the null hypotheses stating that
the population means do not differ can be rejected. In short, these data appear to be

appropriate for estimating MAN OVA models.

24

 

.32 356$ S. w a r... M31v. a r. 5.. w a .

 

 

 

 

 

..:8.~ «353 .223
New :m _ .m :woa eacsm a
_: OS 25. EN 3.: :2 2.2 E:
2 N 22 EN :2 3.2 S... 2.2 528:
8m 22 a: a2 2.2 on... 8.2 33
nomuau===uu<
ten “BBS .223
$06 seemed *mmN ozmflmum k.
A2 82 SA SA 2.: 32 E2 :5 imam
4% 2 ._ EN 8d 2.2 NS 8.2 imam Ea Seam
24 2 .2 EN 9% 3.2 2a 8.2 3:0 25%
macaw—=5
.33 «uses 2:3
is 2% team 2.2% m
cm oi ohm 8a 8.: 8a 3.2 88:6
Nam 22 SN EN 22 SA 8.2 505.5-..852
2w 2._ NZ EN 32 2.... 8.2 :85:
2.53 seem
2 am as: am :82 am as:
ooCBOC/ 353m oo=§>ua £u=o> oozom
flunk/Orr mufiaflu< @830? mova$~< 6.330% mofi3m3<

 

flute—2 <>OZ<2 .m 039—.

25

Ethnic Identity. Each independent variable (i.e., ethnic identity, language, and
acculturation) was aggregated into categories indicating degrees of acculturation. In the
first MANOVA model in Table 3, mean values for each of the dependent variables are
assessed across three ethnic descriptors - - Mexican, Mexican-American, and Chicano - -
that reflect ethnic identity. The results for ethnic identity show that statistically
significant differences were observed between groups for attitudes toward police (F =
3.04, p 5 0.05) and youth deviance (F = 2.48, p 5 0.10). Significant differences across
ethnic identities were not found for attitudes toward family violence. Results from the
Bonferroni multiple comparison tests (not shown) revealed respondents who identified
themselves as Mexican had significantly less positive attitudes toward the police (mean =
15.99) when compared to Mexican-Americans (mean = 16.60). Interestingly, the mean
score for Chicanos fell between the other two groups. Bonferroni tests also detected
significant mean differences between Mexican (mean = 18.52) and Chicanos (mean =
17.60) with respect to attitudes toward youth deviance. Overall, the evidence partially
confirms the hypotheses linking acculturation to differential attitudes regard the police
and youth deviance. No evidence, however, was revealed to support the contention that
individuals expressing more acculturated ethnic identities express different attitudes
toward family violence.

Language. Moving on to the second MANOVA model in Table 3, language,
mean comparisons are once again observed across three distinct groups: Spanish only,
Spanish and English, and English only. Once again, significant group differences were
observed with regards to attitudes toward police (F = 2.33, p 5 0.05) and attitudes toward

youth deviance (F = 4.62, p g 0.01). Similar to the analysis for ethnic identity, however,

26

no significant differences were observed across groups for attitudes toward family
violence. Concerning attitudes toward police, the Bonferroni multiple comparison test
(not shown) revealed that Mexican-descent respondents who spoke Spanish and English
(mean = 16.00) had significantly more apathetic attitudes than their monolingual English
speaking counterparts (mean = 16.77). Another interesting finding is that the mean for
Spanish speaking Mexican respondents was situated between the other two groups. With
regards to attitudes toward youth deviance, Bonferroni tests also showed that there were
significant mean differences between individuals who spoke Spanish only (mean =
18.45), Spanish and English (mean = 18.58), and English only (mean = 17.89). The
hypotheses addressing attitudes toward police and youth deviance are partially and fully
supported, respectively. The Bonferroni tests revealed no significant mean differences
across the three linguistic groups as regards attitudes toward family violence.
Acculturation. Finally, the last model in Table 3, assesses mean differences in
acculturation (i.e., groups formed using an additive variable using ethnic identity and
language). To carry out this assessment, respondents were placed into one of three
groups reflecting different levels of acculturation: Low, medium, and high. More
specifically, those in the “low” acculturation group had scores of either “two” or “three”
on the summated acculturation scale, the “medium” group members had a score of four,
and those in the “high” acculturation group had scores of “five” or “six.” Because each
of the acculturation items had similar factor loading, a simple additive scale was used to
group respondents to reflect different overall levels of acculturation for this analysis.
Consistent with the findings reported above, statistically significant group differences

were observed for attitudes toward police (F = 3.08, p 5 0.05) and attitudes youth

27

deviance (F = 3.13, p 5 0.05). And, once again, no significant differences were observed
between groups with regards to attitudes toward family violence. The Bonferroni
multiple comparison tests (not shown) revealed significant differences between the least
acculturated group (mean = 16.00) and those in the high acculturation group (mean =
16.86) concerning attitudes toward the police. Put simply, more acculturated
respondents, on average, reported more favorable attitudes toward the police. Results
from the Bonferroni tests also showed that there are significant differences between the
“low” group (mean = 18.52) and the “high” group (mean = 17.94) with respect to
attitudes toward youth deviance. The acculturation hypotheses were supported: highly
acculturated Mexican-oriented individuals favored police and were more tolerant of
youth deviance. Again, the Bonferroni tests yielded no significant mean differences with

regards to attitudes toward family violence.

