Randolph C. Cappsa, Jacinta Bronte-Tinkewb, and Allison Horowitzb
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER
ENGAGEMENT WITH INFANTS AMONG CHINESEAND MEXICAN-ORIGIN IMMIGRANT FATHERS
Using a sample of resident fathers (i.e., fathers who co-reside with children)
in the 9-month Early Childhood Longitudinal Study—Birth Cohort (ECLSB), this study examined how acculturation is associated with father engagement with infants for Chinese and Mexican immigrant fathers. When a variety
of individual and demographic characteristics were controlled for, results from
Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) models indicate that U.S. citizenship is negatively associated with warmth for Chinese fathers and that English language
use is positively associated with physical care and nurturing activities for
Mexican fathers. Findings suggest that some dimensions of acculturation
shape parenting across different groups and are a predictor of resident men’s
involvement with their young children.
Keywords: father involvement, immigrants, Chinese-origin, Mexican-origin,
acculturation
Within the last two decades, the U.S. has witnessed record high levels of immigration (Hernandez & Darke, 1999), a trend that has important consequences for millions of children. In 2004, for example, 23 percent of all children under age six had at
least one immigrant parent (Capps, Fix, Murray, Ost, Passel, & Herwantoro, 2005). Although the study of parenting has been the subject of extensive intellectual inquiry
using non-Hispanic, white, U.S.-born populations, less attention has been paid to groups
of immigrant parents, and even less so to immigrant fathers, and their parenting. Existing research on immigrant parents in the United States has largely focused on mothers, has used small select samples that are non-representative (Cote & Bornstein, 2005;
Rumbaut, 1994), or has relied on ethnographic accounts focused on the stresses associated with assimilation (Salgado de Snyder, Cervantes, & Padilla, 1990). Fathering in
the rapidly growing population of immigrants, especially with infants, still remains rela
b
Migration Policy Institute, Washington, DC.
Child Trends, Washington, DC.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jacinta Bronte-Tinkew, Child Trends, Suite 350,
4301 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington DC, 20008. Electronic mail: [email protected]
Fathering, Vol. 8, No. 1, Winter 2010, 61-92.
© 2010 by the Men’s Studies Press, LLC. All rights reserved. http://www.mensstudies.com
fth.0801.61/$14.00 • DOI: 10.3149/fth.0801.61 • ISSN/1537-6680 • eISSN/1933-026X
61
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
atively unexplored. Regardless of parental country of origin, immigrant fathers are
more likely than U.S.-born fathers to co-reside with their children (Capps, 2001;
Chuang & Moreno, 2008). At the same time, immigrant fathers may face stressors such
as underemployment, unemployment, language barriers, shifts in identity roles, and
barriers to services, all of which can affect parenting abilities. In addition, sociocultural beliefs about the roles and expectations of fathers may differ according to the norms
in fathers’ native country, leading to differences in parenting (Shimoni, Este, & Clark,
2003). Recent cross-cultural research has identified differences in parenting practices
for some immigrant groups (Inman, Howard, Beaumont, & Walker, 2007; Julian, McKenry, & McKelvey, 1994), making the case for an examination of differences in parenting across different groups of immigrant men highly warranted.
The role of fathers in general has been found to be important to the wellbeing of
young children (Biller & Lopez Kimpton, 1997; Clarke-Stewart, 1980; Lewis, 1997;
Nugent, 1991; Osborn & Morris, 1982; Pleck, 1997; Radin, 1981) and may be particularly significant in immigrant families. Because many immigrant families espouse
more traditional roles for mothers, the involvement of fathers may take on greater importance. In addition, fathers’ engagement may be critical in any family that moves to
a new context, as such involvement may be essential in managing the process of making a healthy and successful transition to a new country and a new majority culture. The
presence of a father in the household can also provide more family support that can
potentially foster more positive parent-child relationships of higher quality and reduce
family conflict (Leyendecker & Lamb, 1999).
Yet, an understanding of levels and types of involvement among resident immigrant fathers and exactly how acculturation influences such involvement has not been
widely examined. An understanding of this issue is therefore timely and well-warranted.
In light of gaps in existing research, this paper is motivated by one central concern: to
determine how acculturation (measured using multiple dimensions) influences father
involvement among Mexican- and Chinese-origin immigrant fathers, net of other sociodemographic factors.
We use a nationally representative sample of young children and their coresident
fathers in the 9-month wave of the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Birth Cohort
Survey (ECLS-B). These data improve on past studies because they include identifiers
of fathers’ (and mothers’) nativity and contain sufficient samples of immigrant fathers.
Analyses focused specifically on coresident fathers because the patterns and predictors of father involvement and forms of father involvement are structurally different for
co-residential fathers (those who live with their children) compared to nonresidential
fathers (those who do not live with their children). We focus primarily on Chinese- and
Mexican-origin fathers because these groups constitute major migrant streams to the
United States (Julian et al., 1994; Rumbaut, Massey, & Bean, 2006).
Theoretical Framework
There is no single overarching theory of fatherhood (Day, & Lamb, 2004). Rather,
fatherhood research has relied on varied theoretical frameworks, and the role of the fa62
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
ther has been diversely conceptualized in light of numerous contextual factors, including father characteristics (e.g., age, ethnicity, education, employment status), relational factors (e.g., the co-parental relationship), maternal characteristics (e.g.,
employment status, education); and child characteristics (e.g., age, gender) (Rane &
McBride, 2000). The current analyses will be informed by a theoretical framework of
father involvement proposed by Lamb and colleagues (Lamb, Pleck, Charnov, &
Levine, 1985), which defines father involvement as including three critical dimensions:
1) engagement or direct interactions with the child; 2) accessibility, or the presence
and availability of the father to the child (i.e., temporal and proximal positioning that
would allow the child to interact if desired or necessary); and 3) responsibility, the extent to which fathers arrange for resources to be available to the child, including financial support as well as organizing and planning for children. Responsibility includes
making plans and arrangements for care as distinct from the performance of the care.
This theoretical framework provides a conceptualization of father engagement which
is used to guide the present study.
Background
Defining Acculturation
Acculturation is defined as the process of cultural adaptation or change that results from sustained contact between two or more cultures (Berry, 1980; Gonzales,
Deardorff, Formoso, Barr, & Barrera, 2006). Acculturation is not a straight-line process,
nor is it linear (Feliciano, 2001), and has been conceptualized as taking four forms: (a)
assimilation, which involves relinquishing one’s native culture as one adapts to the majority culture, (b) integration, which involves maintaining one’s native culture at the
same time as there is movement towards the majority culture, (c) rejection, separation
from the majority culture that may be self-imposed through segregation, and (d) deculturation, the loss of cultural affiliation with either group resulting in alienation and loss
of identify (Berry, 1980, 1986).
Most immigrant groups choose some form of biculturalism, in which individuals
adapt to the new culture without relinquishing their native culture (Portes, 1996; Rumbaut, 1995). Several theorists contend that acculturation is an interactive process in
which elements of the immigrant’s native culture and new culture interact to create a
new and unique set of behavior and customs (Jain & Belsky, 1997). Acculturation is
also varied in that the ways that and the extent to which individuals adapt to both cultures vary over time, varies by the rate at which some characteristics are acquired and
others are not, varies for different groups, varies from individual to individual, and vary
by country of origin (Berry, 1980, 1986). The choice of strategy may differ by immigrant group and region of origin (Leyendecker & Lamb, 1999). Acculturation is multidimensional and is often operationalized using the following dimensions: cognitive,
behavioral, social, linguistic, value, attitudinal, and ethnic self-identification (Jain &
Belsky). Below, we review the literature related to immigrant fathers in general; Chi63
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
nese-origin and Mexican-origin immigrant fathers; and then turn to a discussion of the
relevance of the three forms of acculturation: length of U.S. residency, citizenship status, and language use and proficiency.
The Role of Immigrant Fathers
Much of the current debate on immigrant parents has focused on immigrant mothers, and particularly on the extent to which immigrant mothers exhibit specific childrearing attitudes and parenting behaviors compared to European American groups
(Jain & Belsky, 1997; Portes, 1996; Rumbaut, 1995). For immigrant fathers, moving
to a new environment may either encourage father involvement, or reduce such involvement, as a new context may pose different structural conditions, norms for relating to family members and conflict, pressure, and adjustment (Jain & Belsky).
Immigrant fathers may also face stressors such as underemployment, unemployment,
language barriers, shifts in identity roles, and barriers to services that can affect parenting abilities. In addition, sociocultural beliefs about the roles and expectations of fathers may differ according to the norms in a fathers’ native country, leading to
differences in parenting (Shimoni et al., 2003).
Men who come from cultures that believe that the father’s primary role is to be a
disciplinarian will be involved with their children differently than men from cultures
which place high value on the father’s role as a teacher or a caregiver. Immigrant fathers may face unique challenges and circumstances that can lead to closer family relationships or to family disintegration, resulting in varied patterns of parenting (Harris,
2000; Hernandez & Charney, 1998; Leyendecker & Lamb, 1999; Reardon-Anderson,
Capps, & Fix, 2002). For example, immigration and acculturation are both processes
that may cause high levels of stress and confusion (Finch & Vega, 2003; Griffith &
Villavicencio, 1985; Sanders & Nee, 1996) as individuals attempt to navigate a new culture with which they are not familiar. Because fathers have been found to withdraw
from parenting under conditions of stress (Lindahl & Malik, 1999), fathers who are
unable to adapt to the challenges of a new culture may be less involved with their children. Additionally, some assimilation theorists argue that because of their status as a minority group, as immigrants become more highly assimilated into American values and
customs, changes in behaviors and attitudes may occur, shifting toward patterns experienced by the majority group (Harris, 2000).
Immigrant fathers who live in a community with a large network of family members and other people from their home country may receive substantial personal, social,
and economic supports that can ease the process of assimilation but at the same time
influence their involvement. The presence of the extended family network can reduce
the difficulties experienced and assist in the parenting role (Buriel & De Ment, 1997;
Kao, 1998; Vega, Khoury, Zimmerman, Gil, & Warheit, 1995) as well as provide additional caretakers and coparents who reduce the burden of parenting that is placed on
the father (Kurrien & Vo, 2004). Immigrant fathers may also have a deeply ingrained
sense of being rooted in their families, and this may influence their notions of what it
64
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
means to be a father (Sabogal, Marin, Otero-Sabogal, Marin, & Perez-Stable, 1987). Although familial obligations tend to decline with time spent in the U.S., familial support
and extensive contacts tend to remain high among some immigrant groups relative to
other U.S. citizens (Buriel & De Ment; Kao; Vega et al.). Little research, however, has
focused on the varying dimensions of acculturation and how these generally influence
immigrant men’s engagement with infants.
