Content uploaded by Carlos A Cuevas
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Carlos A Cuevas
Content may be subject to copyright.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
The Cultural Influences on Help-seeking Among a National
Sample of Victimized Latino Women
Chiara Sabina •Carlos A. Cuevas •Jennifer L. Schally
Published online: 13 August 2011
ÓSociety for Community Research and Action 2011
Abstract The current study examined the influence of
legal status and cultural variables (i.e., acculturation, gen-
der role ideology and religious coping) on the formal and
informal help-seeking efforts of Latino women who
experienced interpersonal victimization. The sample was
drawn from the Sexual Assault Among Latinas (SALAS)
Study that surveyed 2,000 self-identified adult Latino
women. The random digit dial methodology employed in
high-density Latino neighborhoods resulted in a coopera-
tion rate of 53.7%. Women who experienced lifetime vic-
timization (n=714) reported help-seeking efforts in
response to their most distressful victimization event that
occurred in the US. Approximately one-third of the women
reported formal help-seeking and about 70% of women
reported informal help-seeking. Help-seeking responses
were generally not predicted by the cultural factors mea-
sured, with some exceptions. Anglo orientation and nega-
tive religious coping increased the likelihood of formal
help-seeking. Positive religious coping, masculine gender
role and Anglo acculturation increased the likelihood of
specific forms of informal help-seeking. Latino orientation
decreased the likelihood of talking to a sibling. Overall,
these findings reinforce the importance of bilingual
culturally competent services as cultural factors shape the
ways in which women respond to victimization either
formally or within their social networks.
Keywords Help-seeking Latinas Victimization
Acculturation
Cultural beliefs and traditions influence the ways in which
women respond to interpersonal victimization. Culturally
informed constructs such as gender roles, the importance of
family, and the significance of religion, work to create the
lens through which victimization is defined and acted upon.
Minorities who have unique cultural practices may be hard-
pressed to feel welcomed and respected by traditional victim
services that subsume dominant cultural values. Immigrants,
especially, have a unique set of barriers to help-seeking
given their lingual, cultural, and legal differences. While
current research shows that Latino women are less likely to
seek help than White women (Rizo and Macy 2011), the role
legal status and cultural factors play in help-seeking among
Latino women remains unclear. Cultural influences are often
included in theoretical frameworks of help-seeking but are
acknowledged in a limited number of studies. Here we
expand previous research by testing the influence of legal
status and cultural variables on help-seeking responses of a
national sample of victimized Latino women.
Help-seeking is a process by which victimized women
define the problem, decide to seek help, and then choose the
source(s) of support (Liang et al. 2005). Sources of support
may be informal (e.g., friends, family, co-workers) or
include a formal service component (e.g., police, hospitals,
mental health services). The help-seeking process is
undoubtedly influenced by contextual factors, including
cultural ones (Dutton 1996; Liang et al. 2005). Previous
Jennifer L. Schally is now a PhD student at University of Tennessee,
Sociology Department.
C. Sabina (&)J. L. Schally
School of Behavioral Sciences and Education,
Penn State Harrisburg, 777 West Harrisburg Pike,
Olmsted Building W-311, Middletown, PA 17057, USA
e-mail: sabina@psu.edu
C. A. Cuevas
School of Criminology and Criminal Justice,
Northeastern University, 204 Churchill Hall/360 Huntington
Ave, Boston, MA 02115, USA
123
Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363
DOI 10.1007/s10464-011-9462-x
studies comparing the rates of help-seeking among Latinos
and Whites have found that Latinos are less likely to seek
help than Whites (Arroyo et al. 1997; Ingram 2007; Renn-
ison 2007; West et al. 1998). For example, a national study
of both Latino and Anglo women (West et al. 1998) found
significant differences on help-seeking overall, which
included a range of formal and informal supports. The study
also found that Anglos were significantly more likely to talk
to a friend or relative as well as contact a psychologist.
Using National Crime Victimization Survey data, Rennison
(2007) found that Whites were two times more likely to
report rape/sexual assault to police than Latinos. Yet, the
explanations for these differences remain unclear.
One of the important factors in understanding the help-
seeking efforts of Latino women is immigrant status.
Collectively, studies have found that immigrant status
overall, non-permanent legal status, and undocumented
status, are associated with decreased rates of help-seeking
behaviors. Latino immigrants are less likely than US born
Latinos to seek formal help (Ingram 2007) or disclose
abuse to physicians (Rodriguez et al. 2001). Undocumented
women report reluctance to seek help due to fears about
deportation for self and family members (Acevedo 2000;
Bauer et al. 2000; Dutton et al. 2000;Lewis et al. 2005;
Murdaugh et al. 2004; Sorenson 1996) and less frequently
utilize formal resources such as police, domestic violence
shelters, and medical assistance than documented women
(Brabeck and Guzman 2009). Similarly, Ammar et al.
(2005) found that women with stable immigrant statuses
were almost twice as likely to report their victimization to
police than those with temporary legal immigration sta-
tuses. However, even immigrant women who have legal
status in the United States may be hesitant to seek help,
especially through formal avenues, due to fear of losing
children, lack of bilingual or culturally sensitive services,
insufficient knowledge about available services, unfamil-
iarity with the criminal justice or social service systems in
the US, and cultural values which may downplay violence
(Bauer et al. 2000; Dutton et al. 2000; Erez and Hartley
2003; Moracco et al. 2005; Murdaugh et al. 2004).
Another influence on help-seeking among Latino
women is their level of acculturation—defined as changes
in cultural patterns that take place when individuals are
regularly in contact with a host culture (Valentine and
Mosley 2000). The acculturation process may also include
retention of the culture of origin, and functions along
multiple dimensions such as practices, values, and identi-
fications with the heritage and host cultures (Schwartz et al.
2010). Studies that examined the relationship between
acculturation and rates of help-seeking or service utiliza-
tion found that participants with low acculturation scores
were significantly less likely to use available resources than
both Whites and higher acculturated Latinos (Cortina 2004;
Lipsky et al. 2006; Romero et al. 1999; Wells et al. 1987;
West et al. 1998). In Romero et al.’s (1999) study, which
used a probability sample of sexually abused Latino
women, 60% of the participants failed to disclose their
abuse; this percentage increased to 68% when looking
specifically at women who scored low on acculturation.
Similarly, West et al. (1998) found that the mean accul-
turation scores for Latino participants who did not seek
help were significantly lower than those seeking any source
of support. Despite these findings, at least one study
(Ramos-Sanchez and Atkinson 2009) found that more
enculturated (i.e., steeped in their native cultures) Mexican–
Americans showed a greater willingness to seek psycho-
logical help than less enculturated Mexican–Americans
among a mixed-gender sample of Latino college students.
Acculturation may be associated with help-seeking in
several ways. First, the lack of bilingual services and cul-
turally sensitive staff may deter those with lower levels of
acculturation from formal help-seeking. Second, more
acculturated individuals may be more familiar with available
resources in their communities and/or more likely to identify
victimization and utilize formal services as a mechanism to
safety. Third, formal services may require actions that are in
conflict with Latino cultural values, decreasing cultural-fit.
Cultural values that place importance on privacy, reliance on
family, and the building of confianza (trust), may clash with
mainstream service models in which personal issues are
revealed to strangers (Canive and Castillo 1997; Fierros and
Smith 2006; Torres 1998a,b). Fourth, as gender role beliefs
are altered during acculturation (Phinney and Flores 2002;
Valentine and Mosley 2000), definitions of violence or
acceptance of violence may also change.
Familism is commonly attributed to traditional Latino
culture and can inhibit help-seeking behaviors as suggested
in qualitative studies (Bauer et al. 2000; Kelly 2006;Lewis
et al. 2005; Lira et al.1999). The focus on preserving the
family may hinder help-seeking in several ways. Latino
women who are sexually assaulted may avoid discussing
their experiences due to fears associated with disappointing
relatives or causing rifts within their families (Lira et al.
1999). With regard to partner violence, both the stigmati-
zation of divorce and the belief that children need their
fathers contributes to the lack of disclosure among Latino
women (Bauer et al. 2000; Kelly 2006; Sorenson 1996).
However, at least one study (Brabeck and Guzman 2009)
showed familism as a predictor of informal help-seeking,
which may be explained by a sense of obligation to and
closeness with family.
Religiosity is another culturally relevant factor that is
under-explored in the help-seeking literature. Catholicism as
the predominant religion among Latinos informs the role of
women within the family (Canive and Castillo 1997; Pena
and Frehill 1998). Traditional Latino women are socialized
348 Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363
123
to place the highest value on serving their family and hus-
bands. This is a function of marianismo, or the veneration
and expectation of Latino women to be like the Virgin Mary
(i.e., pure, suffering, enduring, and serving) (Hernandez-
Truyol 1998). In this way, traditional Latino culture tends to
place a high value on the virginity of women, associating
virginity with family honor (Fontes 1993). The cultural icon
of womanhood as the Virgin Mary could also signal to
women that sexual behavior, even if involuntary or coerced,
is impure (Lira et al. 1999). Because of these beliefs, sexual
victimization can be associated with feelings of shame that
can in turn hinder help-seeking efforts. Likewise, Latino
women experiencing other types of victimization may be less
likely to seek help as religious cultural values emphasize
silent suffering and perseverance.
