1. Environmental, Attitudinal, and Social Context Factors as Predictors of Immigrant Mexican Wives’ Personal and Marital Well-being Environmental, Attitudinal, and Social Context Factors as Predictors of Immigrant Mexican Wives’ Personal and Marital Well-being Yuliana Rodriguez & Jinni Su University of North Carolina at Greensboro The authors acknowledge Heather Helms, Jill Walls, and Monsy Bonilla. We also thanks the families for their time and participation. Funding provided by a UNCG Regular Faculty Grant and Agricultural Research Service Award (PI, Dr. Heather Helms).

2. F IGURE 1. A DAPTED T HREE -L EVEL M ODEL FOR V IEWING M ARRIAGE 1 1 From “The Social Ecology of Marriage and Other Intimate Unions” by T. L. Huston, 2000, Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, p. 300. Adapted with permission of the author by Helms, Supple, & Proulx (under review). B: Individuals b 1 : Spouses’ personal qualities b 2 : Spouses’ marriage-specific beliefs and attitudes A: Marital Behavior in the Context of Parenthood a 1 : Macrobehavioral patterns a 2: Microbehavioral patterns C: Macroenvironment c 1 : Macrosocietal context c 1i : Sociohistorical c 1ii : Cultural background c liii : Socioeconomic c 2 : Spouses’ ecological niche c 2i : Social environment c 2ii : Physical environment #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6

3. 1) Explore individual and environmental factors link to psychological and marital well-being 2) Specific interest in the relation between pressure to acculturate and well-being. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses are used to address these question.

4. VariablesMSDRange Age Wives28.135.46318– 47 Husbands30.335.7918 – 48 First born (in years)5.873.88.08 – 13.64 Years in US Wives8.814.41<1 – 22 Husbands11.405.262 – 27 Nuclear family size4.06.933 – 7 Total household size4.821.393 – 10

5. VariablesMSDRange Marital duration (years)73.961 – 15 Education (years) Wives9.663.170 – 16 Husbands9.013.181 – 18 Work hours (per week) Wives38.216.3516 – 60 Husbands43.158.0120 – 80 Income (annual) Wives$15,138$6,559$2,500 – $31,600 Husbands$24,647$8,713$8,000 – $69,000 Family$33,297$12,725$8,000 – $83,4000

6. Marital Status: 69.2% married, 30.8% cohabiting Child Gender: 58.3% male, 41.7% female Ethnicity: – Wives: 95.8% Mexican, 1.7% Puerto Rican, 2.5% other Latin origin – Husbands: 93.3% Mexican,.8% Puerto Rican, 5.8% other Latin origin Parents’ Birth Place: – Wives: 93.3% Mexico, 4.2% US, 2.5% other Latin country – Husbands: 90.8% Mexico, 3.3% US, 5.8% other Latin country

7. Employment Status: – Husbands: 98.3% employed, 1.7% non-employed – Wives: 54.2% employed, 45.8% non-employed Acculturation Status: – Wives: 85% Mexican oriented, 13.3% Mexican/bicultural, 1.7 % slightly Anglo oriented – Husbands: 69.2% Mexican oriented, 29.2% Mexican/bicultural, 1.7% slightly Anglo oriented

8. ConstructMeasureAuthorScale & Reliability Wives’ Love and ConflictMarital Love and Conflict Love subscale: 9 items Conflict subscale: 5 items Braiker & Kelley, 1979 9 point scale, higher scores indicate greater levels of love and conflict Love: α =.86 wives Conflict: α =.59 wives Wives’ Personal Well-being Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) 12 items (shortened version) Radloff, 19774 point scale, higher scores indicate higher levels of depressive symptoms α =.79 wives Wives’ Marital Satisfaction Domains of Satisfaction 16 items Huston, McHale, & Crouter, 1986 9 point scale, higher scores indicated greater levels of satisfaction α =.94 wives

9. ConstructMeasureAuthorScale & Reliability Marriage WorkMarriage Work with Friend Helms, et al., 200316 point scale, higher scores indicated greater levels of marriage work with friend α =.95 wives Pressure to AcculturateMultidimensional Acculturative Stress Inventory Pressure to acculturate subscale: 7 items Rodriguez, Myers, Bingham Mira, Flores, & Garcia-Hernandez, 2002 5 point scale, higher scores indicate greater levels of stress α =.85 wives Economic HardshipEmployment and Financial Information Financial Strain subscale: 4 items Conger & Elder, 19945 point scale, lower scores indicate a greater level of economic hardship in the past year α =.88 wives

10. ConstructMeasureAuthorScale & Reliability Gender Role AttitudesGender Role Attitude Scale Hoffman & Kloska, 1995 13 point scale, higher scores indicated more gender sterotyping α =.73 wives Familism AttitudesMexican American Acculturation/Encultur ation Scale (MAAS) Support & emotional closeness, family obligations, and family as referrent subscale: 16 items Knight, Gonzales, Saenz, German, Deardorff, Roosa, & Updegraff, in press 5 point scale, higher scores indicate greater familism α =.71 wives

11. Wives’IIIIIIIV Employment Status.028.014.010.012 Marital Status.181*.091.061.891 Family Economic Hardship.246**.234**.232** Pressure to Acculturate.226*.214*.203* Gender Role Attitudes.168+.174+ Familism Attitudes-.065-.050 Emotional Support-.147+ R2R2.034.154.180.201 Change in R 2.034.120***.026.021+ Note: +p <.1.*p <.05. **p <.01. ***p <.001.

12. Wives’IIIIIIIV Employment Status-.055-.054.019-.022 Marital Status-.220*-.189*-.202*-.163+ Family Economic Hardship -.046-.053-.049 Pressure to Acculturate -.098-.126-.109 Gender Role Attitudes -.098 Familism Attitudes.241*.216* Emotional Support.244** R2R2.053.065.118.175 Change in R 2.053*.012.052*.057* Note: +p <.1.*p <.05. **p <.01. ***p <.001.

13. Wives’IIIIIIIV Employment Status-.117-.113-.088-.091 Marital Status-.218*-.177+-.186*-.144 Family Economic Hardship -.090-.096-.090 Pressure to Acculturate -.115-.135-.116 Gender Role Attitudes -.068-.078 Familism Attitudes.176*.149 Emotional Support.263** R2R2.065.088.116.182 Change in R 2.065*.023.028.066** Note: +p <.1.*p <.05. **p <.01. ***p <.001.

14. Wives’IIIIIIIV Age.090.072.070.040 Number of Kids.057.061.060.059 Pressure to Acculturate-.145-.162+-.189* Marriage Work with Friend.146.193* MPTACC*MMWORKF.190* R2R2.015.036.057.089 Change in R 2.015.021.032* Note: +p <.1.*p <.05. **p <.01. ***p <.001.