Chinese-origin immigrant fathers. Although a fair body of literature currently examines parenting among Chinese mothers (Chao, 2000; Gorman, 1998; Hulei, Zevenbergen, & Jacobs, 2006; Lin & Fu, 1990), until recently, little research has focused on
fathers. Most research on Chinese fathers has focused on parenting styles as opposed
to actual involvement (time spent in direct interaction) with children (Shwalb,
Nakazawa, Yamamoto, & Hyun, 2004). Traditionally, research has characterized Chinese parenting as marked by strong parental control, obedience, discipline,
shaming/love withdrawal, filial piety, family obligations, maintaining harmony, collectivism, protectiveness, “training,” and directiveness (Gorman; Hulei et al.; Wu et
al., 2002). The traditional Chinese family has also been characterized by the motto
“strict father, kind mother,” underscoring the idea of the father as an authoritarian and
disciplinarian and the mother as devoted to and loving toward her children (Shwalb et
al., 2004; Wu et al., 2002). Research suggests that Chinese mothers are expected to be
highly involved with children, especially young children (Wu et al.). Chinese fathers
have been noted to spend limited amounts of time with children, usually disciplining
children only in the case of serious misdemeanors (Julian et al., 1994; Lin & Fu; Suzuki,
1980). To the best of our knowledge, no known studies have focused on the role that
acculturation plays in influencing father’s direct interactions and involvement with infants among Chinese immigrant men.
Mexican-origin immigrant fathers. Research on Mexican immigrant fathers is also
limited, as most empirical research has focused on Mexican immigrant mothering
(Cousins, Power, & Olvera-Ezzell, 1993; Dumka, Roosa, & Jackson, 1997). Studies of
Mexican fathers often portray such men as belonging to the traditional Latino family
and as authoritarian, aggressive, tyrannical rulers of the household (Mayo, 1997; Mirande, 1991; Powell, 1995), and as patriarchal, where the man is lord and master of the
household and the woman is a quiet, submissive, servile figure (Mirande). Other scholarship portrays Mexican fathers as more egalitarian than these traditional portrayals
and as being involved, warm, and caring (Mirande). Recent research also suggests that
Mexican men are engaged in caregiving and physical play with their children (Cabrera & Coll, 2004) and that they share caregiving responsibilities with their partners in
ways that are comparable to other ethnic groups (Roopnarine, Metindogan, & Evans,
2006). However, the common portrayal of Mexican fathers as “macho” stands in contrast to the modern Americanized portrayal of fathers and offers an opportunity to study
how acculturation may affect key dimensions of parenting behaviors for Mexican fathers of young children.
65
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
The Associations between Acculturation and Immigrant Father Engagement
Length of U.S. residency. Several studies indicate that length of residency is an
important dimension of acculturation (Jain & Belsky, 1997) and may influence parenting behaviors (Jambunathan, Burts, & Pierce, 2000), although the ways in which
these changes occur are still unclear, as most studies have used small samples that are
non-representative and specific to a particular ethnic group. Latinos’ length of time in
the United States, for example, has been found to be positively associated with support
and control of adolescents (Dumka et al., 1997) and with knowledge of and involvement in children’s schooling (Moreno & Lopez, 1999). Length of time in the United
States has also been found to be positively associated with parental involvement in
school for Chinese mothers (Chao, 2000). However, longer residency in the United
States may not always affect parenting behavior, as one study has found that the length
of time in the U.S. is not associated with Chinese immigrant mothers’ verbal interactions with their children (Hulei et al., 2006). On the basis of limited available research,
we anticipate that more acculturated fathers (i.e., fathers who have spent longer time
in the U.S.) may be more engaged with their children.
Citizenship status. Some evidence suggests that becoming a naturalized citizen
may be a proxy for acculturation, as citizenship is often associated with a number of
factors related to acculturation, including home ownership and positive perceptions of
U.S. society (Portes & Curtis, 1987). These factors suggest that immigrants who become naturalized may be more “rooted” in and have stronger connections to the United
States (Portes & Curtis). Acquiring citizenship in the host country also publicly changes
an immigrant’s identity (Evans, 1988; Yang, 1994) and may indicate an immigrant’s acceptance of American cultural and other norms (Yang). Immigrants who become U.S.
citizens thus may be more likely to act similarly to U.S.-born citizens. Little research
has examined the relationship between U.S. citizenship status and parenting among
immigrants and, to our knowledge, no research has examined the association between
citizenship and father involvement. One exception suggests that, among Hispanic mothers, becoming a naturalized citizen is associated with reduced parental involvement in
academics (DeSipio, 1996). While citizenship may indicate an inclination to be more
Americanized (Yang), we anticipate that immigrant fathers who have become U.S. citizens will be more engaged in activities with their infants than fathers who are not citizens.
Language proficiency and use. An important dimension of acculturation is language proficiency and/or use (Driedger, 1975; Hazuda, Stern, & Haffner, 1988). Language use may be both a proxy and a result of acculturation, with those who learn and
use English (especially within the home) being more attached to American culture than
those who speak other languages (Feliciano, 2001). Extant research has suggested that
parents’ limited English proficiency may be associated with parenting behaviors, as
low English proficiency has been found to be a barrier to immigrant parents’ involve66
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
ment in children’s academic activities (Cabrera & Coll, 2004). English proficiency has
been found to be associated with more consistent discipline among Mexican mothers
(Dumka et al., 1997), with higher levels of warmth and involvement among Puerto
Rican mothers (Caldaza & Eyberg, 2002), with changes in disciplinary practices among
Japanese parents (Jain & Belsky, 1997), with parenting styles among Mexican parents
(Valera, Vernberg, Sanchez-Sosa, Riveros, Mitchell, & Mashunkashey, 2004), and with
reasoning among Chinese parents (Jain & Belsky). Since English language use is indicative of a stronger attachment to American culture (Feliciano, 2001) and acculturated parents are warmer and more engaged with their children (Caldaza & Eyberg,
2002; Jain & Belsky), we anticipate similar patterns for immigrant fathers who will be
more engaged with their children overall, than fathers who have limited English proficiency.
On the basis of the previous research, we hypothesize the following: Mexican-origin and Chinese-origin immigrant fathers who have resided in the United States for a
longer period of time, who have become naturalized US citizens, and who are English
proficient will be more engaged with their infants overall, compared to fathers who are
new arrivals, who are not U.S. citizens and non-English proficient.
Additional Socio-demographic Controls
Prior research has identified a number of additional factors that are likely to influence both father engagement and immigrant status. We include these in our analyses as control variables to better isolate the association between acculturation and father
engagement.
Social networks. We include a measure of social contact with either the majority
culture or the native culture as prior research suggests that such contacts are an important structural dimension of acculturation (Driedger, 1975; Hazuda et al., 1988;
Rogler & Cooney, 1984; Schumann, 1978). Immigrant fathers may have a deeply ingrained sense of being rooted in these social circles, and this may influence their notions of what it means to be a father (Sabogal et al., 1987). Social contact may also
provide immigrant fathers with resources (Griffith & Villavicencio, 1985; Sanders &
Nee, 1996) that decrease the stress and confusion resulting from immigration and acculturation (Contreras, 2004; Finch & Vega, 2003; Lindahl & Malik, 1999). We also account for fathers’ social support as prior research (Bosher, 1998) suggests that in
immigrant fathers, personal, social, and economic supports can ease the process of assimilation (Griffith & Villavicencio) and at the same time influence perceptions of what
it means to be an involved parent (Buriel & De Ment, 1997; Kao, 1998; Vega et al.,
1995). We also include a measure of the number of adults in the household since, compared to U.S.-born families, immigrant households are more likely to include extended
family members such as grandparents (Bosher, 1998; Demo & Cox, 2000; Hernandez
& Charney, 1998). These additional family members may act as additional caretakers
for young children (Fuller, Holloway, & Liang, 1996; Hunter, Pearson, Ialongo, & Kel67
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
lam, 1998), which may decrease the demand for fathers to be involved in such families and discourage involvement with children (Pleck & Masciadrelli, 2004). This finding is not consistent, with some research suggesting that the presence of additional
households members may also reduce the difficulties experienced and assist in the parenting role (Buriel & De Ment; Kao), thereby being supportive of the father role (Pleck
& Masciadrelli).
Individual father characteristics. We include fathers’ age because some studies
suggest that age is predictive of involvement (Cooksey & Craig, 1998). We also include a measure of household poverty because economic hardship is associated with
poorer father-child interactions (Pleck, 1997). Immigrant parents are also more likely
to live in households that fall below the poverty line (Capps, Fix, Ost, Reardon-Anderson, & Passel, 2004; Hernandez, 2004; Hernandez & Brandon, 2002). We control
for the number of children fathered, as some evidence suggests that the number of children fathered may either increase or limit engagement (Culp, Schadle, Robinson, &
Culp, 2000; Harris & Morgan, 1991; Hernandez, 2004). Immigrant parents are also
likely to have a greater number of children than U.S.-born parents (Hernandez; Hernandez & Charney, 1998). We include a measure of fathers’ role perceptions because
men who identify strongly with being a father are more likely to be engaged with children (Bronte-Tinkew, Carrano, & Guzman, 2006; Palkovitz, 1984). We also a measure
of mental health because fathers’ depression is associated with lower levels of involvement (Bronte-Tinkew, Moore, Matthews, & Carrano, 2007), and immigrant parents generally exhibit lower rates of poor mental health and aggravation
(Reardon-Anderson, Capps, & Fix, 2002).
Mother-father relationship context. We include a measure of the parents’ marital
status because unmarried fathers are often found to be less invested with children compared to married fathers (Hofferth & Anderson, 2003). We also include relationship
quality because higher levels of father engagement have also been found to exist when
parents share a stable and happy relationship as opposed to a high-conflict relationship
(Coiro & Emery, 1998).
Family of origin characteristics. We include characteristics of fathers’ own family of origin because evidence suggests that the presence of a father in the family of origin has an intergenerational effect, which may have positive implications for fathers’
own parenting behavior (Keith & Finlay, 1988). Studies have shown an intergenerational link between father involvement in family of origin and a father’s own involvement with his children (Beaton, Doherty, & Rueter, 2003).
Mother characteristics. We include measures of mother’s citizenship status as this
factor is a likely influence on father’s involvement with infants (Capps, 2001). A measure of maternal age is included as some research suggests that fathers are more involved with their children when mothers are older (Pleck, 1997). We also include a
68
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
measure of maternal employment because this has been linked to higher levels of paternal involvement (Coltrane, 1996; Pleck) and because mothers in immigrant families are more likely to be underemployed or unemployed than mothers in nonimmigrant
families (DeJong & Madamba, 2001; Hernandez & Brandon, 2002; Reardon-Anderson
et al., 2002).