Ordinary Least-Squares Regression Analysis

Ordinary least-squares regression analysis was used to assess the effects of
acculturation on all three dependent variables. The dependent variables - - attitudes
toward police, attitudes toward family violence, and attitudes toward youth deviance - -
were regressed on acculturation and sociodemographic variables (and the statistical
control variable in the attitudes toward police model). Because high inter-correlations
between independent variables can bias regression estimates, it was necessary to check
for potential collinearity. As noted previously, a correlation matrix for the independent
variables used to estimate the regression models featured in Table 4 are provided in the
Appendix. The bivariate correlation coefficients do not exceed an absolute value of .70,

which suggests that collinearity is not cause for concern in the regression analysis.

28

.83 8.5.28 8... v a t... .8... v a t a. .o v a ..
85.0508 5.82%: av 3232652.... 98 .3 322.6538: 2a moogam ”mg-OZ

 

 

 

 

 

8... 8... 8... N...
anomN cocoa-c neecad eta-7K
8...- 8...- .88 8...- 2..- 8...- .88 8...- ...S. 8... ....8 2... 8:23.32
i- i. :38... a... .28 8.. 8:588
8888.02
8...- S...- ..o.8 8...- t8.- 8...- .88 8...- 2.8.2 ...o. .88 8...- 82.88.02 sea;
:3. 8... .88 8... .8..- 8...- .88 2.... 2....- 88 .88 8.8 382.238....3.
S...- 88 .88 8...- .2 8... .28 8... 8... 8... .28 2... .8.u:ueomaao
8..- ....8 .88 8...- .8. 8... .38 8... 8...- 8...- .88 3...- Queue-1.83:8
.8..- 8...- .88 8...- :88 8... .88 8... :NZ 8... .88 8... ow<
2... S... .88 2.. 53....- 2.... .38 8...- ..8. 8... ..~.8 8... .22.":me
8...- 8...- .88 8...- 8...- 88 .88 8...- 8... 8... .28 z... 8:88.”.
2.3.8.2 .28 8a .58.... .88 2.2 :........2 i- .88 a... 5388
8.2-. ._ ..m.8 A. use... a ..m.8 a 3.2.. a ..m.8 a 8.8.a>
Qua—22> beam 023309 €50> Dom—Om
CEBOF "Sweats tasks-H moUBE< 63361—- m0fi3€<

 

29:22. near-Buoy— mqo .v 03....-

29

Attitudes Toward Police. Five of the nine independent variables were
significantly related to attitudes toward police. The primary theoretical variable of
interest, acculturation, was positively associated with attitudes toward police ([3 = 0.05;
t-value = 1.64). Put simply, more acculturated Mexican-origin respondents expressed
more favorable attitudes toward the police. This finding supports the acculturation
hypothesis. To explore the dynamics of this finding further, an additional regression
model was estimated featuring the two acculturation items (i.e., ethnic identity and
language) in a disaggregated format (not shown). The results indicate that the
acculturation effect shown in Table 4 is driven by the association with ethnic identity.
Put differently, ethnic identity was significantly related to attitudes toward the police (p _<_
0.05). Language, on the other hand, had a null effect on attitudes toward police.

Other significant relationships were also observed: older individuals of Mexican
decent (B = 0.07; t-value = 2.12) and male respondents ([3 = 0.05; t-value = 1.68)
expressed more positive attitudes toward the police when compared to younger and
female respondents. Not surprisingly, neighborhood satisfaction was positively linked to
attitudes toward the police ([3 = 0.24; t-value = 8.32). As levels of satisfaction with
neighborhood conditions increased among respondents, perceptions of the police became
increasingly positive. Finally, respondents who had resided in their neighborhoods for
longer periods of time expressed more negative views of the police ([3 = -0.11; t-value =
-2.98). It should be noted that these latter four findings are consistent with previous
studies of attitudes toward the police using multi-racial and multi-ethnic samples (see

Reisig & Parks, 2000; Sampson & J eglum-Bartusch, 1998). The coefficient of

30

determination (R2) reveals that this model explained approximately 7% of the variance
associated with attitudes toward the police.

Attitudes Toward Youth Deviance. Five of the eight independent variables were
significantly related to attitudes toward youth deviance. Although the direction of the
regression coefficient is in the hypothesized direction, acculturation was not significantly
related to attitudes toward youth deviance ([3 = -0.04; t-value = -1.17, p = .24). In short,
the results from the regression model in Table 4 do not support the hypothesis that as
Mexican-origin individuals become more acculturated, they are more tolerant of youth _
deviance.