The findings regarding the role of religiosity in help-
seeking among Latino women are mixed. In Sorenson’s
(1996) qualitative study, one Mexican–American partici-
pant stated:
From my experience, depending on the age of the
woman and how religious she may be and religion can
go both ways. It can either be a source of support for the
woman to leave- a healing- or it can also be something
that keeps her there because of guilt (p. 134).
In the same study, participants also identified clergy as
supporting the continuation of abusive situations (Sorenson
1996). Despite these findings, a few studies have found
Latino women to be more likely than non-Latinos to seek
help through clergy (Feldman-Summers and Ashworth
1981; Sorenson and Siegel 1992). However, other available
research has suggested that Latinos who are victims of
intimate partner violence (IPV) are less likely than non-
Latinos to disclose their victimization to a member of the
clergy (Ingram 2007). Due to these competing findings
from community samples and the availability of only one
recent study, it is necessary to examine the role of religion
in dealing with victimization (i.e., religious coping) and
traditional gender role beliefs in help-seeking behaviors
among Latino women on a national level.
Status and cultural differences may play an important
role in understanding the unique help-seeking profile of
Latino women. Few studies, however, have examined
factors such legal status, acculturation, gender role ideol-
ogy and religious coping. In addition, the available studies
have a number of limitations. Help-seeking research on
Latino women commonly focuses on partner violence
victimization, draws from convenience and purposive
samples, contains measurement limitations, and often fails
to account for acculturation and legal status/documentation
(Rizo and Macy 2011). This study examines the role of
legal status, acculturation, gender role ideology, and reli-
gious coping on help-seeking efforts of Latino women.
The Sexual Assault Among Latinas (SALAS) Study is
well suited to explore these issues as it offers a national
sample of Latino women and employed standardized mea-
sures to assess cultural factors identified in the literature,
thus overcoming limitations of previous research. Here, we
specifically test the importance of permanent legal status,
acculturation, gender role ideology, and religious coping on
formal and informal help-seeking. The aim is to elucidate
the effect of these cultural and status-based factors on the
help-seeking efforts of Latino women in order to identify
the needs of Latino women as they seek support.
Method
Participants
This research uses the data from the Sexual Assault Among
Latinas (SALAS) Study, a bilingual national phone survey,
conducted between May and September 2008. The study
assessed the experiences of a national sample of 2,000
Latino women living in the United States, the majority of
whom (90%) were living in high-density Latino areas (80%
of higher) based on Census 2000 data. The minimum
response rate (i.e., ratio of completed and screen out inter-
views to complete, screen-outs, partial interviews, refusals,
break-offs/refusals after the interview began, and no con-
tact) for the sample was 30.7% while the minimum coop-
eration rate (i.e., the same ratio excluding no contacts) was
53.7%. Numbers dialed that included no Latino women were
coded as screen-outs. The rate calculations are based on
standard definitions established by the (American Associa-
tion for Public Opinion Research 2009). Detailed explana-
tion of various response rate calculations are available in the
SALAS technical report (Cuevas and Sabina 2010).
Demographic characteristics of the full sample and the
victimized sample are shown in Table 1. The victimized
sample (n=714), given the focus of the current study, is
described here. The average age of the participants was
44.47 years of age. Approximately 52% had a high school
education or less. The majority of participants (70%) were
US citizens (either US born or naturalized) with a small
proportion of the sample being categorized as undocu-
mented (4.4%). Approximately 49% of the participants
were married, with the smallest percentages for cohabitat-
ing (9%), divorced (13.4%), and widowed (7.3%). Those
who reported victimization and thus, were asked about their
help-seeking responses, differed significantly from those
who were not victimized on all demographic variables.
In comparing our sample to available Census 2000 fig-
ures on Latinos, we have a notably higher median age that
was likely inflated by our screening procedures that did not
allow for participants under the age of 18. SALAS
Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363 349
123
Table 1 Demographic
characteristics of full sample
and victimized subsample
a
Compared using K–S non-
parametric test
b
Chi-square comparison made
on immigrant/non-immigrant
c
Chi-square comparison made
on married/committed versus all
other categories
d
Chi-square comparison made
on employed FT/PT versus all
other categories
Full sample Victimized
sample
Victimized versus
non-victimized p
Total N2,000 714
Age 47.76 44.47 \.001
Education level (%) \.001
a
Less than high school 38.3 26.1
High school grad/GED 24.9 25.6
Some college/trade school 14.0 17.5
2 year college graduate 6.9 9.3
4 year college graduate 10.3 13.0
Some graduate school 1.3 2.1
Graduate degree 4.2 6.5
Immigration status (%) \.001
b
US born citizen 28.5 42.3
Naturalized citizen 32.6 27.3
Permanent resident 27.7 20.1
Current visa 4.2 3.9
Refugee/asylum .1 .3
Awaiting status 2.3 1.7
None of the above/undocumented 4.7 4.4
Preferred language \.001
English 19.1 33.8
Spanish 76.4 59.2
Both Spanish and English 4.4 6.8
Other .2 .3
Relationship status .001
c
Single (never married) 13.2 18.0
Married 56.3 49.1
Cohabitating/committed relationship 7.6 9.0
Divorced 10.1 13.4
Widowed 10.1 7.3
Other 2.7 3.2
Employment status \.001
d
Employed full-time 7.7 34.6
Employed part-time 11.0 12.7
Unemployed 9.9 11.4
Retired 12.6 9.3
Homemaker 29.6 25.1
Other (students, public assistance, etc.) 9.1 13.1
Household income \.001
a
Under $9,999 26.1 20.7
$10,000–$19,999 26.0 23.9
$20,000–$29,999 16.3 16.8
$30,000–$39,999 9.4 9.8
$40,000–$49,999 6.7 7.6
$50,000–$59,999 4.0 4.4
$60,000–$69,999 2.8 3.2
$70,000–$79,999 2.1 3.1
$80,000 or more 6.5 10.4
350 Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363
123
respondents had higher rates of high school education and
beyond, a similar proportion of being married, and a
smaller proportion of being born in the US or being US
citizens than the overall US Latino population (Guzma
´n
2001; Ramirez 2004).
Measures
Demographic Information
Participant background information was asked on personal
characteristics including age, country of origin, immigra-
tion status, preferred language, sexual orientation, educa-
tional level, employment status, household income, housing
status, and relationship status. Participants were asked,
‘‘What country were you born in?’’ to assess immigrant
status. Those not born in the US were asked about immi-
gration status through a series of 5 questions probing
whether they held US citizenship, permanent US residency,
a current visa, refugee/asylum status, or were waiting for
one of the above statuses. Participants were coded as having
permanent legal status if they were either US born citizens,
naturalized citizens, or permanent residents.
Lifetime Trauma and Victimization History (LTVH)
A shortened version of the LTVH (Widom et al. 2005) was
used to assess interpersonal victimization. Participants
were asked if any of the following ever happened to them:
stalking, physical assaults, weapon assaults, physical
assaults in childhood, threats, threats with weapons, sexual
assault, attempted sexual assault, sexual fondling, kidnap-
ping, and witnessed victimization. Affirmative experiences
were then grouped into physical assaults, sexual assaults,
stalking, threats, witnessed violence, and kidnapping. For
example, physical assaults included questions about direct
physical assaults (Have you ever been shot at, stabbed,
struck, kicked, beaten, punched, slapped around, or other-
wise physically harmed?) and assaults with weapons (Have
you ever been actually assaulted with any kind of a
weapon, like a knife, gun, baseball bat, frying pan, scissors,
stick, rock, or bottle?). The complete list of questions and
their categorization is available in the full study technical
report (Cuevas and Sabina 2010). Each affirmative incident
on the LTVH was followed-up with questions regarding the
age of occurrence, duration, frequency, perpetrator, injury,
and posttraumatic reaction (e.g., being in danger of death
or serious injury and experiencing intense fear, helpless-
ness, or horror). The total number of victimizations was a
sum of all of the endorsed victimization questions
excluding witnessed events, which could be up to a total of
ten endorsed events. The original LTVH found adequate
predictive, criterion, and convergent validity (Widom et al.
2005) and others have used shortened versions of the
instrument (McFarlane et al. 2010; McIntyre and Widom
2011). Contact the corresponding author to obtain a copy of
the version used in this study.