Child characteristics. We include a control for child gender because fathers may
be involved differently with sons and with daughters (Julian et al., 1994; Patel, Power,
& Bhavnagri, 1996), especially in cultures with clearly defined gender roles. We also
include a measure for child’s age because fathers have been found to be more engaged
with older children than with infants (Lamb, Pleck, Charnov, & Levine, 1987), although
this finding has also been inconsistent (Yeung, Sandberg, Davis-Kean, & Hofferth,
2001).
Method
Data Source
These analyses used data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Birth Cohort (ECLS-B) 9-month resident father surveys. The ECLS-B is the first longitudinal
study in the U.S. to track a nationally representative sample of children from infancy
to the time they enter first grade in order to assess prospectively their experiences in a
variety of domains (U.S. Department of Education, 2004). The sample consists of
10,700 children born in 2001 (U.S. Department of Education). Data collection occurs
in five waves: at approximately 9 months after birth, 24 months, 48 months, entrance
to kindergarten, and at first grade. In the present study, we use data from the first wave
of the study, collected approximately 9 months after birth. The ECLS-B includes oversamples of important populations such as Asians, American Indians, low- to moderately
low-birth weight infants, and twins. The primary modes of data collection are in-person interviews and direct child assessments that occur during home visits. Information
on children is also drawn from birth certificates and from interviews with the child’s
parents, childcare providers, and teachers. At each data collection point, resident fathers
are asked to complete a 20-minute self-administered questionnaire. The ECLS-B resident father component includes fathers who live in the same household as the sampled
children. Resident fathers are asked about their attitudes and behaviors, including the
quality and quantity of their involvement with their child.
Children were selected for inclusion in the ECLS-B based on a nationally representative probability sample of registered births from the National Center for Health
Statistics vital statistics system. The target population from which this sample was selected consists of all children born in the United States in 2001, with the exclusion of
children who were born to mothers less than 15 years of age and children who died or
were adopted prior to the 9-month assessment (U.S. Department of Education, 2004).
To inform participants of the study, advance letters and brochures with information
69
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
about the ECLS-B, written in English, were sent to parent respondents prior to the 9month survey. If birth certificate data indicated that the mother was Hispanic and born
outside of the United States, Spanish language materials were included. If birth certificate data indicated that the mother was Asian and born outside of the United States,
an insert with information in Hmong, Vietnamese, Japanese, Khmer, Korean, traditional Chinese, and simplified Chinese explained the purpose of the study and provided
the parent with an opportunity to request additional information in his/her native language. During the parent interview, if a Spanish-speaking respondent did not speak
English well, the interview was conducted by a trained bilingual interviewer who was
fluent in Spanish; if the parent respondent spoke some other language, a bilingual
household member was asked to help to arrange a time when the field interviewer, the
parent, and a qualified interpreter could meet to complete the interview (U.S. Department of Education). Self-administered questionnaires were written in Spanish and English; if the father spoke another language and was home when an interpreter conducted
the parent interview, the interpreter helped to administer the resident father survey (U.S.
Department of Education). These measures reduce the likelihood that language barriers and/or illiteracy affected the response rates of immigrant fathers. Overall, about 9
percent of parent interviews were conducted in a language other than English; less than
0.1 percent of parent interviews could not be conducted because of language problems
(U.S. Department of Education).
At the completion of the 9-month data collection, there were approximately 6,300
completed questionnaires from resident fathers. The resident father was identified as the
spouse or partner of the respondent to the parent interview, and the vast majority (98%)
were the child’s biological father. Other persons meeting the criteria to be included as
resident fathers were stepfathers, adoptive, or foster fathers, provided that they were
identified by the primary respondent to the parent interview. The response rate of resident fathers in the 9-month data collection wave was 76.1 percent (U.S. Department
of Education, 2004).
Sample for analysis. Our analytical sample is restricted to those biological residential fathers in the 9-month wave of the study who were born in either Mexico or
China. Of the 6,300 fathers who completed resident father questionnaires at the 9month wave of the study, 1,600 were born outside of the United States and its territories (foreign-born). Within this foreign-born group, we identified fathers who reported
having been born in Mexico (n = 500), or mainland China (People’s Republic of China)
(n = 250). Of the 500 Mexican-origin fathers, 50 were non-resident (did not co-reside
with their children); and of the 250 Chinese-origin fathers, 50 were non-resident (did
not co-reside with their children). This left us with a final analytic sample of 450 Mexican-origin biological resident men, and 200 Chinese-origin biological resident men. To
preserve complete cases for all fathers in the analytic sample, we used Missing Values
Analysis procedures in SPSS to impute missing values for all control variables using
the expectation maximization (EM) algorithm (Allison, 2001) in SPSS (SPSS Inc.,
2007).
70
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
Table 1 provides further details about these samples of Chinese-origin and Mexican-origin fathers who co-reside with their children. Fathers who were not included in
the analytical sample (due to either non-completion of the questionnaire or being born
elsewhere; tables not provided) were more likely than fathers in the analytic sample to
have children with more than one woman, to have not been present at the focal child’s
birth, to have a child that is female, and a disabled child. While fathers who completed
questionnaires are likely to be those who are more highly involved with their families,
it should be noted that the ECLS-B may over represent married fathers and fathers with
strong attachments to children and under represent fathers who are less involved in
their child’s life at an early age (U.S. Department of Education, 2004). However, since
the vast majority of Chinese and Mexican immigrant families reside with their children and are married, this bias may be less relevant to these groups than other immigrant groups.
Measures
Dependent Variables
Father involvement includes five measures: cognitively stimulating activities,
physical care, warmth, nurturing activities, and caregiving activities. To develop these
measures, we first standardized 19 items from three separate ECLS-B questions (so
they are measured with similar variances). These 19 items asked about (1) the frequency
with which fathers engaged in a typical week in the following four activities with infants: read books, tell stories, sing songs, and run errands, with response categories
ranging from not at all to everyday; (2) the frequency with which fathers engaged in the
past month in the following ten activities with infants: changing diapers, preparing
meals and bottles, feeding the child, playing “peek a boo” with the child, holding the
child, tickling the child, putting the child to sleep, washing or bathing the child, taking
the child outside for a walk, and dressing the child, with response categories ranging
from not at all to more than once a day; and (3) how often the father ever did the following five activities with the child: get up with the child during the night, soothe the
child when upset, take the child to the doctor, stay home with the child when he/she is
ill, and take the child from the sitter or day care center. Response categories ranged
from never to always.
Factor analyses with varimax rotation were then performed to investigate the underlying structure of the nineteen items. It was decided a priori that items with a factor loading of .70 or greater on a principal component and less than .30 on any other
factor would be considered part of an orthogonal construct. Eigenvalues and scree plots
were examined to determine the optimum number of components to rotate. The analysis yielded a five-factor solution (cognitively stimulating activities, caregiving activities, paternal warmth, nurturing activities, and monitoring/ supervision activities). Of
the original 19 items, 3 items did not load on to any factor: these were “play peek-aboo,” “put the child to sleep,” and “take the child from the sitter or day care center.”
71
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
Reliability estimates indicated that Cronbach’s alpha coefficients (a measure of reliability, reflecting the weighted average correlation among all items in the created scales
or internal consistency) for each scale exceeded 0.64. Analyses showing the factor loadings for the indexes that comprise the father involvement construct are available upon
request.
Cognitively stimulating activities. Cognitively stimulating activities consisted of
three items that asked fathers about the frequency with which they: read; told stories;
and sang songs to the child. Scores range from 0 to 9 with higher scores indicating
more involvement in cognitively stimulating activities (mean = 3.5, α = 0.69 for Chinese fathers; mean = 3.8, α = 0.75 for Mexican fathers).
Physical care. Physical care consisted of three items that asked fathers about the
frequency with which they: changed diapers; prepared meals and bottles; and fed the
child. Scores range from 0 to 15 with higher scores indicating more involvement in
physical care activities (mean = 10.2, α = 0.90 for Chinese fathers; mean = 11.0, α =
0.85 for Mexican fathers).
Paternal warmth. Warmth was measured using two items that asked fathers about
the frequency with which they: held the child and tickled the child. Scores range from
0 to 10, with higher scores indicating greater warmth (mean = 9.4, α = 0.77 for Chinese fathers; mean = 9.4, α = 0.60 for Mexican fathers).
Nurturing activities. Nurturing was measured using four items that asked fathers
about the frequency with which they: woke with the child at night; soothed the child
when he/she was upset; remained at home with the child when ill; and took the child
to the doctor. Scores range from 0 to 16, with higher scores indicating more involvement in nurturing activities (mean = 10.3, α = 0.69 for Chinese fathers; mean = 10.1,
α = 0.70 for Mexican fathers).
Caregiving activities. Caregiving was measured using four items that asked fathers about the frequency with which they would: wash the child; take the child for a
walk; dress the child; and take the child along on an errand. Scores range from 0 to 20,
with higher scores indicating more involvement in caregiving activities (mean = 11.2,
α = 0.62 for Chinese fathers; mean = 10.7, α = 0.71 for Mexican fathers).
Primary Predictor
Acculturation. We include four measures of acculturation: length of U.S. residency,
U.S. citizenship status, and language use and English proficiency. Length of U.S. residency was measured as a categorical variable (less than five years, five to 10 years, or
10 or more years). Citizenship status was assessed for foreign born fathers based on the
father’s response to a single question in the resident father survey. Fathers who reported
72
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
having been born outside of the United States were asked if they were a citizen of the
United States. Those who responded yes were coded as (1), and those who indicated
that they were not citizens were coded as (0). English proficiency was measured based
on the father’s response to a series of questions assessing how well he: (a) spoke English, (b) read English, (c) wrote English, and (d) understood English. For these items,
fathers whose primary language was not English indicated whether they did these things
very well, pretty well, not very well, or not well at all. Fathers who answered that they
could do at least two of these “very well” or “pretty well” were coded as (1) (proficient),
and other fathers were coded as (0) (not proficient). Household language use was assessed based on the primary respondent’s response to a question on the primary language spoken in the home. Those who indicated that English was the primary language
were coded as (1) (English spoken in household), and all other languages were coded
as (0) (other language spoken).
Control Variables
Individual father characteristics. We include a variety of self-reported measures
of father’s socio-demographic characteristics. Demographic covariates include categorical variables for employment status (employed or not employed); and poverty status (at or above 100% of the federal poverty line, below the poverty line). Father’s age
was measured as a continuous variable. We also included a measure of the number of
biological children fathered, operationalized as a continuous variable.
