Familism is a core Latino value that emphasizes close family relationships and prioritizing of family before the self. Familism has implications for well-being and health, but it is not clear whether these values are generally beneficial or beneficial under stress. We examined whether the associations of familism with well-being/health were consistent with a main effect or stress-buffering model in Latinos and non-Latinos. Latino (n = 171), European (n = 225), and East Asian Americans (n = 415) completed measures of familism, stress, well-being, and health. In terms of general benefits, familism was negatively associated with loneliness, depression, and physical symptoms. In terms of stress-buffering benefits, the combination of high familism with high stress was associated with higher self-esteem and subjective health than the combination of low familism with high stress. These patterns were consistent across groups, suggesting that familism can be beneficial for Latinos and non-Latinos.

We examined the effect of political rhetoric on the targets of that rhetoric. Drawing from scholarship on anti-Mexican and anti-immigrant rhetoric found readily in various media and scholarship on emotions, we tested four hypotheses. Hypotheses 1 and 2 predicted that positive and negative political rhetoric would increase and decrease positive and negative emotions, respectively. Hypotheses 3 and 4 then predicted that emotional responses to positive or negative political rhetoric would influence perceived stress, subjective health, and subjective wellbeing. Data collection occurred between August 2016 and June 2017 at a university in California. A sample of 280 Mexican-origin youth, defined broadly as having at least one ancestor born in Mexico or the participant themselves born in Mexico, participated in an experiment where they were randomly assigned to one of three study conditions: viewing (1) positive or (2) negative political rhetoric about immigrants and Latinos in general, or (3) neutral rhetoric as a control condition before providing qualitative responses to open-ended questions and completing measures of positive and negative affect, perceived stress, subjective health, and subjective wellbeing. Qualitative responses indicated that negative and positive political rhetoric elicited a range of negative emotions and positive emotions, respectively. Quantitative analysis with independent samples t-tests, ANOVA, and linear regression models found that negative political rhetoric elicited higher negative affect than positive and neutral rhetoric, and positive rhetoric elicited higher positive affect than negative and neutral rhetoric. Negative emotional responses, in turn, were associated with participants' higher perceived stress, lower subjective health and lower subjective well-being. Conversely, positive emotional responses were associated with lower perceived stress, higher subjective health, and higher subjective well-being. Positive political rhetoric, by eliciting positive emotions, can have a salubrious effect. Altogether, these findings suggest that political rhetoric matters for the targets of that rhetoric. In June 2018, a White woman in Running Springs, California, approached Esteban Guzman, a U.S. citizen, and his mother who were gardening and told them to "go back to Mexico" and unleashed other anti-Mexican rants. Guzman asked, "Why do you hate us?" She replied, "Because you're Mexicans." He said, "We're honest people." The woman laughed, and said, "You're rapists, drug dealers. Even the President of the United States says you're a rapist." Guzman: "Thanks to him (Donald Trump) everywhere I go I am a rapist, an animal, and drug dealer. You don't know what it feels like to be hated so much."

Gratitude is positively associated with health and well-being. Past studies of gratitude have primarily focused on the distinct cultural context of European Americans. The current studies aimed to extend gratitude research to Latino and East Asian Americans, 2 collectivistic contexts known to differently value positive emotions. Two studies explored whether Latino and East Asian Americans varied in gratitude experience and whether the disposition toward gratitude was associated with well-being for both. In Study 1, participants completed measures of the emotional experience and expression of gratitude. Latino Americans rated the desirability, appropriateness, frequency, and intensity of their gratitude experience-expression higher than did East Asian Americans. Moreover, European Americans' gratitude experience and expression was similar to those of Latino Americans and higher than those of East Asian Americans. In Study 2, participants completed measures of gratitude disposition and indicators of well-being. Latino Americans reported a higher disposition toward gratitude than did East Asian Americans. Higher disposition toward gratitude was associated with higher self-esteem and with less loneliness and perceived stress across groups. However, the strength of the association of gratitude with subjective health and depressive symptoms varied by group in theoretically expected ways. The promising possibilities of extending research on gratitude to culturally diverse groups is discussed.

No abstract

Objectives: Recently, there has been a call to better understand Latino health and arrive at effective approaches for achieving health equity via research focusing on the association between cultural factors and health. This study examined whether familism, a cultural value that emphasizes warm and close family relationships, would attenuate the negative effects that perceived stress, a psychological process that can worsen health, can have on two physical health indicators- number of health conditions and bodily pain. Methods: Latina mothers (n = 85, M age = 52.68, SD = 6.60) with Type 2 diabetes and their daughters (n = 86, M age = 27.69, SD = 7.61) whose weight put them at risk for also developing the condition were recruited to take part in a larger intervention study aimed at improving weight loss/dietary intake. Participants completed measures of familism, perceived stress, health conditions, and bodily pain. Results: Results indicated that in the daughters, familism and perceived stress interacted to predict health conditions and bodily pain. As familism decreased, stress was associated with more health conditions and more bodily pain. These interactions were not significant for the mothers. Conclusions: First, familism has the potential to buffer the negative effect of stress in ways that are protective for health among Latinas at risk for diabetes. Second, this buffering effect has boundary conditions, suggesting that a better understanding is needed of how, for whom, and under what circumstances familism can be beneficial for health.