Network resources and educational outcomes among Mexican-origin youth.

Despite schooling gains over the last two decades, Mexican-origin adults complete fewer years of schooling than adults from other ethnic backgrounds. Explanations emphasizing network resources suggest Mexican-origin adolescents have social ties that are more likely to be "closed" from adults with experience in higher education-and this, in turn, inhibits the transition to college. In this study, we draw on unusual network data measuring characteristics of students' peers and friends, as well as the socioeconomic background of peers' and friends' parents. We demonstrate that Mexican-origin adolescents are much less likely to have friends whose parents have college educations. 83% of non-Hispanic Asian students and 72% of non-Hispanic white students have nominated friends with college-educated mothers; about half of Mexican-origin students do. These patterns are the result of socioeconomic segregation in social networks both across and within schools. Within schools, we observe that the educational background of friends is predictive of schooling outcomes for non-Mexican students. We find evidence that this network resource shapes non-Mexican students' educational expectations in high school and longer-run completed schooling as adults more so than it shapes the outcomes among Mexican-origin students.

Familism and the Hispanic Health Advantage: The Role of Immigrant Status.

It is well known that Hispanic immigrants exhibit better physical and mental health than their U.S.-born counterparts. Scholars theorize that stronger orientations toward the family, also known as familism, could contribute to this immigrant advantage. Yet, little work directly tests whether familial attitudes may be responsible for the favorable health of foreign-born Hispanics. We investigate this possibility using biomarkers, anthropometrics, and mental health assessments from the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos (N = 4,078). Results demonstrate that the relationship between familial attitudes and health vary depending on the outcome assessed. While Hispanics with strong attitudes toward familial support have fewer symptoms of depression and anxiety, those who report high referent familism display worse mental health outcomes. We find little evidence that familism is linked to physical health or that immigrant generation moderates the relationship of interest. Our results challenge assumptions that familism is responsible for the comparably better health of foreign-born Hispanics.

Investigating Health Selection Within Mexico and Across the US Border.

Despite acquiring lower levels of attainment and earnings, Mexican immigrants exhibit favorable health outcomes relative to their native-born counterparts. And while scholars attempt to reconcile this so-called paradoxical relationship with a variety of theoretical and empirical approaches, patterns of selective migration continue to receive considerable attention. The present study contributes to the literature on health selection by extending the healthy migrant hypothesis in a number of ways. First, we rely on a unique combination of data sets to assess whether the healthy are disproportionately more likely to migrate. We use the latest wave of the Mexican Family Life Survey and the 2013 Migrante Study, a survey that is representative of Mexican-born persons who are actively migrating through Tijuana. Pooling these data also allow us to differentiate between internal and US-bound migrants to shed light on their respective health profiles. Results provide modest support for the healthy migrant hypothesis. Although those who report better overall health are more likely to migrate, we find that the presence of certain chronic conditions increases migration risk. Our findings also suggest that internal migrants are healthier than those traveling to the US, though this is largely because those moving within Mexico reflect a younger and more educated population. This study takes an important step in uncovering variation across migrant flows and highlights the importance of the timing at which health is measured in the migration process.

Moving Beyond Salmon Bias: Mexican Return Migration and Health Selection.

Despite having lower levels of education and limited access to health care services, Mexican immigrants report better health outcomes than U.S.-born individuals. Research suggests that the Mexican health advantage may be partially attributable to selective return migration among less healthy migrants-often referred to as "salmon bias." Our study takes advantage of a rare opportunity to observe the health status of Mexican-origin males as they cross the Mexican border. To assess whether unhealthy migrants are disproportionately represented among those who return, we use data from two California-based studies: the California Health Interview Survey; and the Migrante Study, a survey that samples Mexican migrants entering and leaving the United States through Tijuana. We pool these data sources to look for evidence of health-related return migration. Results provide mixed support for salmon bias. Although migrants who report health limitations and frequent stress are more likely to return, we find little evidence that chronic conditions and self-reported health are associated with higher probabilities of return. Results also provide some indication that limited health care access increases the likelihood of return among the least healthy. This study provides new theoretical considerations of return migration and further elucidates the relationship between health and migration decisions.

The Effect(s) of Teen Pregnancy: Reconciling Theory, Methods, and Findings.

Although teenage mothers have lower educational attainment and earnings than women who delay fertility, causal interpretations of this relationship remain controversial. Scholars argue that there are reasons to predict negative, trivial, or even positive effects, and different methodological approaches provide some support for each perspective. We reconcile this ongoing debate by drawing on two heuristics: (1) each methodological strategy emphasizes different women in estimation procedures, and (2) the effects of teenage fertility likely vary in the population. Analyses of the Child and Young Adult Cohorts of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (N = 3,661) confirm that teen pregnancy has negative effects on most women's attainment and earnings. More striking, however, is that effects on college completion and early earnings vary considerably and are most pronounced among those least likely to experience an early pregnancy. Further analyses suggest that teen pregnancy is particularly harmful for those with the brightest socioeconomic prospects and who are least prepared for the transition to motherhood.

Social mobility in the context of fathering: the intergenerational link in parenting among co-resident fathers.

Intergenerational transmissions extend across a number of family-related behaviors, including marriage timing, fertility, and divorce. Surprisingly, few studies investigate the link between the fathering men experience and the fathering they ultimately engage in. I use data on the grandfathers and fathers of the 2001 U.S. birth cohort - measured in the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study (N=4050) - to test whether men's perception of the parenting they received influences their subsequent paternal self-assessments and behaviors. I find a nonlinear association between experiencing warm fathering and men's self-assessed parenting quality and stress. Men with particularly warm fathers are more likely to report being good fathers themselves. Those who report having the harshest fathers also exhibit better paternal self-perceptions and lower stress. Perceptions of paternal warmth show similar associations with men's fathering engagement. This research sheds light on the significance of family dynamics and how a legacy of fathering may contribute to inequality.