We also included a measure of the father’s perception of the importance of his role
as a father because fathers’ perceptions of their roles and their internalized parenting and
gender role norms often play a role in parenting and are likely to influence their engagement. We created a 7-item index of father’s agreement with regard to views on: it
being essential for the child’s wellbeing that fathers spend time playing with their children; it being difficult for men to express affectionate feelings towards babies; a father
should be as heavily involved as the mother in the care of the child; the way a father
treats his baby has a long term effect on the child; the activities that a father does with
his child do not matter, what matters is that he provides for them; one of the most important things that a father can do is to give the mother encouragement and emotional
support; and all things considered, fatherhood is a highly rewarding experience. For
these items, fathers indicated whether they (a) strongly agreed, (b) agreed, (c) disagreed, or (d) strongly disagreed. We reverse coded items as appropriate and created an
index of perceptions of the role of the father ranging from 0 to 21 by adding scores
from each of the 7 items (mean = 16.3, α = 0.67 for Chinese fathers; mean = 16.9, α =
0.62 for Mexican fathers). Higher scores indicate a more positive perception of the role
as a father.
Father’s mental health was assessed using a modified version of the Center for
Epidemiological Studies—Depression Scale (CES-D) (Radloff, 1977). Fathers were
asked a series of questions assessing how often in the past week they: were bothered
by things that don’t usually bother them; had a poor appetite; could not shake off the
73
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
blues; were easily distracted; felt depressed; felt that everything they did was an effort;
felt fearful; experienced restless sleep; talked less than usual; felt lonely; felt sad; and
could not get going. Respondents indicated if they felt this way (a) rarely or never; (b)
some or a little of the time; (c) occasionally or moderate; or (d) most or all of the past
week. If respondents answered at least nine of the 12 questions, responses were summed
to create a scale of depressive symptoms (range = 0 – 36; mean = 3.4, , α = 0.89 for
Chinese fathers; mean = 2.3, α = 0.88 for Mexican fathers) (U.S. Department of Education, 2004). Higher scores indicate higher levels of depression.
Frequency of social contact. Frequency of social contact was measured as a continuous variable based on the respondent’s report of the frequency of getting together
socially with close friends or neighbors since the child’s birth, with response categories
ranging from: (a) never; (b) less than once a month; (c) about once or twice a month;
(d) about once a week; to (e) several times a week. Responses were reverse coded
(range = 0 - 4), and higher scores on this measure indicate more frequent social contact. We included a measure of social support based on responses from three items:
support when in need of help/advice, monetary support, and support during an emergency. Respondents indicated to whom, other than someone living in the child’s household (e.g., former spouse or partner; mother or father; in-laws; grandparents;
co-workers), they would turn: (a) for help or advice if he/she was feeling depressed or
confused; (b) to borrow money for a few weeks because of an emergency; or (c) if
he/she needed help in the middle of the night because of an emergency. For each kind
of help, respondents who indicated whether they could turn to any of these individuals
for support were coded as (1) (support). Respondents who indicated that they could
not turn to any of these individuals for that kind of help were coded as (0) (no support). Responses were summed to create a scale of social support (range = 0 – 3; mean
= 2.9, α = 0.71 for Chinese fathers; mean = 2.8, α = 0.88 for Mexican fathers). The
number of adults in the household was measured using a continuous variable based on
respondent’s reports of the number of additional adults residing in the household (range
= 1 - 8), with higher scores indicating more co-resident adults.
Father-mother relationship context. These measures include categorical variables
for marital status (married or cohabiting). We also included a categorical variables for
father-mother relationship quality (not happy, happy, or very happy), and a continuous
measure of the level of conflict in the mother-father relationship. We created a 10-item
measure of father’s assessment of how often he argues with his spouse/partner about:
chores and responsibilities; their children; money; not showing love and affection; sex;
religion; leisure time; drinking; other men or women; and in-laws. For these items, fathers indicated whether they (a) often argue, (b) sometimes argue, (c) hardly ever argue,
or (d) never argue. We reverse coded these items and created an index of conflict ranging from 0 to 30 by adding scores from each of the ten items (mean = 9.0, α = 0.84 for
Chinese fathers; mean = 6.9, α = 0.84 for Mexican fathers). Higher scores indicate a
higher level of relationship conflict.
74
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
Family of origin context. A dummy variable was used to measure father presence
in the family of origin (father lived with biological father until age 16 or father did not
live with biological father until age 16). A continuous variable was used to measure
how close the resident father feels to his biological father (range = 0 – 4), with higher
scores indicating increased closeness.
Mother characteristics. We include a variety of self-reported measures of mothers’
socio-demographic characteristics from the parent survey. Citizenship status was assessed for foreign born mothers based on the mother’s response to a single question in
the resident father survey. Mothers who reported having been born outside of the United
States were asked if they were a citizen of the United States. Those who responded yes
were coded as (1), and those who indicated that they were not citizens were coded as
(0). Demographic covariates include age, measured as a continuous variable, and employment status (employed or not employed). We control for these factors to address
the possibility that the father’s behaviors may reflect maternal characteristics.
Child characteristics. We include a dummy variable indicating the sex of the child
(male or female) and a continuous measure of the child’s age at the time of the 9-month
administration (range = 7.2 – 11.7).
Analytic Strategy
We first present descriptive statistics for our variables of interest. Second, we estimated Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression models, controlling for social and
demographic covariates, to examine whether the varying dimensions of acculturation
are associated with measures of fathers’ involvement with infants for Chinese-origin
and Mexican-origin fathers. All control variables were entered first, followed by the acculturation variables, with the increment to R-square for the acculturation variables assessed. Prior to estimating our models, we used multiple imputation techniques to
obtain complete cases for all independent variables used in the analyses. We used Missing Values Analysis procedures in SPSS to impute missing cases for all control variables
using the expectation maximization (EM) algorithm (Allison, 2001) in SPSS (SPSS
Inc., 2007) to preserve complete cases for all fathers in the analytic sample on these
variables. This approach is preferred to either deleting missing cases list-wise or pairwise, or mean substitution, and produces less biased results (Allison).Analyses were
conducted using sample weights to correct for the different probabilities of sample selection resulting from factors such as oversampling in the ECLS-B. In each model, the
standard errors of the coefficients predicting fathering behaviors were adjusted using
Stata for the stratified clustered sample design of the ECLS-B.
Results
Descriptive Statistics
Table 1 reports the weighted means, percentages, and standard deviations of the
variables used in the analyses. Among resident Chinese immigrant fathers of young
75
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
children, one in three (33.7%) reported having U.S. citizenship, and Chinese immigrant fathers reported having lived in the United States for an average of 9.8 years
(range = 1 - 38). More than three-quarters of Chinese immigrant fathers (78.5%) reported being fluent in English, but few of these fathers (3.8%) reported that English was
spoken in their household. More than nine in ten Chinese immigrant fathers (93.8%)
reported a household income at or above the federal poverty line. Among resident Mexican immigrant fathers of young children, fewer than two in ten fathers (18.8%) reported having U.S. citizenship, and Mexican immigrant fathers reported having lived
in the United States for an average of 12.4 years (range = 0 - 39). More than one in three
Mexican immigrant fathers (34.4%) reported being fluent in English, and approximately one in six (16.3%) reported speaking English in their household. Roughly half
of Mexican immigrant fathers (56.6%) reported a household income at or above 100%
of the federal poverty line.
Tests for correlations (tables not shown) indicated that for both groups of fathers,
the five father involvement variables were significantly positively correlated (range:
.17-.60 in Mexican; .16-.59 in Chinese). For both groups, the highest correlation was
between physical care and care-giving, and the lowest association was the association
of warmth to nurturing activities and cognitively stimulating activities.
Multivariate Analyses
How is acculturation associated with father involvement among Mexican and Chinese
immigrant fathers, net of other socio-demographic factors?
Table 2 provides the results for multivariate analyses using OLS regression models. For all analyses tests were performed to rule out the possibility of multicollinearity among the study variables (above and beyond tests of correlations). Multicollinearity
diagnostic statistics were produced by linear regression analysis (PROC REG with options VIF TOL in SAS) to examine Tolerance and Variance Inflation factors for each
variable. Values of VIF exceeding 10 were used as the criteria for indicating multicollinearity (Allison, 1999). On the basis of these multicollinearity diagnostic tests, 2
variables (mother’s citizenship status and relationship satisfaction) were dropped from
the final regression analyses. The results presented in Tables 2 and 3 reflect models
with these omitted variables. For all regression results reported below, the increment to
the R2 with the addition of the acculturation variables was significant, suggesting a significant improvement in model fit.
Caregiving. Model 1 of Table 2 and Model 1 of Table 3 show that for Mexican fathers and Chinese fathers, there are no significant associations between any measures
of acculturation and care-giving activities for fathers.
Warmth. Model 2 of Table 2 shows significant negative associations between U.S.
citizenship and paternal warmth (β = -0.42) for Chinese-born as well as for Mexicanborn fathers (β = -0.06).
76
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics for Variables Used in the Analyses, ECLS-B 9- and 24-Month
Resident Father Surveys (weighted)
Chinese Fathers (n = 200)
FATHER INVOLVEMENT
Care-giving
Paternal Warmth
Paternal Nurturing
Cognitively Stimulating
Activities
Physical Care
FATHER’S ACCULTURATION
U.S. Citizenship
Father has U.S. Citizenship
Length of Time in the U.S.