Help-Seeking Questionnaire (HSQ)
The help-seeking questionnaire was developed specifically
for this study but was derived from two large scale studies
that assessed formal and informal help-seeking behaviors
(Block 2000; Gelles and Straus 1988). The questionnaire
focused on actions taken by respondents after experiencing
a specific incident of victimization. Participants who
reported victimization chose an anchor incident by identi-
fying the ‘‘most severe incident that occurred in the United
States and has upset you the most.’’ Anchor events were
designated as physical assault, sexual assault, threatened
violence, stalking, or kidnapping. Questions included
information about the various types of resources, both for-
mal and informal, that participants may have contacted.
Formal help-seeking efforts included contacting police, the
courts, social service agencies, and medical care. For
example, participants were asked, ‘‘Did you contact or visit
a doctor, medical center, or hospital after this incident?’’
Informal help-seeking behaviors were assessed by asking
participants, ‘‘Aside from people already mentioned, did
you ever talk to anyone about the incident; for example, a
family member, friend, or priest?’’ Those who answered
affirmatively were asked, ‘‘Who did you talk to about this
event?’’ Responses to this open-ended question were coded
as talking to parents, siblings, other family members, part-
ners, friends, clergy, or other professionals (e.g., teachers).
Help-seeking behaviors are presented in two ways. First,
formal and informal help-seeking responses are crossed to
produce four categories—no help-seeking, formal help-
seeking only, informal help-seeking only, or both formal
and informal help-seeking. Second, responses are presented
as any formal help-seeking (regardless of informal help-
seeking) and any informal help-seeking (regardless of
formal help-seeking). Here, we also present the specific
sources of formal help (e.g., police, social services, medi-
cal) and informal help (e.g., parents, partners, friends).
Brief Multidimensional Measure of Religiousness/
Spirituality (BMMRS)
The BMMRS is a 33-item multidimensional measure that
examines religiousness and spirituality designed for health-
related studies. Two indices, drawn from the RCOPE
(Pargament et al. 2000), gauge the role of religion in
coping with stressful life events. Participants are asked to
respond to six items that reflect the way they cope with
major problems in life on a scale of 1(a great deal) to 4
Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363 351
123
(not at all). Reverse coding of the items results in higher
scores on each of the scales, indicating a greater amount or
greater use of religious coping. For example, a higher score
on the positive religious coping scale indicates a greater
degree of seeing religiosity as a positive/supportive force
(e.g., ‘‘I work together with God as partners’’). A high
score on negative religious coping indicates spiritual ten-
sions and struggle (e.g., ‘‘I wonder whether God has
abandoned me’’). In our victimized subsample the internal
consistency coefficients (alphas) were .78 in English and
.76 in Spanish for positive religious coping and .46 in
English and .48 in Spanish for negative religious coping.
As the minimum level of acceptable reliability is .60 (Aron
and Aron 2003) we sought to increase reliability by
deleting one item, resulting in an alpha of .69 in English
and .63 in Spanish.
Brief Acculturation Rating Scale
of Mexican–Americans-II (Brief ARSMA-II)
The Brief ARSMA-II assesses both minority and majority
cultural identity (Bauman 2005) and includes a subset of
items from the complete ARSMA-II (Cuellar et al. 1995).
Participants report the degree to which each statement
accurately describes them on a scale of 1(not at all) to 5
(almost always). Statements query behaviors associated
with either Anglo (e.g., ‘‘I enjoy English language mov-
ies’’) or Mexican (e.g., ‘‘I enjoy reading books in Spanish’’)
orientations. Higher scores indicate a greater degree of
orientation with that culture. For example, a high score on
the Anglo scale suggests having a high orientation toward
the Anglo culture. The scale is often used with the Latino
population in general (Cuellar et al. 1995) and none of the
items refer to Mexican culture in particular, so we will
refer to this as Latino orientation. A reported alpha coef-
ficient for the Latino orientation scale was .91 and .73 for
the Anglo orientation scale derived from a sample of
middle school and elementary school students. Accultura-
tion scores also significantly correlated to the language
chosen to respond to the scale. For our victimized sample,
we found adequate internal consistency (alpha) for both the
Anglo orientation scale (.68 in English and .68 Spanish)
and Latino orientation scale (.86 in English and .70 in
Spanish).
Short Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI- Short Form)
This instrument measures sex-typed personality character-
istics by asking participants to report the degree to which
30 adjectives describe them (10 masculine, 10 feminine
and 10 neutral items) (Beere 1990). The BSRI is the most
commonly used instrument in gender-related research, has
been used with minority groups, and was normed in the
United States (Beere 1990; Bem 1981). The femininity and
masculinity scales are a calculation of the mean score for
the items on those scales. Both the masculinity and femi-
ninity scales aim to measure the degree to which someone
conforms to the culturally defined sex-appropriate behavior
for that sex role (Bem 1981). Femininity items include
adjectives such as ‘‘affectionate,’’ ‘‘compassionate,’’ and
‘‘gentle.’’ Masculinity items include adjectives such as
‘‘aggressive,’’ ‘‘assertive,’’ and ‘‘dominant.’’ For this sur-
vey, the standard 7-point Likert-type scale was abbreviated
to a 5-point Likert-type scale for easier phone administra-
tion. Both the masculine (.78 in English and .76 in Spanish)
and feminine (.88 in English and .86 in Spanish) scales had
strong reliability coefficients (alphas) in our victimized
subsample.
Procedures
Detailed description of the study procedures is available
from the final report (Cuevas and Sabina 2010). The
sample was obtained using random digit dial (RDD)
methodology, applied in high-density Latino areas based
on Census 2000 data. Related phone exchanges were used
and random digits added to produce a random sample
within high-density Latino neighborhoods. Telephone
interviewing has been found to be comparable with
in-person interviews in its reliability and validity (Bajos
et al. 1992; Bermack 1989; Czaja 1987; Hermens et al.
2006; Martin et al. 1989; Slutske et al. 1998). Participants
were screened for identification as a Latino woman and
being over the age of 18.
If there was only one eligible individual per household,
that individual was asked to participate in the study. If
there was more than one eligible participant, then the
‘‘most recent/next birthday’’ method was used to decide
which individual to interview (Salmon and Nichols 1983).
Upon obtaining informed consent, participants completed
the survey, which included questions about the state of
social issues, demographic information, acculturation,
lifetime victimization, help-seeking behaviors, religiosity,
gender role ideology, psychological symptoms, and post-
traumatic symptoms. All instruments were translated into
Spanish by the survey firm and verified by two bilingual
professionals, except for the ARSMA-II that already had a
standard translation. Participants could respond to the
survey in their preferred language (71.4% chose to com-
plete the interview in Spanish). Upon completing the sur-
vey, participants were asked if they felt distressed and were
offered a support hotline and/or a callback for follow-up. If
the participant requested a callback or the interviewer
identified a need for a callback, the case was screened for
follow-up. On follow-up calls it was ensured that the
individual was no longer distressed and they were provided
352 Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363
123
with information for additional support if needed (e.g.,
local social service agencies). Approximately 1% of the
sample required follow-up. After completing the survey,
participants were paid $10 for their participation.
Interviews were conducted using a Computer Assisted
Telephone Interview (CATI) system. An experienced
research firm with expertise in conducting surveys that ask
about interpersonal violence conducted the interviews. An
initial attempt and four callbacks were made to reach a
specific household. Once reached, up to three additional
calls were made until final disposition was obtained (e.g., a
completed survey or refusal). On average, the interviews
lasted 28 min. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) of
Northeastern University authorized all study procedures
with subsequent analyses approved by the IRB of The
Pennsylvania State University.
Analysis Strategy
The rates of help-seeking by various statuses identified in
the literature (i.e., immigration status, legal status and
language preference) are presented. For further analyses,
legal status was used instead of immigrant status. This
decision was made because legal status issues were more
closely linked to help-seeking in the literature, and legal
status is a subset of immigrant status, making inclusion of
both variables redundant. Next, a multinomial logistic
regression explored the differences between the four pro-
files of help-seeking: no help-seeking, informal only, for-
mal only, and both. The cultural variables used in the
models include permanent legal status, Anglo orientation,
Latino orientation, masculine sex role, feminine sex role,
positive religious coping, and negative religious coping as
suggested by prior research. Subsequently, a series of
logistic regressions were run to determine which cultural
factors predict overall and specific forms of formal and
informal help-seeking. All of the regression models control
for age, socioeconomic status, and total number of vic-
timization events. Socioeconomic status was calculated by
converting education and household income variables into
z-scores, adding those values, and then re-standardizing the
summed values.
Results
Of the full sample, 37.6% of the women reported at least
one lifetime victimization incident based on physical
assault, sexual assault, stalking, and threatened violence. In
childhood, 25.6% reported at least one victimization
experience, while 26.6% reported at least one victimization
experience in adulthood. For the victimized women, 52.6%
of them experienced more than one victimization incident,
with an average of almost three (2.93) victimization inci-
dents. For the full sample, the rate for any physical assault,
which includes weapon assault, was 22.2%; for sexual
assaults was 17.2%, which included completed sexual
assault/rape, attempted sexual assault, and fondling/forced
touch; for stalking victimization was 18.3%; and for
threatened victimization was 21.1%. A small percentage of
the full sample reported kidnapping (1.5%). Anchor events
for the help-seeking questions were physical assault
(31.2%), sexual assault (29.7%), threats (22.0%), stalking
(16.2%) and kidnapping (.8%).
