MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414129821 · doi:10.71332/m10tyx05

The Psychology of Marianismo: A Review of Empirical Research

2025· review· en· W4414129821 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Agostinho Cruz, G. Bonilla, Yarilet Rivera Nieves, Adanary Nazario Ortiz

Bibliographic record

VenueSalud y conducta humana · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society in Latin America
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCausality (physics)Empirical researchNarrativeAttributionQualitative researchPsychological researchEmpirical evidence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present narrative review seeks to explain the roles and expectations of women in Hispanic cultures. For this purpose, we focused on marianismo, which is generally defined as the concept that women should be spiritually family leaders and submissive to their partners. Marianismo is a cultural script deeply rooted in Roman Catholicism and embodies female gender norms and expectations in Hispanic culture. Unlike machismo, marianismo has not been widely researched. To summarize the existing literature, we reviewed 20 quantitative and qualitative studies using APA PsychInfo, EBSCO Research Databases, JSTOR, and SAGE Journals. Both positive and negative psychological outcomes were linked to Latinas high in marianismo. In particular, Latinas are less likely to abuse substances and more academically motivated but are also more likely to suffer from depression, tolerate intimate partner violence, and practice unsafe sex. However, various factors limit the validity of the literature in marianismo, such as lack of causality and sampling generalizability. Most participants were exclusively Mexican women living in the United States and Canada. Further research is needed to fully understand the effects of marianismo on Latinxs, considering that these studies underline its significant influence on Latinxs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.369
GPT teacher head0.628
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSalud y conducta humanaSame topicReligion and Society in Latin AmericaFrench-language works237,207