A number of statistically significant inverse relationships were observed. In
particular, older individuals ([3 = -O.15; t-value = -5.01), those who moved recently ([3 =
-0.06; t-value = -1.92), males ([3 = -O.15; t-value = -5.01), and respondents who had lived
in their current neighborhood for longer periods, all expressed significantly higher levels
of tolerance regarding deviance among thirteen-year-olds. When compared to the
attitudes toward police regression model, this model explained less variance (i.e., 4%).

Attitudes Toward Family Violence. The slope coefficient for acculturation in the
attitudes toward family violence model was not statistically significant (p = .33), thus the
hypothesized effect of acculturation was not supported. Nevertheless, the relationship
was in the hypothesized direction. The lack of statistical significance may be due, at least
in part, to the wording of the survey item. This issue will be revisited in the discussion
section. Two of the eight independent variables were significantly related to attitudes
toward family violence. As observed in the previous model, age was a statistically

significant correlate (B = -0.06; t-value = -1.65). Older individuals of Mexican decent

31

tended to view family violence as more of a public matter. Those who have made more
residential moves, on the other hand, were more likely to view family violence as more of
a private issue ([3 = 0.07; t—value = 1.95). When compared to the other regression models
featured in Table 4, the attitudes toward family violence model explained the least

amount of variance (i.e., 2%).

DISCUSSION

The primary objective of the current research was to dispel the myth of cultural
homogeneity by examining the effects of acculturation on attitudes toward police, youth
deviance, and family violence among Mexican-origin individuals. Evidence was found
in support of acculturation theOry. The most significant findings revealed that Mexican
individuals were more apathetic toward police officials than their Mexican-American and
Chicano counterparts. Although not significantly significant, Mexicans were more
intolerant of youth deviance than their more acculturated counterparts. No evidence was
uncovered to suggest that more acculturated Mexican-heritage individuals viewed family
violence as a public concem.

A more sensitive, multidimensional, and sophisticated acculturation measure
could have improved the current analyses and yielded stronger support for the study’s
hypotheses. In addition to language and ethnic identity, religious identification could
also be included in an acculturation measure.3 Studies show that first generation

Mexican-oriented individuals have higher rates of Catholic affiliation when compared to

 

3 The researcher’s original intent was to include religious identification as a third indicator of acculturation.
However, because of time constrictions and delayed notice that the information must be requested with
special permission from the distributor, the author decided to proceed with the two most important
indicators of acculturation. Nonetheless, religious identification would have accounted for the least amount
of variance in the acculturation composite score.

32

subsequent generations (Gonzales & La Velle, 1985; de la Garza, DeSipio, Garcia,
Garcia, & Falcon, 1992). Another option would be to use the Acculturation Rating Scale
for Mexican-Americans (ARSMA-II) (Cuellar et al., 1995).

Not only does acculturation merit more precise measurement in future studies,
such tools also must be complimented with survey questions that are also culturally
sensitive. For instance, in the present study, acculturation had a null effect on attitudes
toward family violence among Mexican-origin respondents. This insignificant effect is
more than likely due to the wording of the survey question that asks about violence
between “friends” and “family.” The introduction of the subject of friends could have
attenuated the effect of familismo among respondents. Such an occurrence would not be
surprising since existing studies on familismo do not mention the relevance of friendship
networks (Marin & Marin, 1991; Sabogal et al., 1987). Thus, it is beneficial that future
criminologists reflect their plight for cultural relativism equally in their measures.
Moreover, informed by inquiries in other social sciences (i.e., cultural and psychological
anthropology), the present criminological research has reaped the benefits of inter-
disciplinary enterprises that can effectively enlighten police practices.

In this research, ethnic identity was composed of more complex properties than
previous research had reported (e. g., Buriel & Cardoz, 1993; Phinney & Devich—Navarro,
1997). For example, each of the three ethnic labels affected attitudes differently among
Mexican-oriented respondents. Specifically, the Chicano social identity differed in
important aspects that merit closer inspection. First, only 30 respondents identified
themselves as “Chicano,” whereas 292 and 812 respondents subscribed to “Mexican-

American” and “Mexican” social identities, respectively. This supports Vigil’s (1997)

33

observation regarding the decline of the subscription to Chicano ethnic identity. Further,
the Chicano ethnic label in the 19605, 19705, and early 19805 represented a solid and
strong ethnic and cultural identity among Mexican-oriented individuals (Horowitz, 1983;
Penalosa, 1973). As the ethnic category became more politically charged and
unattractive, more youth during the early 19905 refrained from identifying with it (Vigil,
1997). However, in the current study, young females and those who had not completed
high school more fiequently identified with the Chicana ethnic identity. Supporting
previous research (Gurin, Hurtado, & Peng, 1994), these findings reveal that this ethnic
identity was more than likely politically-oriented in comparison to the class-oriented
Mexican and Mexican-American ethnic identities (measured by educational
achievement). Gurin and her colleagues (1994) argue that the subscription to the
Chicano/a ethnic identity leads to more inter-group interaction, therefore attenuating the
effect of acculturation for this particular ethnic group. Put simply, political involvement
and social class, not unlike previous research (see Sampson & J eglum-Bartusch, 1998),
attenuates some cultural effects, in this case, acculturation.