The help-seeking profile of victimized women was as
follows: 23.3% did not seek any kind of help, 43.8% used
only informal help, 7.8% used only formal resources, and
25% utilized both formal and informal resources. Overall,
32% of victimized women sought some source of formal
help and 68.9% sought some source of informal help.
Table 2shows the rates of help-seeking by immigrant
status, language preference, and permanent legal status.
Although almost all comparisons were non-significant, the
trend reveals that immigrants and those who have a
Spanish language preference were less likely to seek cer-
tain types of informal help.
Bivariate correlation results (see Table 3for detailed
results) show both formal and informal help-seeking to be
positively, but weakly, related to Anglo orientation
(r=.10, p=.01; r=.09, p=.02, respectively). No
other significant correlations were found between cultural
factors and types of help-seeking. However, formal help-
seeking was positively associated with number of victim-
izations (r=.19, p\.001) and informal help-seeking was
negatively correlated with age (r=-.13, p\.001), pos-
itively correlated with SES (r=.13, p\.001), and posi-
tively correlated with number of victimizations (r=.08,
p=.03). Also a notable result was that the two types of
help-seeking correlated positively with each other (r=.11,
p=.003). Anglo orientation was also highly negatively
correlated with Spanish language preference (r =-.60,
p\.001) and moderately with Latino orientation (r=
-.42, p\.001).
Table 4reports multinomial logistic regression results
that compare the four profiles of help-seeking. Predictors
that distinguish among groups are age, SES, number of
victimizations, Anglo orientation, and negative religious
coping. Anglo orientation was related to increased odds of
formal help-seeking only, OR =1.49, p=.04, 95% CI
(1.02, 2.19) compared to no help-seeking. The number of
victimizations was associated with increased odds of both
types of help-seeking when compared to the no help-
seeking group, OR =1.24, p\.001, 95% CI (1.11, 1.39),
the informal only group, OR =1.32, p\.001, 95% CI
(1.20, 1.45), and the formal only group, OR =1.38,
p\.001, 95% CI (1.15, 1.66). Additionally, an increase in
Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363 353
123
SES was associated with decreased odds of formal help-
seeking in comparison to informal help-seeking only,
OR =.58, p=.005 (.40, .85). However, an increase in
SES was associated with increased odds of both forms of
help-seeking in comparison to formal only help-seeking,
OR =1.54, p=.03, 95% CI (1.04, 2.27). Lastly, negative
religious coping was associated with increased odds of
formal only in comparison to no help-seeking, OR =2.06,
p=.003, 95% CI (1.28, 3.31) and informal only,
OR =1.76, p=.006, 95% CI (1.17, 2.65), but decreased
odds of seeking both types of help in comparison to formal
only, OR =.44, p=.001, 95% CI (.27, .71).
Table 5shows detailed formal help-seeking regression
results. Individual regressions run for specific types of
formal help-seeking (i.e., police, restraining order, criminal
charges, social services, and medical), show that Anglo
orientation was not a significant predictor of help-seeking,
nor were any of the other cultural factors. However, the
number of victimizations significantly predicted any formal
help-seeking, OR =1.22, p\.001, 95% CI (1.13, 1.32),
reporting to police, OR =1.12, p=.02, 95% CI (1.02,
1.23), getting a restraining order, OR =1.19, p=.002,
95% CI (1.07, 1.33), filing criminal charges, OR =1.20,
p=.001, 95% CI (1.08, 1.34), and utilizing social ser-
vices, OR =1.26, p\.001, 95% CI (1.12, 1.41). The
more victimizations a participant experienced, the greater
the odds that they would seek these services.
Table 6shows detailed informal help-seeking regression
results. Results for informal help-seeking once again reveal
the number of victimizations as a significant predictor. The
more victimizations experienced, the greater the odds are
for disclosing to a sibling, OR =1.18, p=.001, 95% CI
(1.07, 1.30), or friend, OR =1.11, p=.02, 95% CI (1.02,
1.21), but odds are decreased for disclosing to a spouse or
partner, OR =.79, p=.01, 95% CI (.66, .95). Addition-
ally, those with an Anglo orientation and traditionally
masculine characteristics had greater odds of disclosing to
a friend, OR =1.27, p=.04, 95% CI (1.01, 1.60) and
OR =1.50, p=.006, 95% CI (1.13, 2.00), respectively.
Acculturation, specifically Latino orientation, also signifi-
cantly decreased the odds of talking to a sibling, OR =.80,
p=.05, 95% CI (.64, 1.00). Positive religious coping also
significantly predicted increased odds of any informal help-
seeking, OR =1.25, p=.05, 95% CI (1.00, 1.59), and
talking with other family members, OR =1.49, p=.02,
95% CI (1.06, 2.09) while negative religious coping sig-
nificantly decreased the odds of talking with a partner,
OR =.35, p=.03, 95% CI (.14, .90).
Discussion
Although previous research points to the importance of
legal status and cultural factors (i.e., acculturation, gender
Table 2 Rate of help-seeking by status
Victimized
sample
(n=714)
Non-immigrant
(n=296)
Immigrant
(n=404)
Permanent legal
status
(n=628)
Non-permanent
legal status
(n=72)
English language
preference
(n=240)
Spanish language
preference
(n=421)
Any formal 32.5% 33.4% 31.7% 33.4% 23.6%
32.1% 31.1%
Police 16.9 16.9 16.8 17.7 9.7
16.3 16.6
Restraining order 11.2 10.8 11.4 11.5 8.3 10.0 11.6
Criminal charges 10.9 10.8 10.9 11.0 9.7 12.1 10.5
Social services 9.9 10.5 9.3 10.3 5.7 11.7 8.9
Medical
a
34.7 35.7 34.0 35.6 25.0 33.8 35.9
Any informal 68.9 72.8 65.9 68.4 72.9 74.5 65.1*
Parent 26.6 26.5 26.8 25.8 34.3 25.1 25.7
Sibling 14.9 18.0 12.5* 15.4 10.0 18.8 13.0*
Other family 12.7 13.6 12.0 13.3 7.1 12.1 12.5
Partner 7.9 6.8 8.8 8.0 7.1 7.9 8.2
Friend 21.5 25.5 18.8* 21.8 20.0 28.5 18.8**
Clergy 5.7 7.8 4.0* 5.8 4.3 8.8 4.1*
Staff 4.4 4.4 4.5 5.0 0.0
5.0 3.8
Note. Some respondents did not provide enough information to determine immigrant status (n=14), legal status (n=14), or language
preference (n=3). Additionally, some respondents specified both English and Spanish were their languages of preference (n=50) or another
language (n=2)
a
Medical help-seeking was only asked of the 190 participants that reported an injury
*p\.05; ** p\.01;
p\.10
354 Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363
123
Table 3 Intercorrelations for help-seeking and cultural factors
Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1. Age –
2. SES -.11*** –
3. Vic count -.16*** .18*** –
4. Permanent legal status
a
.26*** .18*** .05* –
5. Lang preference
b
.11*** -.42*** -.32*** -.16*** –
6. Anglo -.11*** .46*** .25*** .21*** -.60*** –
7. Latino .05* -.37*** -.27*** -.15*** .64*** -.41*** –
8. Masculine -.11** .18*** .15*** .02 -.15*** .26*** -.11** –
9. Feminine .17*** -.04 .04 .03 .03 .07
.08* .13*** –
10. Pos rel coping .23*** .07 -.02 .05 .01 .04 .02 .01 .28*** –
11. Neg rel coping -.14*** -.12** .06 .01 .03 .03 .02 .09* -.06 -.10** –
12. Formal help-seeking
c
-.03 -.02 .19*** .06
-.01 .10** -.04 .04 .07
.02 .03 –
13. Informal help-seeking
c
-.13*** .13*** .08* -.03 -.10* .09* -.03 .07
.01 .05 -.04 .11** –
Note. n’s range from 649 to 714. SES socioeconomic status, vic count victimization count, lang preference language preference, Anglo Anglo orientation, Latino Latino orientation, masculine
masculine gender role, feminine feminine gender role, pos rel coping positive religious coping, neg rel coping negative religious coping
a
Coded 0 non-permanent, 1permanent
b
Coded 0 English, 1Spanish
c
Coded 0 no, 1yes
*p\.05; ** p\.01; *** p\.001;
p\.10
Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363 355
123
Table 4 Multinomial logistic regression of likelihood of help-seeking profile (n=686)
Informal only
versus no help
Formal only
versus no help
Both versus
no help
Formal only versus
informal only
Both versus
informal only
Both versus
formal only
Age .98 (.97, .99)** .99 (.97, 1.01) .98 (.96, 1.00)* 1.01 (.99, 1.03) 1.00 (.98, 1.01) .99 (.97, 1.01)
SES 1.19 (.97, 1.46) .69 (.47, 1.03)
1.07 (.85, 1.34) .58 (.40, .85)** .90 (.74, 1.09) 1.54 (1.04, 2.27)*
Vic count .94 (.84, 1.05) .90 (.75, 1.08) 1.24 (1.11, 1.39)*** .96 (.80, 1.14) 1.32 (1.20, 1.45)*** 1.38 (1.15, 1.66)***