In U.S. Less than 5 Years
In U.S. 5 to 10 Years
In U.S. 10 Years or More
English Proficiency
Proficient
Household Language Use
English Spoken in Household
SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CONTROLS
SOCIAL NETWORK
Social Support (Range:0-3)
Frequency of Social Contact
Number of Adults in Household
Mexican Fathers (n = 450)
M/%
SD
Range
α
M/%
SD
Range
11.2
9.4
10.3
3.53
1.18
2.98
0-15
0-10
0-16
0.62
0.77
0.69
10.7
9.4
10.1
3.87
1.11
3.34
0-15
0-10
0-16
0.71
0.60
0.70
3.5
10.2
2.30
3.16
0-9
0-18
0.69
0.90
3.8
11.0
2.30
3.73
0-9
0-19
0.75
0.85
2.8
2.1
2.6
0.90
1.09
1.05
0-3
0-4
1-8
0.88
33.7%
18.8%
26.7%
28.6%
44.7%
17.6%
24.8%
57.6%
78.5%
34.4%
3.8%
16.3%
2.9
1.9
2.4
INDIVIDUAL FATHER CHARACTERISTICS
Poverty Status
Household is Below 100% of
Poverty Level
6.2%
Age
35.7
Employment
Employed
94.0%
Number of Children
1.6
Perceptions of the Father Role
16.3
Mental Health
3.4
FATHER-MOTHER RELATIONSHIP CONTEXT
Marital Status
Married
98.7%
Marital Satisfaction
Very Happy
72.6%
Fairly Happy
25.6%
Not Happy
1.8%
Conflict
9.0
0.71
α
0.80
0.91
0.8
0-3
0-4
2-6
5.41
22-56
43.4%
30.1
6.53
19-57
0.64
2.48
4.46
0-4
11-21
0-21
76.4%
2.3
16.9
2.3
1.53
2.66
4.13
1-33
10-21
0-33
0.62
0.88
5.62
0-25
0.84
0.67
0.89
70.7%
5.18
0-22
Table 1 is continued on page 78
77
0.84
71.5%
27.2%
1.4%
6.9
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
Table 1, continued from page 77
Chinese Fathers (n = 200)
M/%
FAMILY OF ORIGIN CHARACTERISTICS
Family Structure in Childhood
Lived with Father Until Age 16 84.5%
Closeness to Father
2.9
INDIVIDUAL MOTHER CHARACTERISTICS
U.S. Citizenship
Mother has U.S. Citizenship
26.1
Maternal Age
33.1
Maternal Employment
Employed
58.2%
CHILD CHARACTERISTICS
Child Age
Child Gender
Male
Female
10.4
SD
Range
0.91
0-4
4.66
22-48
Mexican Fathers (n = 450)
α
M/%
SD
Range
77.1%
2.6
1.17
0-4
27.2
27.3
5.86
16-47
1.82
7.2-21.7
α
35.9%
1.75
8.3-19.2
50.0%
50.0%
10.3
52.3%
47.7%
Nurturing. Controlling for varied socio-demographic characteristics, Model 3 of
Table 2 shows no significant associations between any of the measures of acculturation
and nurturing activities for Chinese immigrant fathers. Model 3 of Table 3 shows that
for Mexican immigrant fathers, the linguistic dimension of acculturation (English used
in the household) is associated with lower levels of nurturing (β = -0.30) and the attainment of U.S. citizenship (β = -0.01), is also associated with lower levels of nurturing.
Cognitively stimulating activities. Model 4 of Tables 2 and 3 show positive associations between English language proficiency and involvement in cognitively stimulating activities for both Chinese immigrant fathers (β = 0.20), as well as for Mexican
immigrant fathers. For Mexican immigrant fathers however, this association was only
marginally significant.
Physical care. Controlling for socio-demographic characteristics, Model 5 of Table
2 shows no associations between acculturation and physical care activities for Chinese
immigrant fathers. Model 5 of Table 3, however, shows that for Mexican fathers, the
linguistic dimension of acculturation – speaking English in the household (β = -0.24)
is associated with lower levels of physical care among Mexican immigrant fathers.
Discussion
Using a nationally representative sample of young children and their resident immigrant fathers, the primary objective of this study was to determine how multiple dimensions of acculturation are associated with multiple aspects of father engagement
78
β
B
B
79
Table 2 is continued on page 80
FATHER’S FAMILY OF ORIGIN CHARACTERISTICS
Closeness to Father
-0.93 0.58 -0.24
Family Structure in Family of Origin
Father lived with Father
Until Age 16
1.79 0.54 0.14
Father did not Live with Father Until Age 16 (ref.)
0.16
0.79
-0.06
0.96
0.23
-0.05
0.11
0.00
1.51
0.03
0.72
0.00
FATHER-MOTHER RELATIONSHIP CONTEXT
Marital Status
Married (ref.)
Cohabiting
3.44 0.80
Conflict
0.13 0.08
0.17
0.20
-0.04
-0.21
0.28 * 0.38
0.05
0.05
0.27
0.06
0.04
2.27
-0.84
6.27
0.15
0.15
0.20
0.70
1.28
0.40
0.38
1.27
0.23 * -0.35
0.14
0.57
β
0.19
0.56 *
0.48
0.13
0.20
SE B
1.44
0.45
0.95
0.07
0.68
0.13
0.06
1.75
0.19
0.08
0.27
0.37
0.47
SE B
1.85
0.27
0.30
B
-1.78
0.20
-0.24
0.34 *
0.26 *
1.43
-0.17
-4.13
0.14
-0.04
0.53
0.32 ** 0.22
0.08
-0.06
0.01
0.90
0.38
2.89
0.06
0.46
0.14
0.07
1.88
1.73
0.10
1.68
0.36
0.33
SE B
-0.52
0.02
-0.06
0.52
1.82
0.13
1.81
0.58
0.25
B
0.17
-0.07
0.53
-0.10
1.74
0.48
3.69
0.08
0.62
0.16
0.09
2.67
1.25
0.17
1.21
0.42
0.43
SE B
β
0.04
-0.03
0.00
0.38 **
-0.10
0.01
-0.08
0.04
0.29
0.19
0.28 *
0.16
0.05
Model 5
Physical Care
-0.24 -0.05
0.31 * 0.24
0.14
0.25
-0.13
-0.19
0.15
0.15
0.14
0.10
0.09
β
Model 4
Cognitively Stimulating
Activities
0.33 *
1.86
0.65 *** 0.07
0.28
-0.10
0.13
β
Model 3
Paternal Nurturing
0.64
0.05
0.38 0.19 * 1.09
0.43 0.01
0.29
0.43 -0.24 ** 0.22
SE B
Model 2
Paternal Warmth
INDIVIDUAL FATHER CHARACTERISTICS
Poverty Status
Household is at or above 100% of Poverty Level (ref.)
Household is Below 100% of
Poverty Level
3.18 0.68 0.18
1.11
Age
0.02 0.14 0.03
0.13
Employment
Employed
1.66 0.14 0.12
0.92
Not Employed (ref.)
Number of Children
-1.63 0.68 -0.29 * -0.07
Perceptions of the Father Role 0.03 0.17 0.02
0.12
Mental Health
-0.07 0.08 -0.09
0.01
SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CONTROLS
SOCIAL NETWORK
Social Support
1.05
Frequency of Social Contact 0.05
# of Adults in the Household
-1.19
B
Model 1
Caregiving Activities
Table 2
Ordinary Least Squares Regressions of the Influence of Acculturation on Father Involvement among Chinese Immigrant Fathers, ECLS-B 9-Month Survey (n = 200)
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
B
Model 1
SE B
β
0.18 -0.20 *
0.81 -0.09
-0.36
-0.61
80
0.31
0.03*
0.34
200
0.05*
0.39
200
0.58
-0.21
0.34
0.40
0.50
0.43
0.53
0.23
0.13
-0.67
-0.36
-1.09
-0.24
0.08
0.25
-0.18
-0.01
0.07
Model 2
SE B
-0.07
B
-0.93
0.25
0.57
-0.32
B
1.46
0.94
0.42
-0.03 * -1.13
0.05
-0.28
-0.15
-0.42 * -0.31
-0.11
-0.01
-0.08
-0.25
β
0.02*
0.48
200
0.46
1.69
0.89
1.29
1.20
1.10
0.72
0.20
0.83
0.16
Model 3
SE B
1.08
1.01
0.52
0.44
-0.06
0.04
0.36
-0.02
B
-0.18 ** -0.81
0.21
0.14
0.06
-0.04 **
-0.15
0.16
0.09
-0.42 *
β
0.02*
0.35
200
0.33
1.61
0.80
0.05
1.02
0.05
0.62
0.17
0.71
0.13
Model 4
SE B
-0.45
-0.32
0.83
-1.84
-0.18
1.34
0.05
B
-0.06
-1.18
0.20 **0.79
0.20
0.10
0.08
-0.13
0.04
0.08
-0.04
β
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001
Note: Final regression models account for multicollinearity and exclude 2 variables (mother’s citizenship status and marital satisfaction).
R2 for Controls
Increment to R2 for acculturation
variables
Total R2
N
LINGUISTIC DIMENSION
English Language Proficiency
Proficient
0.19 0.90 0.02
Not Proficient (ref.)
Household Language Use
English Spoken in Household 3.08 0.95 0.16
Other Language Spoken in Household (ref.)
FATHER’S ACCULTURATION
U.S. Citizenship
Father has U.S. Citizenship
0.77 0.68 0.10
Father does not have U.S. Citizenship (ref.)
Length of Time in the U.S.
In U.S. < 5 Years
-0.82 0.77 -0.11
In U.S. 5-10 Years
-2.04 0.84 -0.28
In U.S. >10 Years (ref.)
CHILD CHARACTERISTICS
Child Age
Child Gender
Male (ref.)
Female
INDIVIDUAL MOTHER/PARTNER CHARACTERISTICS
Maternal Age
0.31 0.20 0.37
Maternal Employment
Employed
1.45 0.73 0.21
Not Employed (ref.)
Table 2, continued from page 79
0.04*
0.42
200
0.38
1.86
1.02
1.75
1.63
1.71
0.73
0.21
0.70
0.19
Model 5
SE B
-0.06
0.10
-0.07
-0.15
0.11
-0.28 *
-0.11
0.21
0.07
β
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
β
81
Table 3 is continued on page 82
FATHER’S FAMILY OF ORIGIN CHARACTERISTICS
Closeness to Father
0.21 0.24 0.07
Family Structure in Family of Origin
Lived with Father Until
Age 16
-1.35 0.69 -0.15
Did not Live with Father Until Age 16 (ref.)
0.07
0.18
-0.05
0.08
0.19
0.02
FATHER-MOTHER RELATIONSHIP CONTEXT
Marital Status
Married (ref.)
Cohabiting
1.56 0.54 0.19 ** 0.23
Conflict
-0.04 0.05 -0.06
-0.02
0.03
-0.06
0.10
-0.12
-0.07
-0.06
0.27 ** 0.12
-0.03
-0.10
0.07
0.04
0.02
-0.64
0.26
0.54
-0.07
0.31
-0.13
0.00
1.11
0.25
0.15
B
-0.05
0.07
0.01
-0.07
β
0.20
0.42
0.07
0.10
SE B
-0.06
-0.15
1.28
0.01
-0.07
B
0.66
0.24
0.64
0.05
0.21
0.11
0.05
0.76
0.60
0.06
0.28
0.26
0.23
SE B
-0.08
0.09
0.07
-0.13
-0.02
0.10
-0.13
0.04
-0.02
0.00
0.05
0.08
0.05
β
Model 3
Paternal Nurturing
0.18
0.02
0.38 0.11 *
0.28 -0.02
0.24 0.11
SE B
Model 2
Paternal Warmth
INDIVIDUAL FATHER CHARACTERISTICS
Poverty Status
Household is at or above 100% of Poverty Level (ref.)
Household is Below 100% of
Poverty Level
-0.22 0.52 -0.03
-0.14
Age
0.02 0.06 0.03
0.03
Employment
Employed
0.86 0.66 0.09
-0.13
Not Employed (ref.)