This study justifies and invites future research that both combines Mexican-
American and Chicano individuals as one group and research that differentiates between
the two. On the one hand, individuals in this study who identified with the ethnic
identities of Mexican and Mexican-Americans differed significantly fi'om each other
when viewing police officials, yet Chicanos were situated between the two extremes.
However, Chicanos and Mexican-Americans mean scores approximated each other and
they could arguably be aggregated together. On the other hand, Chicanos, Mexican-

Americans, and Mexicans varied notably with respect to tolerance of youth deviance,

34

siding with the notion of treating all three ethnic groups as unique and distinct. Ethnic
identity elucidated important cross cutting features within the construct of acculturation.
In the future, qualitative research may help explain such interesting intersections (see
Vigil, 1988, 2002).

Just like linguistic anthropologists (Duranti, 1994; Kroskrity, 1993; Zentella,
1997) and psychological anthropologists (Fiske, 1991; Ward, 1992), the researcher
considered culture, psychology, and language as interrelated phenomena. Although this
study suggested the (independent effects of language preference and ethnic identity, the
concept of acculturation nonetheless retained its holistic features, thus keeping with the
tradition established by cultural, sociological, and psychological scholars regarding
inextricably tied phenomena.

Chicago was composed mostly of Mexicans (N = 805) who scored low on the
acculturation spectrum. Notably, these cross-sectional data provides weak support for the
assimilation hypothesis, especially since rates for English monolingualism (N = 125),
Chicanoism (N = 30), and assimilation rates (N = 111) are low. Furthermore, Mexican-
descent individuals in the United States, according to the data, favor both separatist and
integrationist adaptive sub-strategies that Berry (1997) suggests in his theoretical work.
Mexicans were reportedly separatists, because of the high rates of Spanish 1
monolingualism (N = 415), Mexican ethnic identities (N = 812), and low acculturation
levels among respondents. The integrationist school of thought is less but certainly
supported by the high rates of bilingualism (N = 594) among Mexican-descent
respondents. Superficially, the everyday life and routine of Mexican-descent immigrants

and their offspring requires them to interact fully in both English and Spanish in the name

35

of convenience, not affecting other culturally separatist features (i.e., language
preference, acculturation, etc.).

One subsequent study has been administered each year for six years to the same
respondents in this study. As soon as these data are available, longitudinal analyses will
test the acculturation, assimilation, and adaptation directional hypotheses
aforementioned. It will fill the void where Berry (1997) neither emphasized nor offered
clear examples supporting or disconfirming the case for mutual dependency or mutual
exclusivity among these strategies (i.e., integrationist, separatist, and assimilationist).
The goal of future cultural criminological studies must comprehend and scrutinize these
sub-processes and effectively express how these apply to different cultural groups. For
instance, is it that police departments, which are extensions of a larger political
infrastructure, segregate these groups, or is it that these cultural groups separate
themselves altogether from police entities due to the their discriminatory and profiling
practices? How does acculturation influence these rates? Political studies show that
Mexican-Americans are less trustful of American governments than their less
acculturated co-ethnic counterparts (Klesner, 2003; Michelson, 2001a, 2001b). The
current study, then, strongly questions the police departments’ instrumental and auxiliary
attachment to the greater governmental infrastructure, because Mexicans in this study
firmly viewed police less favorably than their more acculturated counterparts.

Ferrel (1999), in his description of “cultural criminology” fails to realize the
importance of representative, quantitative, and probabilistic studies, especially since he
emphasizes importance of qualitative studies. Ironically, he fails to recognize in the

research that he proposes the existing multiplicity of American cultures in a growingly

36

multicultural criminal justice setting. This study introduces new forms of inquiry to the
school of “cultural criminology.” Specifically this study gives import to probabilistic,
large, representative, and quantitative research schemas for studying cultural phenomena
within unique American cultural groups. Thus, equally effective as any good qualitative
study, the current quantitative study yielded important findings relevant to cultural
studies with regard to attitudes toward police and delinquency especially.

Criminological theories and current criminal justice policy making practices have
lumped Latin American-origin individuals into one group, which has been categorized as
either “Latino” or “Hispanic,” negating important inter- and intra-cultural differences
(Garcia, 1994; Pizarro & Vera, 2001). The current research successfully questions the
efficacy and saliency of criminal justice policies that lump individuals into aggregates or
quantifiable categories deemed manageable and stripped of their cultural sensibilities.
For penal policymakers and police agencies to employ one-size-fits-all crime control,
intervention, and preventative strategies is to insulate themselves from the “messy, hard-
to-control demands of the social world” (F eeley & Simon, 1992, p. 456). In this research,
this messiness is caused by the effects of acculturation and other cultural processes. This
research succeeded in deconstructing such aggregate modes of thinking. Criminologists
and criminal justice practitioners must now work on reconstructing these categories and
sub-categories faithfully, which will be conducive to culturally specific and relative

policy implementation in the criminal justice system within a multicultural context.