Perm legal status
a
1.41 (.71, 2.82) .79 (.23, 2.71) .83 (.35, 1.97) .56 (.18, 1.77) .59 (.28, 1.24) 1.05 (.29, 3.76)
Anglo 1.19 (.93, 1.51) 1.49 (1.02, 2.19)* 1.30 (.99, 1.71)
1.26 (.88, 1.80) 1.10 (.86, 1.40) .87 (.59, 1.29)
Latino 1.09 (.88, 1.35) 1.00 (.70, 1.42) 1.12 (.88, 1.42) .92 (.66, 1.28) 1.03 (.84, 1.27) 1.12 (.79, 1.59)
Masculine 1.01 (.77, 1.33) .77 (.49, 1.22) 1.01 (.73, 1.39) .76 (.49, 1.18) 1.00 (.75, 1.33) 1.31 (.82, 2.09)
Feminine .97 (.71, 1.32) 1.14 (.68, 1.92) 1.23 (.84, 1.79) 1.18 (.72, 1.94) 1.27 (.90, 1.79) 1.08 (.63, 1.85)
Pos rel coping 1.24 (.95, 1.63) .99 (.64, 1.54) 1.31 (.96, 1.79)
.80 (.52, 1.21) 1.06 (.80, 1.39) 1.33 (.85, 2.08)
Neg rel coping 1.17 (.80, 1.70) 2.06 (1.28, 3.31)** .90 (.57, 1.41) 1.76 (1.17, 2.65)** .77 (.52, 1.13) .44 (.27, .71)***
v
2
(30) =99.36
Nag R
2
=.15
Note. All reference groups are listed second, so that informal versus no help shows the results for informal help-seeking in comparison to no help-seeking, for example. SES socioeconomic
status, vic count victimization count, perm legal status permanent legal status, Anglo Anglo orientation, Latino Latino orientation, masculine masculine gender role, feminine feminine gender
role, pos rel coping positive religious coping, neg rel coping negative religious coping
a
Reference group is those with permanent legal status
*p\.05; ** p\.01; *** pB.001;
p\.10
356 Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363
123
role, and religious coping) on the help-seeking efforts of
Latino women, this study found limited support for these
assertions. Generally, the rates of help-seeking did not
differ by immigrant status, legal status, or language pref-
erence. In addition, the cultural variables were not con-
sistently predictive of help-seeking efforts. Yet, formal
help-seeking was associated with Anglo orientation and
negative religious coping. Latino orientation, masculine
gender role, and religious coping predicted specific sources
of informal help-seeking. Neither permanent legal status
nor feminine gender role had any significant effects on
formal or informal help-seeking.
The findings support the existing literature by showing
that low levels of acculturation serve as a hindrance to
formal help-seeking (Cortina 2004; Lipsky et al. 2006;
Romero et al. 1999; Wells et al. 1987; West et al. 1998). It
is likely that Anglo acculturation, as it is largely based on
language preference, increases access to formal services
because of a better command of the English language.
Additionally, those with high levels of Anglo acculturation
may have more knowledge of legal, medical, and social
services in the US than individuals with low levels of
Anglo acculturation. For example, recent Latino immi-
grants showed a lack of knowledge of local domestic
violence agencies and protective orders (Moracco et al.
2005) as well as a reluctance to call the police (Ammar
et al. 2005). Anglo-acculturated Latino women may be
more inclined to disclose experiences of victimization and
seek social services than Latino women steeped in Latino
culture. Indeed, traditional Latino culture stresses that
personal issues should be kept within the family (Canive
and Castillo 1997; Fierros and Smith 2006; Torres 1998a,
b). Also, as immigrants acculturate they become more
willing to identify victimization as a crime and know more
about available services (Ammar et al. 2005; Erez et al.
2009). The effect of Anglo acculturation on formal help-
seeking was found when comparing those who sought
formal help only to those who sought no help. However,
other analyses of formal help-seeking such as calling the
police, filing criminal charges, or seeking medical services,
did not reveal significant results for Anglo acculturation.
Thus, we must be careful to also acknowledge that Anglo
acculturation may not be as influential on formal help-
seeking as commonly assumed.
The lack of association between acculturation and spe-
cific forms of formal help-seeking such as calling the
police, seeking social services, and getting medical atten-
tion, is an uncommon finding. Several studies found that
highly acculturated women utilize these services more
frequently than women with lower levels of acculturation
(Ammar et al. 2005; Arroyo et al. 1997; Sorenson and
Siegel 1992; Wells et al. 1987). Characteristics of the
SALAS sample may aid in understanding this discrepancy.
First, respondents in this sample lived in high-density
Latino neighborhoods that may be more likely to offer
services in Spanish that are sensitive to Latino culture.
Thus, in these settings, Anglo orientation may be less
critical than in more diverse settings where English is more
likely to be the only language spoken. Second, the study
sample and the victimized subsample generally reported
Table 5 Logistic regression of cultural factors predicting formal help-seeking (n=693)
Dependent variable (Formal help-seeking)
Predictor Any formal
OR (95% CI)
Police
OR (95% CI)
Restraining order
OR (95% CI)
Criminal charges
OR (95% CI)
Social services OR
(95% CI) (n=687)
Medical OR
(95% CI) (n=188)
Age 1.00 (.98, 1.01) 1.01 (.99, 1.02) .99 (.97, 1.01) 1.00 (.98, 1.02) .97 (.95, 1.00)** 1.00 (.98, 1.03)
SES .88 (.74, 1.04) .92 (.75, 1.13) .80 (.62, 1.04)
.70 (.53, .93)* .91 (.69, 1.19) .75 (.53, 1.04)
Vic count 1.22 (1.13, 1.32)*** 1.12 (1.02, 1.23)* 1.19 (1.07, 1.33)** 1.20 (1.08, 1.34)*** 1.26 (1.12, 1.41)*** 1.16 (1.00, 1.34)
Perm legal
status
1.59 (.84, 3.00) 2.14 (.86, 5.32) 1.53 (.60, 3.93) 1.18 (.48, 2.89) 2.12 (.69, 6.46) 1.82 (.50, 6.57)
Anglo 1.20 (.98, 1.47)
1.11 (.87, 1.42) 1.26 (.95, 1.68) 1.07 (.80, 1.44) 1.23 (.90, 1.70) 1.29 (.84, 1.98)
Latino 1.05 (.88, 1.25) 1.08 (.87, 1.34) 1.26 (.96, 1.65)
.92 (.71, 1.19) 1.15 (.87, 1.52) 1.07 (.76, 1.50)
Masculine .93 (.74, 1.19) 1.20 (.88, 1.62) 1.04 (.73, 1.49) .93 (.65, 1.33) .89 (.60, 1.32) .70 (.43, 1.13)
Feminine 1.24 (.93, 1.64) 1.31 (.90, 1.91) 1.51 (.93, 2.44)
1.25 (.81, 1.93) 1.30 (.81, 2.09) 1.14 (.69, 1.88)
Pos rel coping 1.06 (.84, 1.33) .91 (.69, 1.21) 1.13 (.80, 1.60) 1.13 (.80, 1.61) 1.28 (.88, 1.85) 1.12 (.73, 1.73)
Neg rel coping 1.08 (.81, 1.44) .80 (.53, 1.19) .89 (.57, 1.39) 1.04 (.68, 1.60) .87 (.53, 1.40) 1.37 (.72, 2.60)
Nag R
2
.08*** .05* .07** .06* .10*** .09
Note. SES socioeconomic status, vic count victimization count, perm legal status permanent legal status, Anglo Anglo orientation, Latino Latino
orientation, masculine masculine gender role, feminine feminine gender role, pos rel coping positive religious coping, neg rel coping negative religious
coping
*pB.05; ** p\.01; *** pB.001;
p\.10
Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363 357
123
Table 6 Logistic regression of cultural factors predicting informal help-seeking (n=686)
Dependent variable (informal help-seeking)
Predictor Any informal
OR (95% CI)
Parents
OR (95% CI)
Sibling
OR (95% CI)
Other family
OR (95% CI)
Partner
OR (95% CI)
Friend
OR (95% CI)
Clergy
OR (95% CI)
Prof
OR (95% CI)
Age .98 (.97, .99)** .98 (.97, .99)** 1.00 (.98, 1.01) 1.01 (1.00, 1.03) 1.00 (.98, 1.02) .99 (.97, 1.00)
1.01 (.98, 1.04) 1.02 (.99, 1.05)
SES 1.24 (1.04, 1.48)* 1.39 (1.17, 1.65)*** 1.07 (.87, 1.33) .86 (.68, 1.09) 1.32 (1.00, 1.75)
1.03 (.86, 1.24) 1.08 (.80, 1.47) 1.17 (.83, 1.64)
Vic count 1.08 (.99, 1.18)
.96 (.88, 1.05) 1.18 (1.07, 1.30)*** 1.03 (.92, 1.15) .79 (.66, .95)* 1.11 (1.02, 1.21)* 1.10 (.95, 1.27) 1.11 (.94, 1.30)
Perm legal status .78 (.42, 1.42) .69 (.38, 1.25) 1.47 (.61, 3.55) 1.69 (.62, 4.60) 1.13 (.40, 3.22) .93 (.47, 1.85) .71 (.19, 2.68) –
Anglo 1.11 (.91, 1.36) 1.03 (.83, 1.27) .82 (.63, 1.08) 1.08 (.81, 1.42) .85 (.61, 1.20) 1.27 (1.01, 1.60)* 1.24 (.81, 1.89) 1.09 (.68, 1.75)
Latino 1.01 (.91, 1.32) 1.14 (.94, 1.37) .80 (.64, 1.00)* .97 (.76, 1.24) 1.04 (.76, 1.42) 1.06 (.87, 1.29) .81 (.59, 1.12) 1.01 (.70, 1.45)
Masculine 1.07 (.84, 1.35) 1.05 (.82, 1.35) .79 (.58, 1.08) 1.23 (.88, 1.71) .89 (.60, 1.32) 1.50 (1.13, 2.00)** 1.04 (.64, 1.68) 1.08 (.64, 1.83)
Feminine 1.02 (.78, 1.33) 1.18 (.87, 1.58) 1.09 (.77, 1.56) .83 (.57, 1.19) 1.46 (.86, 2.49) .94 (.69, 1.27) 1.27 (.69, 2.35) .76 (.44, 1.31)
Pos rel coping 1.26 (1.00, 1.59)* .92 (.73, 1.17) 1.14 (.85, 1.54) 1.49 (1.06, 2.09)* 1.05 (.70, 1.57) .98 (.77, 1.27) 1.10 (.69, 1.73) 1.30 (.76, 2.20)