Number of Children
-0.44 0.28 -0.15
-0.06
Perceptions of the Father Role 0.27 0.10 0.20 ** 0.10
Mental Health
-0.11 0.07 -0.13
-0.01
SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CONTROLS
SOCIAL NETWORK
Social Support
1.50
Frequency of Social Contact -0.07
# of Adults in Household
0.41
B
Model 1
Caregiving Activities
-0.21
0.33
0.18
-0.02
-0.43
-0.17
-0.04
0.36
0.02
0.02
1.18
-0.17
0.19
B
0.62
0.23
0.42
0.05
0.19
0.08
0.04
0.59
0.45
0.05
0.38
0.18
0.19
SE B
0.77
0.42
-0.07
1.19
0.42
-0.14
B
-0.04
0.17
0.03
-0.06
-0.73
0.20
0.39
-0.07
0.68
0.23
0.63
0.05
0.26
0.10
0.05
0.77
0.62
0.06
0.27
0.28
0.32
SE B
β
-0.09
0.07
0.05
-0.11
-0.04
0.06
-0.16 *
0.09
0.06
-0.12
0.08 *
0.12
-0.04
Model 5
Physical Care
-0.23 * -0.12
-0.20 * 0.08
-0.07 -0.13
0.06
0.01
0.06
0.07
-0.08
0.08
β
Model 4
Cognitively Stimulating
Activities
Table 3
Ordinary Least Squares Regressions of the Influence of Acculturation on Father Involvement among Mexican Immigrant Fathers, ECLS-B 9-Month Survey (n = 450)
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
B
Model 1
SE B
β
B
0.16 -0.01
0.62 -0.07
-0.03
-0.55
82
-0.17
0.92 -0.11
-0.06
0.08
0.01
-0.15
0.06
-0.14
0.00
-2.61
0.50
1.35
0.15
-0.10
-0.05
-0.04
0.20
0.03*
0.23
450
0.80
0.65
0.81
0.71
0.79
0.57
0.13
0.55
0.06
Model 3
SE B
-0.17
-0.75
-0.24
0.98
0.18
-0.01
0.39
0.00
B
-0.30 *** -0.60
0.07
0.15
0.02
-0.01
-0.01
-0.02
0.10
0.04
β
0.14
0.02*
0.16
450
0.49
0.48
0.57
0.53
0.53
0.42
0.13
0.44
0.05
Model 4
SE B
-0.93
-1.14
-0.19
2.16
0.03
B
-0.10
-2.22
-0.04 + 1.20
-0.12 + 0.63
-0.04 0.53
0.18
0.04
0.04
0.08
-0.01
β
+ p < .10, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001
* Note: Final regression models account for multicollinearity and exclude 2 variables (mother’s citizenship status and marital satisfaction).
0.21
0.05*
0.26
450
0.26
0.19
0.17
0.24
0.03
-0.37
0.17
0.21
0.18
-0.29
0.16
0.04
0.20 ** 0.64
0.15
0.03
B
-0.06
β
0.02
Model 2
SE B
0.00
0.72 -0.02
0.28
R for Controls
0.04**
Increment to R2 for accult. variables
0.32
Total R2
N
450
2
LINGUISTIC DIMENSION
English Language Proficiency
Proficient
-0.14
Not Proficient (ref.)
Household Language Use
English Spoken in Household -1.08
FATHER’S ACCULTURATION
U.S. Citizenship
Father has U.S. Citizenship -0.17 0.75 -0.02
Father does not have U.S. Citizenship (ref.)
Length of Time in the U.S.
In U.S. < 5 Years
-0.43 0.92 -0.04 +
In U.S. 5-10 Years
0.59 0.64 0.07
In U.S. >10 Years (ref.)
CHILD CHARACTERISTICS
Child Age
Child Gender
Male (ref.)
Female
INDIVIDUAL MOTHER/PARTNER CHARACTERISTICS
Maternal Age
0.06 0.06 0.08
-0.01
Maternal Employment
Employed
2.60 0.52 0.35 *** 0.42
Not Employed (ref.)
Table 3, continued from page 81
0.24
0.05*
0.29
450
0.70
0.70
0.80
0.68
0.76
0.59
0.16
0.55
0.06
Model 5
SE B
-0.24 **
0.16
0.07
0.06
-0.11
-0.16
-0.09
0.30***
0.04
β
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
among Mexican-origin and Chinese-origin immigrant fathers (net of other socio-demographic factors). We hypothesized that the more acculturated immigrant fathers from
Mexico and China were, the more likely they would be to be involved with their infants.
We found partial support for this hypothesis across the varied dimensions of acculturation considered and by the type of activities in which fathers engaged with their children. Overall, our findings suggest that while aspects of acculturation such as time
spent in the U.S., U.S. citizenship, and language proficiency and use are important predictors of some aspects of father engagement, a number of additional factors such as
social networks, maternal characteristics (e.g., maternal work status and maternal age),
as well as other individual father characteristics, also influence immigrant father’s involvement with their children.
Length of U.S. Residency
We hypothesized that fathers’ length of time in the U.S. would be associated with
higher paternal warmth, more cognitively stimulating activities, and nurturing. However, we found no associations between the length of time spent in the U.S. and father
engagement. These limited findings are consistent with some prior research conducted
with other immigrant groups of fathers. They reinforce the point that acculturation
should not necessarily be equated with the time spent in the U.S. (Jain & Belsky, 1997).
The lack of a significant association may also reflect that immigrant fathers from different groups may interact with infants in different ways through varied behaviors that
may not necessarily be captured in the way that European American norms or practices are operationalized as they are in the present study (Chuang & Moreno, 2008).
Thus, time spent in the US is not sensitive to these measured aspects of engagement,
but rather may be more sensitive to unmeasured behaviors that are not captured in the
present analyses. Not to be ignored as well are differences in childrearing beliefs across
both groups. It may be that immigrant fathers perceive certain aspects of involvement
as more appropriate and others less so, which are not captured here, and this may account for the lack of significance.
Citizenship Status
We hypothesized that citizenship status would be positively associated with father
engagement. Instead, we found negative associations between the attainment of U.S.
citizenship and father involvement for Chinese and Mexican-origin immigrant fathers.
For Chinese immigrant fathers, U.S. citizenship was negatively associated with paternal warmth, and the attainment of US citizenship was also negatively associated with
both paternal warmth and paternal nurturing for Mexican immigrant fathers. This finding is in contrast to our hypothesis that U.S. citizenship would increase fathers’ warmth
and nurturing behaviors toward their infants. While surprising, this finding reinforces
that acculturation should not be equated with citizenship, as citizenship may be easier
for certain immigrant groups to attain and may have no bearing on changes in parenting behaviors as a result of a change in naturalization status.
83
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
English Language Use
In contrast with our hypothesis that English language use would be associated with
increased engagement with infants, we found negative associations between the use of
English in the household and nurturing activities and physical care activities with infants for Mexican immigrant fathers. This finding may reflect that father-child interactions, especially with regard to nurturing and physical care activities, may be a
function of language capital (Cabrera, Shannon, West, & Brooks-Gunn, 2006), the latter being lower among Mexican fathers based on English proficiency (Videon, 2005).
The use of English is often theorized as symbolizing immigrants’ willingness to relinquish ties to their home country (Portes & Rumbaut, 2001), and may signify a willingness to engage in the forms of parenting associated with the host country and to
adopt European American fathering practices considered the “norm.” Faced with encouragement from the host society, media portrayals of fathers, social demands, and
changes in men’s positions of power and status as immigrants in the United States
(Hondagneu-Sotelo & Messner, 1994), fathers who are more acculturated (measured by
their English language use) may change their patterns of involvement from the norm
in their native countries (Jain & Belsky, 1997). This is not seen to be the case for Mexican immigrant fathers.
English language proficiency. We found support for the hypothesis that English
language proficiency would be positively associated with Chinese fathers’ involvement
in cognitively stimulating activities with young children (this association was only marginally significant for Mexican-immigrant fathers. These findings reinforce prior research which suggests that low English proficiency is often a barrier to immigrant
parents’ involvement in children’s academic activities, but for older children (Cabrera
& Coll, 2004; Cabrera, West, Shannon, & Brooks-Gunn, 2006). Here we see for a sample of Chinese fathers of infants, that involvement in cognitively stimulating (reading,
telling stories, and singing songs to the child) activities even during the first years of
life is also a function of English proficiency.
The influence of other socio-demographic factors. While not integral to the paper’s
main focus, we found a number of additional socio-demographic characteristics to be
significant predictors of father involvement above and beyond the measures of acculturation, highlighting how father-infant interactions may be accounted for by differences in the strength of social networks, economic resources, maternal characteristics,
and father characteristics between immigrant groups. For example, we found that social contact was a significant predictor of father involvement for Chinese immigrant fathers. For Chinese immigrant fathers, social contact with friends increased the
likelihood of paternal warmth with infants. These findings provide support for the notion that peer and social groups elevate the involvement of immigrant fathers, in this
case Chinese fathers, and may serve as alternative role models, thereby reinforcing the
importance of majority culture images and roles of the father in the household (Jain &
84
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
Belsky, 1997). We also found that social support was positively associated with caregiving activities and physical care activities for both groups of fathers. This finding
supports the idea that social support, especially from those who are themselves Americanized, may encourage the use of parenting practices that conflict with traditional
notions of parenting; and support may also reinforce traditional beliefs of parenting
practices (Inman et al., 2007; Wong, Yoo, & Stewart, 2005). We also found that the
presence of additional adults in the household was negatively associated with caregiving for Chinese immigrant fathers. This finding supports previous studies of both Asian
immigrants that have found that additional adults in the household may serve as additional caregivers for children (Contreras, 2004; Kurrien & Vo, 2004). Because of the
emphasis on familialism and interdependence in immigrant families, other household
members may provide assistance for parenting responsibilities (Contreras; Kurrien &
Vo), and such support may reduce the need for fathers to perform basic child care tasks
such as dressing and bathing the child (Pleck & Masciadrelli, 2004). Additional father
characteristics such as more positive perceptions of the father role (both groups), and
father’s poverty status (Chinese–origin fathers) were positively associated with father
involvement reinforcing the notion that a broad constellation of individual father characteristics influence their interactions with children. Not to be forgotten as well are the
importance of maternal characteristics such as mother’s age, and maternal employment
that influence father’s involvement. Further explorations of how these factors influence father involvement for immigrant fathers is a promising avenue for future research.
As a group these findings suggests that while measures of acculturation may influence engagement for men, a wide range of factors work differently to influence father involvement for different groups (Ahmeduzzaman & Roopnarine, 1992). In certain
situations, acculturation may uphold traditional values and roles and fathers’ perceptions of what is considered acceptable fathering and what it means to be a good father,
and for other groups there are no effects or negative effects.