37

APPENDIX

38

.92 3:35;; 8. w m : 3. w a ..

 

2: :86 1.8.? cad Ed- :aod mod wed 36 need Nod couoflmtum uoofonnwfiz :
co; .33.? .2..de vod. {acmd mod shod :mmd :omd 1.3.9 woofenanZEmSo> 2

 

2: :3? 3.? :3? 8.? 8.? 3.? 8.? 8.? 38238282 a
2: :23 :23 23 ::.o :23 :83 ::.3 escapee w
2: :23 .83 :23 :2? :2? :2? 3252 a.
2: 8.3 :8? 8.3 :3 23 a? e
2: :3 3.? :3? 5.3 6m m
2: :23 :23 :32 8:258 v
2: :33 :33 8:82.82 m
2: :23 3:52 25:: N
2: owazmcmq _
: S a w a e m. e m N _

 

329323 3:023:3qu 8.. 2.32 seam—280 26:33:.

39

REFERENCES

Adler, F ., Mueller, G.O., & Laufer, W.S. (1991). Criminology. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Altarriba, J., & Santiago-Rivera, A.L. (1994). Current perpectives on using linguistic and
cultural factors in counseling the Hispanic client. Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice, 25, 388-397.

Alvirez, D., & Bean, FD. (1976). The Mexican American family. In C.H. Mindel & R.N.
Haberstein (Eds.), Ethnic families in America (pp. 271-291) New York: Elsevier.

Aycan, Z., & Berry, J .W. (1996). Impact of employment-related experiences on
immigrants’ well-being and adaptation to Canada. Canadian Journal of Behavioral

Science, 28, 240-251.

Baker, C.K., Perilla, J .L., & Norris, EH. (2001). Parenting stress and parenting
competence among Latino men who batter. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16, 1139-

1157.

Bedard, L., Eschholz, S., & Gertz, M. (1994). Perceptions of crime and education within
the Hispanic community and the impact on corrections. Journal of Correctional
Education, 45, 72-80.

Berry, J.W. (1992a). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications. New York:
Cambridge University Press.

Beny. J. W. (1992b). Acculturation and adaptation in a new society. International
Migration, 30, 69-85.

Berry, J . W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An
International Review, 46, 5-68.

Beny, J.W., & Annis, RC. (1974). Acculturative stress. Journal ofCross-Cultural
Psychology, 5, 382-406.

Berry, J.W., & Sam, D. (1996). Acculturation and adaptation. In J.W. Berry, M.H. Segall,

at C. Kagicibasi (Eds), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology, Vol. 3. Boston: Allyn &
acon.

Botello, N.A., & Rivera, A.L. (2000). Everything in this job is money: Inside the
Mexrcan police. World Policy Journal, 17, 61-71.

Blea, 1.1. (1988). Toward a Chicano Social Science. New York: Praeger.

40

 

Bray, J.H., & Maxwell, SE. (1985). Multivariate Analysis of Variance. Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.

Buffmgton, R. (2000). Criminal and Citizen in Modern Mexico. Lincoln, NB: University
of Nebraska Press.

Buriel, R., Perez, W. De Ment, T.L., Chavez, D.V., & Moran, V.R. (1998). The
relationship of language brokering to academic performance, biculturalism, and self-
efficacy among Latino adolescents, Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 20, 283-
297.

Buriel, R., & Cardoza, D. (1993). Mexican American ethnic labeling: An intrafamilial
and intergenerational analysis. In J.P. & M. Rotherman (Eds.), Children ’s ethnic
socialization: Pluralism and development (pp. 134-152). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Caetano, R., Schafer, J ., Clark, C.L., Cunradi, C.B., & Raspberry, K. (2000). Intimate
partner violence, acculturation, and alcohol consumption among Hispanic couples in the
United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15, 30-45.

Carter, D. L. (1983). Hispanic interaction with the criminal justice system in Texas:
Experiences, attitudes, and perceptions. Journal of Criminal Justice, 11, 213-227.

Carter, UL. (1985). Hispanic perception of police performance: An empirical
assessment. Journal of Criminal Justice, 13, 487-500.

Chavez, LR. (1998). Shadowed Lives: Undocumented Immigrants in American Society.
New York: Harcourt Brace.

Cheurprakobkit, S. (2000). Police-citizen contact and police performance: attitudinal
differences between Hispanics and non-Hispanics. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 325-
336.

Chevigny, P. (1999). Defining the role of the police in Latin America. In J.E. Mendez, G.
O’Donnell & P. S. Pinheiro (Eds), The (un)rule of law and the underprivileged in Latin
America (pp. 49-70). South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

Chevigny, P. (1995). Edge of the Knife: Police Violence in the Americas. New York: The
New Press.