Neg rel coping .83 (.63, 1.11) .97 (.71, 1.33) .80 (.52, 1.25) .74 (.46, 1.18) .35 (.14, .90)* .98 (.71, 1.35) .84 (.42, 1.66) .66 (.27, 1.59)
Nag R
2
.07*** .07*** .06** .04 .08** .07*** .05 .07
Note. SES socioeconomic status, vic count victimization count, perm legal status permanent legal status, Anglo Anglo orientation, Latino Latino orientation, masculine masculine gender role,
feminine feminine gender role, pos rel coping positive religious coping, neg rel coping negative religious coping
– Unable to estimate parameter
*p\.05, ** pB.01, *** pB.001,
p\.10
358 Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363
123
low levels of acculturation, taking into account their Latino
and Anglo orientations. In fact, using Cuellar’s cutoff
scores (1995) the mean score for the victimized sample
would be coded as ‘‘Mexican-oriented to approximately
balanced bicultural;’’ Level II of the five levels of accul-
turation. Therefore, the sample likely did not contain many
highly Anglo-acculturated Latino women, potentially
attenuating the range of this variable and making it more
difficult to detect an effect for Anglo orientation. These
sample characteristics may account for the counter-intui-
tive findings.
Importantly, permanent legal status was not associated
with formal help-seeking, also conflicting with prior
research findings that point to a fear of deportation among
Latino immigrants. These help-seeking differences may not
have been detected because the SALAS sample contained
few non-permanent residents. Indeed, several research
studies with more diverse samples have found effects for
legal status (Ammar et al. 2005; Brabeck and Guzman
2009); and fears of deportation for self, children or partners
are certainly understandable fears that would hinder formal
help-seeking (Acevedo 2000; Bauer et al. 2000; Dutton
et al. 2000;Lewis et al. 2005; Murdaugh et al. 2004;
Sorenson 1996). Our findings suggest that those with per-
manent legal status may be more likely to seek formal help;
for example, those with permanent legal status contacted
the police more often (17.7%) than those without perma-
nent legal status (9.7%), though this did not reach statistical
significance.
Religion may also shape Latino women’s role in rela-
tionships and their responses to victimization. This study
found a limited effect for the role of religious coping.
Negative religious coping was associated with increased
odds of formal help-seeking only and decreased odds of
talking to a partner. Perhaps negative religious coping as
represented by the item, ‘‘I wonder whether God has
abandoned me’’ is associated with shame or internalized
emotions whereby friends and family are also viewed as
potential abandoners. Women with high negative religious
coping scores may also experience more adverse effects to
victimization, spurring formal help-seeking, given that
negative religious coping tends to be associated with
depression and post-traumatic stress (Pargament et al.
2011). Positive religious coping, on the other hand, was
associated with informal help-seeking, specifically talking
to other family members. Those who rely on positive
religious coping may talk with others as a mechanism to
help them find meaning in life and their victimization.
Positive religious coping has been previously linked to
increased self-esteem, physical well-being, life satisfaction,
active coping and post-traumatic growth (Pargament et al.
2011), underscoring the benefit of relying on God when
dealing with negative life events. Positive religious coping
potentially served as a gateway for women to talk about
their victimization.
Demographic factors such as age and socio-economic
status (SES) additionally influenced help-seeking behav-
iors. For instance, older participants were less likely to seek
social services. Perhaps older age is associated with tra-
ditional Latino culture that stresses privacy. With regard to
SES, higher SES appears to be associated with informal
help-seeking, especially seeking informal help from par-
ents. Nonetheless, higher SES is related to decreased odds
of formal help-seeking and filing criminal charges. Perhaps
those with relatively more education and economic
resources are hesitant to seek formal services that may
stress leaving the relationship and rely more often on
informal mechanisms to confront victimization. This calls
attention to the economic dependence often evident in
domestic violence situations and the cost-benefit analyses
used in decision-making (Liang et al. 2005). High-SES
Latino women may also be hesitant to disclose victimiza-
tion given their status in their communities.
Taking these findings together, there appears to be a
limited, but important influence of cultural factors on
Latino women’s help-seeking. Some findings from this
study and findings from previous research point to the need
to improve services for Latino women. Various qualitative
studies have documented the limitations of legal, medical,
and social services for female Latino victims (Bauer et al.
2000; Fontes 1993; Kasturirangan and Williams 2003;
Kelly 2006; Rodriguez et al. 2001) and quantitative studies
have documented the limited mental health services
available for Spanish-speakers (Cabassa et al. 2006;US
Department of Health and Human Services 2001). Con-
sidering previous research and the current findings, it is
recommended that formal help-seeking agencies work to
(1) ensure that bilingual services are available, (2) increase
cultural sensitivity within service provision, and (3) work
to increase awareness of available services within the
Latino community. Interventions must be culturally and
linguistically appropriate so that those less familiar with
Anglo culture can access services with minimal barriers.
Additionally, formal services may be falling short in terms
of providing information to Latino communities. Given
that around two-thirds of victims did not seek formal ser-
vices, outreach is needed to inform members of Latino
communities about available support. Immigrants, espe-
cially, need to be made aware of available services and
protections in the US in order to empower them to confront
victimization. In line with other researchers (Brabeck and
Guzman 2009; Dutton et al. 2000), we recommend using
the strengths of the Latino community, including a strong-
knit family and extended family unit, to confront violence.
As the results show, more than half of confidants were
family members, representing the main source of informal
Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363 359
123
help. These relationships are pivotal in women’s decisions
on how to respond to violence in their lives.
Another important point for consideration is the role of
informal help-seeking. This study and others find that
informal help-seeking is the most common form of help-
seeking (Ingram 2007; Sorenson and Siegel 1992). Indeed,
informal networks can provide emotional and instrumental
support along with knowledge of available services.
Informal supports are also easy to access, likely know the
situation at hand, and have longer relationships with
women than formal supports. Thus, we offer at least two
important implications. First, providing information to
informal supports about how to respond in a caring, helpful
and informative way to victimization is a potentially
influential way to aid victims. Efforts to educate and
empower bystanders which have been found to be effective
on college campuses (for example, Moynihan et al. 2011)
should be expanded to include community and family
members. The reactions of the first people to whom victims
disclose their experience have a substantial impact on
future efforts and recovery (Filipas and Ullman 2001;
Goodkind et al. 2003), by providing emotional support,
encouraging formal help-seeking, or by minimizing and
blaming, for example. Second, models that utilize com-
munity members may also be appropriate for this popula-
tion. Collaborative models that blend informal/formal
sources of help by using lay persons who may have been
victimized themselves to organize community-based dis-
cussion groups builds on the strengths within the Latino
community. Promotora (community health workers)
models are effective ways to engage Latinas (Bloom et al.