Study limitations. Several limitations of this study should be noted. This is not a
process-oriented longitudinal study of change over time; rather, it is a cross-sectional
study that provides a snapshot of how measures of acculturation influence fathering
for specific groups, and so analyses speak only to how acculturation influences involvement at one point in time. Ultimately, immigrant men’s journeys shape their views
of what it means to be a good father, but we could not include life history measures in
the analyses. We would have liked to have been able to examine the nature and type of
engagement and how this changes for immigrant fathers over time (including prior to
immigration) but could not do so. We used available measures of father engagement,
and the instruments used are primarily Eurocentric, conceptualizing father involvement according to European-American parenting behaviors. For the groups that we
consider, other aspects of father involvement may also be important but were not measured in our analyses. For immigrant fathers from minority groups, we recognize that
there are multiple stresses associated with acculturation, e.g., discrimination, living
85
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
with stereotypes, narrow portrayals of capabilities, negative images, and being misunderstood, none of which could be measured in the analyses because they were not collected in the ECLS-B. Although we recognize that acculturation is a multidimensional
phenomenon, our data precluded an examination of all the key dimensions of acculturation (such as the social dimension as well as cultural context) that are associated
with parenting behaviors and different value systems.
Additionally, there is self-selection into the immigration, as fathers do not randomly immigrate to the United States. Those fathers who do so may see themselves as
more similar to mainstream United States residents, may not be typical of their countrymen, and may be predisposed to behave similarly to those fathers born within the
United States. We also have no information on the specific ethnic subgroup to which
the fathers in our sample belong, and substantial heterogeneity is masked by using
gross categories such as Chinese to describe fathers. For example, among Tibetans and
Naxi, two minority Chinese groups, fathers provide much of the parenting of young
children, but among the Han Chinese, fathering is more similar to Western fathering
(though differences still exist). Although the Han Chinese are dominant (98 percent of
the Chinese population) and may be more capable of emigrating from China to the
United States, we still note that different conceptions of parenting likely exist among
fathers from a single country. We also lack detailed information about interviewers
who spoke languages other than English or Spanish and about the translation process
for the different survey instruments. Thus, our conclusions regarding the influence of
acculturation on father engagement must be viewed as first steps toward acquiring more
definitive knowledge.
Study strengths. Despite these limitations, the present study makes a straightforward contribution to the literature on both fathers and the emerging immigration debate.
Using data from a nationally representative sample of young children with co-resident
fathers, we are able to demonstrate the unique influence of multiple dimensions of acculturation on father engagement for two of the fastest growing immigrant groups in
the U.S. We were able to use measures of multiple measures of acculturation, rather
than a single measure of length of U.S. residency or citizenship status. We are also able
to examine how acculturation is associated with multiple dimensions of paternal involvement that involve a constellation of parenting behaviors – both emotional and behavioral. Moreover, the conceptualization of involvement as a combination of several
components provides a strong framework for understanding how fathers from diverse
groups interact with infants. Evidence provided here reinforces that father-child interactions, even during infancy, reflect differences between groups in both the emotional
and behavioral components of fathering. Additional research focused on the parenting
behaviors of a wider range of fathers from other regions of the world is a promising avenue for future research. Future waves of ECLS-B data will also allow for additional
research on changes in the parenting behavior of immigrant fathers over time.
Policy and practice implications. The study of immigrant fathers has practical importance as well as scientific importance for understanding the processes that shape
86
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
parenting across different groups of families. Given the increasing diversity of recent
immigrant groups to the U.S., it is crucial to understand the patterns of involvement for
fathers of specific ethnic origins. Findings from this study will add to the knowledge
base used to develop appropriate interventions and high-quality programs for immigrant parents with young children.
References
Ahmeduzzaman, M.E., & Roopnarine, J.L. (1992). Sociodemographic factors, functioning style,
social support, and fathers’ involvement with preschoolers in African-American families.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 699-707.
Allison, P.D. (2001). Missing data. Sage University Press Papers Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-136. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Beaton, J.M., Doherty, W.J., & Rueter, M.A. (2003). Family of origin processes and attitudes of
expectant fathers. Fathering: A Journal of Theory, Research, and Practice about Men as Fathers, 1(2), 149-168.
Berry, J.W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In A.M. Padilla (Ed.), Acculturation:
Theory, models, and some new findings (pp. 9-25). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Berry, J.W. (1986). The acculturation process and refugee behavior. In C.L. Williams & J. Westermeyer (Eds.), Refugee mental health in resettlement countries (pp. 25-37). Washington,
DC: Hemisphere.
Biller, H.B. & Lopez Kimpton, J. (1997). The father and the school-aged child. In M.E. Lamb
(Ed.), The role of the father in child development (pp. 143-161). New York: Wiley.
Bosher, S. (1998). The measurement of acculturation. Annual Meeting of the American Association for Applied Linguistics. Seattle, WA: American Association for Applied Linguistics.
Bronte-Tinkew, J., Carrano, J., & Guzman, L. (2006). Resident fathers’ perceptions of their roles
and links to involvement with infants. Fathering, 4(3), 254-285.
Bronte-Tinkew, J., Moore, K., Matthews, G., & Carrano, J. (2007). Symptoms of major depression in a sample of fathers of infants: Socio-demographic correlates and links to father involvement. Journal of family Issues, 28(1), 61-99.
Buriel, R., & De Ment, T. (1997). Immigration and sociocultural change in Mexican, Chinese,
and Vietnamese American families. In A. Booth, A.C. Crouter, & N.S. Landale (Eds.), Immigration and the family: Research and policy on U.S. immigrants (pp. 165-200). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cabrera, N., Shannon, J., West, J., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2006). Parental interactions with Latino
infants: Variation by country of origin and English proficiency. Child Development, 74(5),
1190-1207.
Cabrera, N.J., & Coll, C.G. (2004). Latino fathers: Uncharted territory in need of much exploration. In M.E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the father in child development (4th ed., pp. 98-120).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Cabrera, N.J., West, J., Shannon, J.D., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2006). Parental interactions with
Latino infants: Variation by country of origin and English proficiency. Child Development,
77(5), 1190-1207.
Caldaza, E.J., & Eyberg, S.M. (2002). Self-reported parenting practices in Dominican and Puerto
Rican mothers of young children. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 31(3),
354-363.
87
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
Capps, R. (2001). Hardships among children of immigrants: Findings from the 1999 National
Survey of America’s Families (assessing the New Federalism Policy Brief B-29). Washington,
DC: The Urban Institute.
Capps, R., Fix, M., Murray, J., Ost, J., Passel, J.S., & Herwantoro, S. (2005). The new demography of America’s schools: Immigration and the No Child Left Behind Act. Washington, DC:
The Urban Institute.
Capps, R., Fix, M., Ost, J., Reardon-Anderson, J., & Passel, J. S. (2004). The Health and WellBeing of Young Children of Immigrants. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
Chao, R.K. (2000). The parenting of immigrant Chinese and European American mothers: Relations between parenting styles, socialization goals, and parental practices. Journal of Applied
Developmental Psychology, 21(2), 233-248.
Chuang, S., & Moreno, R. (Eds.). (2008). On new shores: Understanding immigrant fathers in
North America. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Clarke-Stewart, K.A. (1980). The father’s contribution to children’s cognitive and social development in early childhood. In F.A. Pedersen (Ed.), The father-infant relationship: Observational studies in a family setting (pp. 111-146). New York: Praeger.
Coiro, M.J., & Emery, R.E. (1998). Do marriage problems affect fathering more than mothering?
A quantitative and qualitative review. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 1(1), 2340.
Coltrane, S. (1996). Family man: Fatherhood, housework, and gender equity. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Contreras, J.M. (2004). Parenting behaviors among mainland Puerto Rican adolescent mothers:
The role of grandmother and partner involvement. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 14(3),
341-368.
Cooksey, E.C., & Craig, P.H. (1998). Parenting from a distance: The effects of paternal characteristics on contact between nonresidential fathers and their children. Demography, 35(2),
187-200.
Cote, L.R., & Bornstein, M.H. (2005). Child and mother play in cultures of origin, acculturating
cultures, and cultures of destination. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29(6),
479-488.
Cousins, J.H., Power, T.G., & Olvera-Ezzell, N. (1993). Mexican-American mothers’ socialization strategies: Effects of education, acculturation, and health locus of control. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 55, 258-276.
Culp, R.E., Schadle, S., Robinson, L., & Culp, A.M. (2000). Relationships among paternal involvement and young children’s perceived self-competence and behavioral problems. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 9, 27-38.
Day, R.D., & Lamb, M.E. (2004). Conceptualizing and measuring father involvement. Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
DeJong, G.F., & Madamba, A.B. (2001). A double disadvantage? Minority group, immigrant
status, and underemployment in the United States Social Science Quarterly, 82(1), 117-130.
Demo, D.H., & Cox, M.J. (2000). Families with young children: A review of research in the
1990s. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(4), 876-895.
DeSipio, L. (1996). Making citizens or good citizens? Naturalization as a predictor of organizational and electoral behavior among Latino immigrants. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 18(2), 194-213.
Driedger, L. (1975). In search of cultural identity factors: A comparison of ethnic students. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 12, 150-162.
88
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
Dumka, L.E., Roosa, M.W., & Jackson, K.M. (1997). Risk, conflict, mothers’ parenting, and
children’s adjustment in low-income, Mexican immigrant, and Mexican American families.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59, 309-323.
Evans, M.D.R. (1988). Choosing to be a citizen: The time-path of citizenship in Australia. International Migration Review, 22(2), 243-264.
Feliciano, C. (2001). The benefits of biculturalism: Exposure to immigrant culture and dropping
out of school among Asian and Latino youths. Social Science Quarterly, 82(4), 865-879.
Finch, B.K., & Vega, W.A. (2003). Acculturation stress, social support, and self-rated health
among Latinos in California. Journal of Immigrant Health, 5(3), 109-117.
Fuller, B., Holloway, S.D., & Liang, X. (1996). Family selection of child-care centers: The influence of household support, ethnicity, and parental practices. Child Development, 67(6),
3320-3337.
Gonzales, N.A., Deardorff, J., Formoso, D., Barr, A., & Barrera, M. (2006). Family mediators
of the relation between acculturation and adolescent mental health. Family Relations, 55,
318-330.
Gorman, J.C. (1998). Parenting attitudes and practices of immigrant Chinese mothers of adolescents. Family Relations, 47(1), 73-80.
Griffith, J., & Villavicencio, S. (1985). Relationships among acculturation, sociodemographic
characteristics and social supports in Mexican American adults. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 7(1), 75-92.
Harris, K.H., & Morgan, S.P. (1991). Fathers, sons, and daughters: Differential paternal involvement in parenting. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 531-544.
Harris, K.M. (2000). Health risk behavior among adolescents in immigrant families. In D.J. Hernandez (Ed.), Children of immigrants: Health, adjustment, and public assistance. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Hazuda, H.P., Stern, M.P., & Haffner, S.M. (1988). Acculturation and assimilation among Mexican Americans: Scales and population-based data. Social Science Quarterly, 69, 687-706.