Chun, K.M., & Akutsu, PD. (1999). Utilization of mental health services. In E.J.
Kramer, S.L. Ivey, & Y.W. Ying (Eds), Immigrant women 's health: Problems and
solutions (pp.54-64). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Coohey, C. (1996). Child maltreatment: Testing the social isolation hypothesis. Child
Abuse and Neglect, 20, 241-254.

41

Costelloe, M., Chiricos, T., Burianek, J ., Gertz, M., & Maier-Katkin, D. (2002). The ,
social correlates of punitiveness toward criminals: A comparison of the Czech republic
and Florida. Justice System Journal, 23, 191-223.

Cuellar, 1., Arnold, B., & Maldonado, R. (1995). Acculturation rating scale for Mexican-
Americans: A revision of the original ARSMA scale. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral
Sciences, 17, 275-304.

De Genova, N. (1998). Race, space, and reinvention of Latin America in Mexican
Chicago. Latin American Perspectives, 25, 87-116.

de la Garza, R. O., Desipio, L., Garcia, F .C., Garcia, J ., & Falcon, A. (1992). Latino
Voices: Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Cuban Perspectives. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Di Rado, A. (October 25, 1993). The times poll: The fear of crime is the unifying factor
in orange county. Los Angeles Times, p. A1.

Dunham, R.G., & Alpert, GP. (1988). Neighborhood differences in attitudes toward
policing evidence for a mixed strategy model of policing in a multi ethnic setting.
Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 79, 504-523.

Duranti, A. (1994). From Grammar to Politics: Linguistic Anthropology in a Western
Samoan Village. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Earls, F. (1999). Project on human development in Chicago neighborhoods: Community
survey, [994-] 995 [Computer file]. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for
Political and Social Research.

Editor. (1996). Estudio de penetracion y opinion publica sobre la violencia familiar,
auspiciado por el fondo de poblacion de las naciones unidas. Nueva Cultura F eminista,
20, 34-39.

Feeley, M.M., & Simon, J. (1992) The new penology: Notes on the emerging strategy of
corrections and its implications. Criminology, 30, 449-474.

Ferrell, J. (1999) Cultural criminology. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 395-418.
Firestone, J.M., Lambert, L.C., & Vega. WA. (1999). Intimate Violence Among Woman
of Mexican Origin: Correlates of Abuse. Journal of Gender, Culture, and Health, 4, 199-
234.

Fiske, AP. (1996). The cultured mind: Why psyches depend on cultures. Review of
Philip K. Bock, Psychological Anthropology. Contemporary Psychology, 41, 929—930.

Garcia, R. (1994). Latinos and Criminal Justice. Chicano-Latino Law Review, 14, 6-19.

42

. . n uni ”fir!

 

Garza, H. (1974). Administration of justice: Chicanos in Monterrey County. In A.S.
Lopez (Ed.), Criminal justice and Latino communities (pp. 47-55). New York: Garland.

Gonzales, M.G. (2000). Mexicanos: A History of Mexicans in the United States.
Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University Press.

Gonzales, R.O., & La Velle, M. (1985). The Hispanic Catholic in the United States. New
York: Northeast Catholic Pastorla Center for Hispanics.

Gordon, M. (1964). Assimilation in American Life. New York: Oxford University Press.

Gurin, P., Hurtado, A., & Peng, T. (1994) Group contacts and ethnicity in the social
identities of Mexicanos and Chicanos. Personality and Social Psychologr Bulletin, 20,
521-532.

Horowitz, R. (1983). Honor and the American Dream. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers
University Press.

Horwitz, A.V. (1987). Help-seeking processes and mental health services. In D.
Mechanic (Ed.) Improving mental health services: What the social sciences can tell us
(pp. 33-45). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Johnson, AG, (2000). The Blackwell Dictionary of Sociology: A User ’3 Guide to
Sociological Language. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Kanuha, V. (1994). Women of color in baterring relationships. In L. Comas-Diaz & B.
Greene (Ed5.), Women of color: Integrating ethnic and gender identities in
psychotherapy (pp. 428-454). New York: Guilford Press.

Keefe, S. E., & Padilla, A. (1987). Chicano Ethnicity. Albuquerque, NM: University of
New Mexico Press.

Keefe, S.E., Padilla, A.M., & Carlos, ML. (1979). The Mexican-American extended
family as an emotional support system. Human Organization, 34, 144-152.

Klesner, J .L. (2003). Political Attitudes, Social Capital, and Political Participation: The
United States and Mexico Compared. Mexican Studies, 19, 29-63.

Kottack, C. P. (2002). Anthropology: The Exploration of Human Diversity. Boston:
McGraw-Hill.

Kroskrity, Paul V. (1993). Language, History, and Identity: Ethnolinguistic Studies of the
Arizona T ewa. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.

43

Laureano, M., & Poliandro, E. (1991). Understanding cultural values of Latino male
alcoholics and their families: A cultural sensitive model. Journal of Chemical
Dependency Treatment, 4,137-155.