2009). Overall, the use of informal supports should not be
minimized, but instead valued and if possible drawn upon
to further aid women.
There are several limitations to the current study. First,
help-seeking was assessed in response to one victimization
and therefore a comprehensive help-seeking history was
not obtained. In order to increase recall accuracy and to
provide recommendations relevant to US formal services,
participants were asked to choose an anchor event for help-
seeking responses (i.e., their most distressing victimization
that took place in the US). Other factors such as fami-
lism—the importance placed on family manifested in
attitudinal, behavioral, and structural patterns (Coohey
2001)—were not measured here due to time limitations in
the survey. Measurement limitations include a relatively
low alpha on the negative religious coping scale, intro-
ducing measurement error. Further psychometric evalua-
tion is needed to understand why deleting one item
differentially effected English and Spanish versions.
Perhaps the construct of negative religious coping is
manifested differently for these populations or item inter-
pretation is not consistent across languages. Additionally,
construct validity for the ARSMA-II was derived from a
university sample, which may have limited appropriateness
for this study. Further, as SALAS focuses exclusively on
Latino women, we cannot speak to comparisons with other
racial/ethnic groups. We must also acknowledge the limi-
tations of telephone interviewing that excludes cell-phone
only households and may systematically exclude the most
vulnerable segments of the Latino population if they do not
have landlines (e.g., transient farm-workers, people who
are homeless). Telephone interviewing may also under-
sample younger participants and those of lower socioeco-
nomic status (Blumberg and Luke 2009). Furthermore,
women who were uncomfortable discussing victimization
experiences may have elected to not participate in the
phone survey.
Several constructs are not measured in the current study
that would further our understanding of help-seeking
efforts. First, factors more proximal to victimization and
everyday survival need to be included in research studies.
For example, severity of victimization, safety of children,
relationship with perpetrator, potential retaliation, eco-
nomic options and housing are more immediate concerns
that must be addressed and considered as women work to
stop the violence in their lives. Indeed, the most consistent
predictor of help-seeking in the current study was the
number of victimization types; specifically, more victim-
ization types were associated with increased odds of help-
seeking. Thus, women become more active in resisting
violence as they experience varying forms of victimization.
Second, future research should consider the rich diversity
within the Latino community, including documented dif-
ferences among Latino ethnic groups, which may contrib-
ute to differences among help-seeking responses. Third,
while this study queried whether women utilized formal
services or sought informal help, we do not know how
beneficial these services or personal disclosures were.
More critically, this study and others focus on a limited
set of behaviors that researchers and service providers have
defined as favorable. Help-seeking, as operationalized by
utilizing formal and informal supports, is not the only
mechanism by which women confront violence in their
lives. Women’s broader responses to violence may include
blocking, retaliation, saving money, or resisting roles. Fine
et al. (2005) conducted detailed life narratives with Puerto
Rican women and identified paths of resistance including
concerns about respect, remaining connected to family and
community, a grounded sense of responsibility, caretaking
to protect mothers and children, and using the public safety
net when needed. These ways of resistance are largely
situated in the historical, cultural, class, and racial position
of women (Erez et al. 2009; Fine et al. 2005) and are
missed by narrowing in on formal or informal help-seek-
ing. For immigrant women, formal help-seeking may
360 Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363
123
represent an aberration of cultural values and instead,
methods to end violence and maintain the family unit may
be favored (Erez and Hartley 2003). An examination of the
cultural-fit of services is needed as well as a broader per-
spective on the ways in which women respond to violence
in their lives.
Help-seeking among Latino women is influenced by a
myriad of factors. Here we measured overarching orien-
tations that yielded small effects on help-seeking decisions.
More proximal antecedents may play a larger role than the
cultural factors that we have examined in this study.
Nonetheless, we see that familiarity with American culture
does play a role in formal help-seeking. Thus, we must
consider both the accessibility of services and the will-
ingness of less acculturated Latino women to access these
services. Overall, the findings do reinforce that Latino
culture and values are preserved by the population and that
these constructs do shape the ways in which women
respond to victimization, either formally or within their
social networks.
Acknowledgments This project was supported by Grant 2007-WG-
BX-0051 awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of
Justice Programs, US Department of Justice. Findings and conclu-
sions of the research reported here are those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the US Depart-
ment of Justice.
References
Acevedo, M. J. (2000). Battered immigrant Mexican women’s
perspectives regarding abuse and help-seeking. Journal of
Multicultural Social Work, 8, 243–282.
American Association for Public Opinion Research. (2009). Standard
definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates
for surveys (6th ed.). Deerfield, IL: AAPOR.
Ammar, N. H., Orloff, L. E., Dutton, M. A., & Aguilar Hass, G.
(2005). Calls to police and police response: A case study of
Latina immigrant women in the USA. International Journal of
Police Science and Management, 7, 230–244.
Aron, A., & Aron, E. N. (2003). Statistics for psychology (3rd ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall/Pearson Education.
Arroyo, J. A., Simpson, T. L., & Aragon, A. S. (1997). Childhood
sexual abuse among Hispanic and non-Hispanic White college
women. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 19, 57–68.
Bajos, N., Spira, A., Ducot, B., & Messiah, A. (1992). Analysis of
sexual behaviour in France (ACSF): A comparison between two
modes of investigation: Telephone survey and face-to-face
survey. AIDS, 6, 315–323.
Bauer, H. M., Rodriguez, M. A., Quiroga, S. S., & Flores-Ortiz, Y. G.
(2000). Barriers to health care for abused Latina and Asian
immigrant women. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and
Underserved, 11, 33–44.
Bauman, S. (2005). The reliability and validity of the brief
acculturation rating scale for Mexican Americans-II for children
and adolescents. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 27,
426–441.
Beere, C. A. (1990). Gender roles: A handbook of tests and measures.
Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Bem, S. L. (1981). Bem sex role inventory manual. Menlo Park, CA:
Mind Garden.
Bermack, E. (1989). Effect of telephone and face-to-face communi-
cation on rated extent of self-disclosure by female college
students. Psychological Reports, 65, 259–267.
Block, C. R. (2000). Chicago women’s health risk study (part I and II),
final report, NCJ 183128. Washington, DC: United States Depart-
ment of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=183128.
Bloom, T., Wagman, J., Hernandez, R., Yragui, N., Hernandez-
Valdovinos, N., Dahlstrom, M., & Glass, N. (2009). Partnering
with community-based organizations to reduce intimate partner
violence. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 31, 244–257.
Blumberg, S. J., & Luke, J. (2009). Wireless substitution: Early
release of estimates from the national health interview survey,
July–December 2008. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for
Health Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/
nhis/earlyrelease/wireless200905.htm.
Brabeck, K. M., & Guzman, M. R. (2009). Exploring Mexican-origin
intimate partner abuse survivors’ help-seeking within their
sociocultural contexts. Violence and Victims, 24, 817–832.
Cabassa, L. J., Zayas, L. H., & Hansen, M. C. (2006). Latino adults’
access to mental health care: A review of epidemiological
studies. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental
Health Services Research, 33, 316–330.
Canive, J. M., & Castillo, D. (1997). Hispanic veterans diagnosed
with PTSD: Assessment and treatment issues. NC-PTSD Clinical
Quarterly, 7(1), 12–14.
Coohey, C. (2001). The relationship between familism and child
maltreatment in Latino and Anglo families. Child Maltreatment,
6, 130–142.
Cortina, L. M. (2004). Hispanic perspectives on sexual harassment
and social support. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
30, 570–584.
Cuellar, I., Arnold, B., & Maldonado, R. (1995). Acculturation rating
scale for Mexican Americans-II: A revision of the original
ARSMA scale. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 17,
275–304.
Cuevas, C. A., & Sabina, C. (2010). Final report: Sexual Assault
among Latinas (SALAS) study (Document No. 230445). Wash-
ington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
Czaja, S. J. (1987). Human factors in office automation. In G. Salvendy
(Ed.), Handbook of human factors (pp. 1587–1616). Oxford,
England: Wiley.
Dutton, M. A. (1996). Battered women’s strategic response to
violence: The role of context. In J. L. Edleson & Z. C. Eisikovits
(Eds.), Future interventions with battered women and their
families (pp. 105–124). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Dutton, M. A., Orloff, L. E., & Hass, G. A. (2000). Characteristics of
help-seeking behaviors, resources and service needs of battered
immigrant Latinas: Legal and policy implications. Georgetown
Journal on Poverty Law and Policy, 7, 245–306.
Erez, E., Adelman, M., & Gregory, C. (2009). Intersections of
immigration and domestic violence: Voices of battered immi-
grant women. Feminist Criminology, 4, 32–56.
Erez, E., & Hartley, C. C. (2003). Battered immigrant women and the
legal system: A therapeutic jurisprudence perspective. Western
Criminology Review, 4, 155–159.
Feldman-Summers, S., & Ashworth, C. D. (1981). Factors related to
intentions to report a rape. Journal of Social Issues, 37, 53–70.
