The Psychology of Marianismo: A Review of Empirical Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".