Lafree, G., & Russell, K.K. (1993). The argument for studying race and crime. Journal of
Criminal Justice Education, 4, 273-288.

Langan, P.A. Greenfield, L.A., Smith, S.K., Durose, M.R., & Levin, DJ. (2001).
Contacts Between the Police and the Public: Findings from the 1999 National Survey.
Washington, DC: US. Department of Justice.

Levy, K. (2001). Relationships between adolescent attitudes toward self-concept,
authority, and delinquency. Adolescence, 36, 333-346.

Marin, G., & Marin, B.V. (1991). Research with Hispanic populations. Newbury Park:
Sage. '

Marin, G. Sabogal, E, Marin, B.V., Otero-Sabogal, R., & Perez-Stable, E. (1987).
Development of a short acculturation scale. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Science, 9,
183-205.

Meier, M.S., & Ribera, F. (1993). Mexican Americans/American Mexicans: From
Conquistadores to Chicanos. Canada: Harper Collins.

Michelson, M.R. (2001a). Political trust among Chicago Latinos. Journal of Urban
Affairs, 23, 323-334.

Michelson, M.R. (2001b). The effect of national mood on Mexican American political
opinion. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 23, 57-70.

Mirande, A. (1980). Fear of Crime and Frear of the Police in a Chicano Community.
Sociology and Social Research, 64, 528-541.

Mirande, A. (1981). The Chicano and the Law: An analysis of community-police conflict
in an urban barrio. Pacific Sociological Review, 24, 65-86.

Mirande, A., (1987). Gringo Justice. South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
Myers, L.B., Cintron, M., Kathryn, & Scarborough, E. (1994). Latinos: The
conceptualization of race. In J .E. Hendricks & B. Byers (Eds) Multicultural perspectives
in criminal justice and criminology (pp 155-184). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Olmeda, EL. (1979). Acculturation: A psychometric perspective. American Psychologist,
34, 1061-1070.

44

 

Padilla, F .M. (1985). Latino Ethnic Consciousness: The case of Mexican Americans and
Puerto Ricans in Chicago. South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame Press

Padilla, F .M. (1986). On the nature of Latino ethnicity. Social Science Quarterly, 65,
65 1-664.

Palerm, J .V., Vincent, B.R., & Vincent, K. (1999). Mexican Immigrants in Courts. In J .1.
Moore and ME. Fisher (Eds), Immigrants in courts (pp. 73-97). Seattle, WA:
University of Washington Press.

Patterson, G. R., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1984). The correlation of family
management practices and delinquency. Child Development, 55, 1299-1307.

Penalosa, F. (1973). Toward an operational definition of the Mexican-American. In G.
Lopez & G. Rivas (Eds), The Chicanos (pp. 91-106). New York: Monthly Review Press.

Perez-McCluskey, C. (2002). Understanding Latino Delinquency. New York: LFB
Scholarly Publishing LLC.

Perlrnann, J ., & Waldinger, R. (1998). Are the children of today’s immigrants making it?
In S. Steinberg (Ed.), Race and ethnicity in the United States (pp.223-252). Malden, MA:
Blackwell.

Phinney, J ., & Devich-Navarro, M. (1997). Variations in bicultural identification among
African American and Mexican American adolescents. Journal of Research on
Adolescence, 7, 3-32.

Phinney, J. (1992). The multigroup ethnic identity measure: A new scale for use with
diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7, 156-176.

Pizarro, M., & Vera, EM. (2001) Chicana/o ethnic identity research: Lessons for
researchers and counselors. The Counseling Psychologist, 29, 91-117.

Ponce, C., & Comer, B. (2003). Is Acculturation in Hispanic Health Research a Flawed
Concept? JRSI Working Paper, no. 60.

Rebach, H. (1992). Alcohol use among American minorities. In J .S. Trimble, C.S. Bolek,
& S.J. Niemcryk (Eds), Ethnic and multicultural drug Abuse: Perspectives on current
research. New York: The Haworth Press.

Redfield, R., Linton, R., & Herskovitz, M.J. (1936). Memorandum for the study of
acculturation, American Anthropologist, 38, 149-152.

Reisig, MD. (1998). Rates of disorder in higher-custody state prisons: A comparative
analysis of managerial practices. Crime and Delinquency, 44, 229-244.

45

Reisig, M.D., & Parks, RB. (2000). Experience, quality of life, and neighborhood
context: A hierarchical analysis of satisfaction with police. Justice Quarterly, 17, 607-
630.

Richmond, A. (1993). Reactive migration: Sociological perspectives on refugee
movements. Journal of Refugee Studies, 6, 7-24.

Rogler, L.H., & Cooney, RS. (1991). Puerto Rican families in New York City:
Intergenerational processes. Marriage and Family Review, 16, 331-349.

Rosenfeld, M.J. (2001). Measures of assimilation in the marriage market: Mexican
Americans 1970-1990. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 152-162.