Fierros, M., & Smith, C. (2006). The relevance of hispanic culture to
the treatment of a patient with posttraumatic stress disorder.
Psychiatry, 3(1), 49–56.
Filipas, H. H., & Ullman, S. E. (2001). Social reactions to sexual
assault victims from various support sources. Violence and
Victims, 16, 673–692.
Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363 361
123
Fine, M., Roberts, R. A., Weis, L., Sokoloff, N. J., & Pratt, C. (2005).
Puerto Rican battered women redefining gender, sexuality, culture,
violence, and resistance. In N. J. Sokoloff (Ed.), Domestic violence
at the margins: Readings on race, class, gender, and culture (pp.
272–292). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Fontes, L. A. (1993). Disclosures of sexual abuse by Puerto Rican
children: Oppression and cultural barriers. Journal of Child
Sexual Abuse, 2(1), 21–35.
Gelles, R., & Straus, M. (1988). Intimate violence: The causes and
consequences of abuse in the American family. New York, NY:
Simon & Schuster.
Goodkind, J. R., Gillum, T. L., Bybee, D. I., & Sullivan, C. M.
(2003). The impact of family and friends’ reactions on the well-
being of women with abusive partners. Violence Against Women,
9, 347–373.
Guzma
´n, B. (2001). The Hispanic population 2000: Census 2000
brief. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.
Hermens, M. L. M., Ade
`r, H. J., van Hout, H. P. J., Terluin, B., van
Dyck, R., & de Haan, M. (2006). Administering the MADRS by
telephone or face-to-face: A validity study. Annals of General
Psychiatry, 5. doi:10.1186/1744-859X-5-3.
Hernandez-Truyol, B. E. (1998). Latina multidimensionality and
LatCrit Possibilites: Culture, gender, and sex. University of
Miami Law Review, 53, 811–829.
Ingram, E. M. (2007). A comparison of help seeking between Latino
and non-Latino victims of intimate partner violence. Violence
Against Women, 13, 159–171.
Kasturirangan, A., & Williams, E. N. (2003). Counseling Latina
battered women: A qualitative study of the Latina perspective.
Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 31,
162–178.
Kelly, U. (2006). What will happen if I tell you? Battered Latina
women’s experiences of health care. CJNR: Canadian Journal of
Nursing Research, 38(4), 78–95.
Lewis, S. F., Resnick, H. S., Ruggiero, K. J., Smith, D. W., Kilpatrick,
D. G., Best, C. L., et al. (2005a). Assault, psychiatric diagnoses,
and sociodemographic variables in relation to help-seeking
behavior in a national sample of women. Journal of Traumatic
Stress, 18, 97–105.
Lewis, M. J., West, B., Bautista, L., Greenberg, A. M., & Done-Perez,
I. (2005b). Perceptions of service providers and community
members on intimate partner violence within a Latino commu-
nity. Health Education and Behavior, 32, 69–83.
Liang, B., Goodman, L., Tummala-Narra, P., & Weintraub, S. (2005).
A theoretical framework for understanding help-seeking pro-
cesses among survivors of intimate partner violence. American
Journal of Community Psychology, 36, 71–84.
Lipsky, S., Caetano, R., Field, C. A., & Larkin, G. L. (2006). The role
of intimate partner violence, race, and ethnicity in help-seeking
behaviors. Ethnicity and Health, 11, 81–100.
Lira, L. R., Koss, M. P., & Russo, N. F. (1999). Mexican American
women’s definitions of rape and sexual abuse. Hispanic Journal
of Behavioral Sciences, 21, 236–265.
Martin, W. S., Duncan, W. J., Powers, T. L., & Sawyer, J. C. (1989).
Costs and benefits of selected response inducement techniques in
mail survey research. Journal of Business Research, 19, 67–79.
McFarlane, J., Symes, L., Frazier, L., McGlory, G., Henderson-
Everhardus, M., Watson, K., et al. (2010). Connecting the dots of
heart disease, poor mental health, and abuse to understand gender
disparities and promote women’s health: a prospective cohort
analysis. Health Care for Women International, 31, 313–326.
McIntyre, J. K., & Widom, C. S. (2011). Childhood victimization and
crime victimization. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26,
640–663.
Moracco, K. E., Hilton, A., Hodges, K. G., & Frasier, P. Y. (2005).
Knowledge and attitudes about intimate partner violence among
immigrant Latinos in rural North Carolina. Violence Against
Women, 11, 337–352.
Moynihan, M. M., Banyard, V. L., Arnold, J. S., Eckstein, R. P., &
Stapleton, J. G. (2011). Sisterhood may be powerful for reducing
sexual and intimate partner violence: An evaluation of the
bringing in the Bystander in-person program with sorority
members. Violence Against Women, 17, 703–719.
Murdaugh, C., Hunt, S., Sowell, R., & Santana, I. (2004). Domestic
violence in Hispanics in the Southeastern United States: A survey
and needs analysis. JournalofFamilyViolence,19, 107–115.
Pargament, K., Feuille, M., & Burdzy, D. (2011). The Brief RCOPE:
current psychometric status of a short measure of religious
coping. Religions, 2, 51–76.
Pargament, K., Koenig, H., & Perez, L. (2000). The many methods of
religious coping: Development and initial validation of the
RCOPE. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 58, 519–543.
Pena, M., & Frehill, L. M. (1998). Latina religious practice:
Analyzing cultural dimensions in measures of religiosity.
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 37, 620–635.
Phinney, J. S., & Flores, J. (2002). ‘‘Unpackaging’’ acculturation:
Aspects of acculturation as predictors of traditional sex roles
attitudes. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 320–331.
Ramirez, R. R. (2004). We the people: Hispanics in the United States.
Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.
Ramos-Sanchez, L., & Atkinson, D. R. (2009). The relationships
between Mexican American acculturation, cultural values,
gender, and help-seeking intentions. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 87, 62–71.
Rennison, C. M. (2007). Reporting to the police by Hispanic victims
of violence. Violence and Victims, 22, 754–772.
Rizo, C. F., & Macy, R. J. (2011). Help seeking and barriers of
Hispanic partner violence survivors: A systematic review of the
literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 16, 250–264.
Rodriguez, M. A., Sheldon, W. R., Bauer, H. M., & Pe
´rez-Stable, E. J.
(2001). The factors associated with disclosure of intimate partner
abuse to clinicians. The Journal of Family Practice, 50(4),
338–344.
Romero, G. J., Wyatt, G. E., Loeb, T. B., Carmona, J. V., & Solis, B.
M. (1999). Prevalence and circumstances of child sexual abuse
among Latina women. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences,
21, 351–365.
Salmon, C. T., & Nichols, J. S. (1983). The next-birthday method of
respondent selection. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 270–276.
Schwartz, S. J., Unger, J. B., Zamboanga, B. L., & Szapocznik, J.
(2010). Rethinking the concept of acculturation: Implications for
theory and research. American Psychologist, 65, 237–251.
Slutske, W. S., True, W. R., Scherrer, J. F., Goldberg, J., Bucholz, K.
K., Heath, A. C., et al. (1998). Long-term reliability and validity
of alcoholism diagnoses and symptoms in a large national
telephone interview survey. Alcoholism, Clinical and Experi-
mental Research, 22(3), 553–558.
Sorenson, S. B. (1996). Violence against women: Examining ethnic
differences and commonalities. Evaluation Review, 20, 123–145.
Sorenson, S. B., & Siegel, J. M. (1992). Gender, ethnicity, and sexual
assault: Findings from a Los Angeles study. Journal of Social
Issues, 48, 93–104.
Torres, J. B. (1998a). Masculinity and gender roles among Puerto
Rican men: Machismo on the US mainland. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 68, 16–26.
Torres, S. (1998b). Intervening with battered Hispanic pregnant
women. In J. Campbell (Ed.), Empowering survivors of abuse:
Health care for battered women and their children (pp.
259–270). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
US Department of Health and Human Services. (2001). Mental
health: Culture, race, and ethnicity. Rockville, MD: US
Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse
362 Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363
123
and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Mental
Health Services.
Valentine, S., & Mosley, G. (2000). Acculturation and sex-role
attitudes among Mexican Americans: A longitudinal analysis.
Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 22, 104–113.
Wells, K., Hough, R. L., Golding, J. M., & Burnam, A. M. (1987).
Which Mexican-Americans underutilize health services? The
American Journal of Psychiatry, 144, 918–922.
West, C. M., Kaufman Kantor, G., & Jasinski, J. L. (1998).
Sociodemographic predictors and cultural barriers to help-
seeking behavior by Latina and Anglo American battered
women. Violence and Victims, 13, 361–375.
Widom, C. S., Dutton, M. A., Czaja, S. J., & DuMont, K. A. (2005).
Development and validation of a new instrument to assess
lifetime trauma and victimization history. Journal of Traumatic
Stress, 18, 519–531.
Am J Community Psychol (2012) 49:347–363 363
123