Hernandez, D.J. (2004). Demographic change and the life circumstances of immigrant families.
The Future of Children, 14(2), 16-47.
Hernandez, D.J., & Brandon, P.D. (2002). Who are the fathers of today? In C.S. Tamis-LeMonda
& N. Cabrera (Eds.), Handbook of father involvement: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 3362). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hernandez, D.J., & Charney, E. (Eds.). (1998). From generation to generation: The health and
well-being of children in immigrant families. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Hernandez, D.J., & Darke, K. (1999). Socioeconomic and demographic risk factors and resources
among children in immigrant and native-born families: 1910, 1960, and 1990. In D.J. Hernandez (Ed.), Children of immigrants: Health, adjustment, and public assistance (pp. 19125). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Hofferth, S.L., & Anderson, K.G. (2003). Are all dads equal? Biology versus marriage as a basis
for paternal investment. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65(1), 213-232.
Hondagneu-Sotelo, P., & Messner, M.A. (1994). Gender displays and men’s power: The “new
man” and the Mexican immigrant man. In H. Brod & M. Kaufman (Eds.), Theorizing masculinities (pp. 200-218). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hulei, E., Zevenbergen, A.A., & Jacobs, S.C. (2006). Discipline behaviors of Chinese American
and European American mothers. Journal of Psychology, 140(5), 459-475.
Hunter, A.G., Pearson, J.L., Ialongo, N.S., & Kellam, S.G. (1998). Parenting alone to multiple
caregivers: Child care and parenting arrangements in black and white urban families. Family Relations, 47(4), 343-353.
89
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
Inman, A.G., Howard, E.E., Beaumont, R.L., & Walker, J.A. (2007). Cultural transmission: Influence of contextual factors in Asian Indian immigrant parents’ experiences. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 54(1), 93-100.
Jain, A., & Belsky, J. (1997). Fathering and acculturation: Immigrant Indian families with young
children. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59, 873-883.
Jambunathan, S., Burts, D.C., & Pierce, S. (2000). Comparisons of parenting attitudes among five
ethnic groups in the United States. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 31, 395-406.
Julian, T.W., McKenry, P.C., & 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. (1998). Psychological well-being and educational achievement among immigrant youth.
In D.J. Hernandez (Ed.), Children of immigrants: Health, adjustment, and public assistance.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Keith, V.M., & Finlay, B. (1988). The impact of parental divorce on children’s educational attainment, marital timing, and likelihood of divorce. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
50(3), 797-809.
Kurrien, R., & Vo, E.D. (2004). Who’s in charge? Coparenting in South and Southeast Asian
families. Journal of Adult Development, 11(3), 207-219.
Lamb, M.E., Pleck, J.H., Charnov, E.L., & Levine, J.A. (1985). The role of the father in child development: The effects of increased paternal involvement. In B.B. Lahey & A.E. Kazdin
(Eds.), Advances in clinical child psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 229-266). New York: Plenum.
Lamb, M.E., Pleck, J.H., Charnov, E.L., & Levine, J.A. (1987). A biosocial perspective on paternal behavior and involvement. In J.B. Lancaster, J. Altman, S. Rossi & L.R. Sherrod (Eds.),
Parenting across the lifespan: Biosocial dimensions (pp. 111-142). New York: Aldine de
Gruyter.
Lewis, C. (1997). Fathers and preschoolers. In M.E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the father in child
development (pp. 121-142). New York: Wiley.
Leyendecker, B., & Lamb, M.E. (1999). Latino families. In M.E. Lamb (Ed.), Parenting and
child development in “nontraditional” families (pp. 247-262). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lin, C.C., & Fu, V.R. (1990). A comparison of child-rearing practices among Chinese, immigrant Chinese, and Caucasian-American parents. Child Development, 61(2), 429-433.
Lindahl, K.M., & Malik, N.M. (1999). Observations of marital conflict and power: Relations
with parenting in the triad. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61(2), 320-330.
Mayo, Y. (1997). Machismo, fatherhood, and the Latino family: Understanding the concept.
Journal of Multicultural Social Work, 5(1/2), 46-91.
Mirande, A. (1991). Ethnicity and fatherhood. In F.W. Bozett & S.M.H. Hanson (Eds.), Fatherhood and families in cultural context (pp. 53-81). New York: Springer.
Moreno, R.P., & Lopez, J.A. (1999). Latina mothers’ involvement in their children’s schooling:
The role of maternal education and acculturation. East Lansing, MI: Julian Samora Research
Institute.
Nugent, J.K. (1991). Cultural and psychological influences on the father’s role in infant development. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 475-485.
Osborn, A.F., & Morris, A.C. (1982). Fathers and child care. Early Child Development and Care,
8, 279-307.
Palkovitz, R. (1984). Parental attitudes and fathers’ interactions with their 5-month-old infants.
Developmental Psychology, 20(6), 1054-1060.
90
ACCULTURATION AND FATHER ENGAGEMENT
Patel, N., Power, T.G., & Bhavnagri, N.P. (1996). Socialization values and practices of Indian immigrant parents: Correlates of modernity and acculturation. Child Development, 67, 302-313.
Pleck, J.H. (1997). Paternal involvement: Levels, sources and consequences. In M. Lamb (Ed.),
The role of father in child development (3rd ed., pp. 66-103). New York: Wiley.
Pleck, J.H., & Masciadrelli, B.P. (2004). Paternal involvement by U.S. residential fathers: Levels, sources, and consequences. In M.E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the father in child development (4th ed., pp. 222-271). New York: Wiley.
Portes, A. (1996). What shall I call myself? Hispanic identity formation in the second generation.
Ethnic and Racial Studies, 19, 523-547.
Portes, A., & Curtis, J.W. (1987). Changing flags: Naturalization and its determinants among
Mexican immigrants. International Migration Review, 21(2), 352-371.
Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. (2001). Legacies: The story of the immigrant second generation.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Powell, D.R. (1995). Including Latino fathers in parent education and support programs: Development of a program model. In R.E. Zambrana (Ed.), Understanding Latino families:
Scholarship, policy, and practice (pp.85-106). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Radin, N. (1981). The role of the father in cognitive, academic, and intellectual development. In
M.E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the father in child development (rev. ed., pp. 379-428). New
York: Wiley.
Radloff, L.S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general
population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385-401.
Rane, T.R., & McBride, B.A. (2000). Identity theory as a guide to understanding fathers’ involvement with their children. Journal of Family Issues, 21, 347-366.
Reardon-Anderson, J., Capps, R., & Fix, M.E. (2002). The health and well-being of children in
immigrant families. Retrieved May 18, 2007, from http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/310584B52.pdf
Rogler, L.H., & Cooney, R.S. (1984). Puerto Rican families in New York City: Intergenerational
processes. Maplewood, NJ: Waterfront Press.
Roopnarine, J.L.K., Metindogan, A., & Evans, M. (2006). Links between parenting styles, parent-child academic interaction, parent-school interaction, and early academic skills and social behaviors in young children of English-speaking Caribbean immigrants. Early Childhood
Research Quarterly, 21, 238-252.
Rumbaut, R. (1994). The crucible within: Ethnic identity, self-esteem, and segmented assimilation among children of immigrants. International Migration Review, 28(4), 748-794.
Rumbaut, R. (1995). The new Californians: Comparative research findings on the educational
progress of immigrant children. In R. Rumbaut & W.A. Cornelius (Eds.), California’s immigrant children: Theory, research, and implications for educational policy (pp. 17-69). San
Diego: University of California Press.
Rumbaut, R., Massey, D.S., & Bean, F.D. (2006). Linguistic life expectancies: Immigrant language retention in southern California. Population and Development Review, 32(3), 447-460.
Sabogal, F., Marin, G., Otero-Sabogal, R., Marin, B.V., & Perez-Stable, E.J. (1987). Hispanic
familism and acculturation: What changes and what doesn’t? Hispanic Journal of Behavioral
Sciences, 9(4), 397-412.
Salgado de Snyder, V.N., Cervantes, R.C., & Padilla, A.M. (1990). Gender and ethnic differences in psychosocial stress and generalized distress among Hispanics. Sex Roles, 22(7-8),
441-453.
Sanders, J.M., & Nee, V. (1996). Immigrant self-employment: The family as social capital and
the value of human capital. American Sociological Review, 61(2), 231-249.
91
CAPPS, BRONTE-TINKEW & HOROWITZ
Schumann, J. (1978). The acculturation model for second language acquisition. In R.C. Gingras
(Ed.), Second language acquisition and foreign language teaching (pp. 27-50). Arlington,
VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Shimoni, R., Este, D., & Clark, D.E. (2003). Paternal engagement in immigrant and refugee families. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 34, 555-568.
Shwalb, D.W., Nakazawa, J., Yamamoto, T., & Hyun, J.-H. (2004). Fathering in Japanese, Chinese, and Korean cultures: A review of the research literature. In M.E. Lamb (Ed.), The role
of the father in child development (4th ed., pp. 146-181). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
SPSS Inc. (2007). SPSS 16.0 user’s guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc.
Suzuki, B.H. (1980). The Asian-American family. In M.D. Fantini & R. Cardenas (Eds.), Parenting in a multicultural society (pp. 74-102). New York: Longman.
U.S. Department of Education, N. C. f. E. S. (2004). Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth
cohort (ECLS-B): User’s manual for the ECLS-B nine-month restricted-use data file and electronic code book (No. NCES 2004-092). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Valera, R.E., Vernberg, E.M., Sanchez-Sosa, J.J., Riveros, A., Mitchell, M., & Mashunkashey, J.
(2004). Parenting style of Mexican, Mexican-American, and Caucasian-non-Hispanic families: Social context and cultural influences. Journal of Family Psychology, 18(4), 651-657.
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.
Videon, T.M. (2005). Parent-child relations and children’s psychological well-being—Do dads
matter? Journal of Family Issues, 26(1), 55-78.
Wong, S.T., Yoo, G.J., & Stewart, A.L. (2005). Examining the types of social support and the actual sources of support in older Chinese and Korean immigrants. International Journal of
Aging and Human Development, 61(2), 105-121.
Wu, P., Robinson, C.C., Yang, C., Hart, C.H., Olsen, S.F., Porter, C.L., et al. (2002). Similarities
and differences in mothers’ parenting of preschoolers in China and the United States. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26(6), 481-491.
Yang, P.Q. (1994). Explaining immigrant naturalization. International Migration Review, 28(3),
449-477.
Yeung, W.J., Sandberg, J.F., Davis-Kean, P.E., & Hofferth, S.L. (2001). Children’s time with fathers in intact families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(1), 136-154.
92