Sabogal, E, Marin, B., & Otero-Sabogal, R. (1987). Hispanic familism and acculturation:
What changes and what doesn’t. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 9, 397-412.

Safford, J.B. (197 7). No comprendo: The non-english defendant and the criminal process.
The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 68, 15-30.

Samaniego, R.Y., & Gonzales, NA. (1999). Multiple Mediators of the Effects of
Acculturation Status on Delinquency for Mexican American Adolescents. American
Journal of Community Psychology. 27, 189-210.

Sampson, R.J., & J eglum-Bartusch, DJ. (1998). Legal cynicism and (subcultural?)
tolerance of deviance: The neighborhood of racial differences. Law & Society Review, 32,
777-804.

Schwarzer, R., Hahn, A., & Schroder, H. (1994). Social integration and social support in
a life crisis: Effects of macrosocial change in East Germany. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 22, 685-706.

Shearer, R.A., Myers, L.B., & Ogan, GD. (2001). Treatment resistance and ethnicity
among female offenders in substance abuse treatment programs. The Prison Journal, 81,
55-72.

Skogan, W.G., Steiner, L., DuBois, J ., Gudell, E.J., & Fagan, J. (2002). Community
Policing and “The New Immigrants Latinos in Chicago. Washington, DC:
Government Printing Office.

Snyder, J ., & Patterson, G. (1987). Family interaction and delinquent behavior. In H.C.
Quay (Ed.), Handbook of juvenile delinquency (pp. 216-243). New York: Wiley.

Stanfield, J.H. (1993). Epistemological considerations. In J .H. Stanfield & R.M. Dennis
(Eds), Race and ethnicity in research methods (pp. 16-36) Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

46

'-

Takagi, P. (1981). Race, crime and social policy: A minority perspective. Crime &
Delinquency, 27, 48-63.

Torres, 8., & Vogel, RE. (2001). Pre- and post-test differences between Vietnamese and
Latino residents involved in a community policing experiment: Reducing fear of crime
and improving attitudes towards the police. Policing, 24, 40-56.

Trujillo, L. D. (1974). “La evolucion del “bandido” al ‘Pachuco’”: A critical examination
and evaluation of criminological literature on Chicanos. Issues in Criminology, 9, 43-67.

Tyler, TR. (1990). Why People Obey the Law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
US. Bureau of the Census (2001). Census of Population, 2000. Washington, DC:
Government Printing Office.

US. Bureau of the Census. (1991). Census of Population, 1990. Washington, DC:
Government Printing Office.

Vasquez, A. (1984). Les implications ideologiques du concept d’acculturation. Cahiers
de Sociologie Economique et Culturelle, 1, 83-121.

Vaughn, M.S., Deng, F ., & Lee, L. (2003). Evaluating a drug treatment program in
Taiwan. Journal of Drug Issues, 33, 357-367.

Vega, W.A., Khoury, E.L., Zimmerman, R.S., Gil, A.G., & Warheit, G.J. (1995). Cultural
conflicts and problem behaviors of Latino adolescents in home and school environments.
Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 167-179.

Vigil, J .D. (2002) A Rainbow of Gangs: Street Cultures in the Megacity. Austin:
University of Texas Press.

Vigil, J .D. (1997). Personas Mexicanas: Chicano High Schoolers in a Changing Los
Angeles. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace.

Vigil, J .D. (1998). From Indians to Chicanos: The Dynamics of Mexican-American
Culture. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.

Vigil, JD. (1988) Barrio Gangs: Street Life and Identity in Southern California. Austin:
University of Texas Press.

Wall, J .A., Power, T.G., & Arbona, C. (1993). Susceptibility to Antisocial Peer pressure
and Its Relation to Acculturation in Mexican- American Adolescents. Journal of
Adolescent Research. 8, 403- 418.

Ward, C. (1996). Acculturation. In D. Lands & R.S. Bhagat (Eds), Handbook of
intercultural training (pp. 124-147). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

47

Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1992). Locus of control , mood disturbance and social
difficulty during cross-cultural transitions. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 16, 175-194.

Weitzer, R., & Tuch, SA. (1999). Race, class, and perceptions of discrimination by the
police. Crime & Delinquency, 45, 494-507.

West, C., Kantor, G.K., & J asinski, J .L. (1998). Sociodemographic predictors and
cultural barriers to help-seeking behavior by Latina and Anglo-American battered
women. Violence and Victims, 13, 361-375.

Zapata, J .T., & J aramillo, PT (1981). Research on the Mexican-American family.
Journal of Individual Psychology, 37, 72-85.

Zayas, L.H., Rojas, M., & Malgady, R.G. (1998). Alcohol and Drug Use, and Depression
Among Hispanic Men in Early Adulthood. American Journal of Community Psychology,
26, 425-438.

Zentella, A.C. (1997). Growing Up Bilingual. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Zule,W.A., Desmond, D.P., Medrano, M.A., & Hatch, J .P. (2001). Acculturation and

risky injection practices among Hispanic injectors. Evaluation and Program, 24, 207-
214.

48