J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29 DOI 10.1007/s10826-012-9608-y
ORIGINAL PAPER
Racial Discrimination and African American Adolescents’ Adjustment: Gender Variation in Family and Community Social Support, Promotive and Protective Factors Shauna M. Cooper • Charity Brown • Isha Metzger • Yvette Clinton • Barbara Guthrie
Published online: 17 June 2012 Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012
Abstract The current investigation explores the promotive and protective role of family and community-specific social support on the association between perceived racial discrimination and African American adolescents’ adjustment (e.g., depressive symptoms, school suspensions, school engagement). One thousand nine-hundred forty-two African American adolescents (ages 12–18, M = 15.12; SD = 1.83; 59 % female) from a large Midwestern city participated in this investigation. Regression analyses revealed that perceived racial discrimination was associated with less positive adjustment outcomes for boys and girls. Additionally, there was partial support for gender variation in the promotive role of social support and adolescent adjustment. In particular, while only maternal support was associated with boys’ adjustment, both maternal and paternal support was associated with girls’ adjustment. Also, there was partial support for gender differentiation in the strength and directionality of protective factors. Though in an unpredicted direction, father support moderated the relationship between perceived racial discrimination and girls’ adjustment. Community supports (religious connection and mentor presence) emerged as protective factors for boys’. Findings highlight the role of This research was funded by a contract awarded to the last author from the State of Michigan Department of Community Health. S. M. Cooper (&) C. Brown I. Metzger Department of Psychology, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, USA e-mail:
[email protected] Y. Clinton CNA Corporation, Alexandria, VA, USA B. Guthrie School of Nursing, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06536, USA
gender in understanding potential promotive and protective factors for African American adolescents. Keywords African American Racial discrimination Adolescence Gender Psychological adjustment School adjustment
Introduction Investigations have demonstrated the deleterious impact of racial discrimination among African American youth including increased depressive symptoms (Gaylord-Harden and Cunningham 2009; Neblett et al. 2008; Seaton and Yip 2009; Sellers et al. 2003) and problem behaviors (Brody et al. 2006; Copeland-Linder et al. 2011). Further, studies have demonstrated an inverse relationship between racial discrimination and youths’ academic engagement (Chavous et al. 2008; Dotterer et al. 2009; Smalls et al. 2007). With this in mind, scholars have sought to identify factors that may mitigate this relationship. In particular, social support, which includes resources provided to an individual by important others (Thoits 2011, p. 146), has been suggested as an important mechanism to help one cope with stress. Stress-buffering models (Cohen and Wills 1985) assert that social support can have a positive impact through two pathways—(1) a direct association with wellbeing (e.g., promotive) and (2) buffering against diminished well-being and adjustment in the face of stress (e.g., protective). Several studies with adolescent populations have provided evidence for the main effect of social support and as a protective factor against race-related discrimination (Benhorin and McMahon 2008; CopelandLinder et al. 2011; Hammack et al. 2004; Lindsey et al. 2010). Acknowledging the multidimensionality of social
123
16
support, the current investigation examines the promotive and protective role of two social support domains—(1) family and (2) community. Family Social Support Regarding the link between racial discrimination and youth adjustment, much of the existing literature has demonstrated the promotive and buffering role of parents’ racerelated socialization (Harris-Britt et al. 2007; Dotterer et al. 2009; Neblett et al. 2006; Neblett et al. 2008; Neblett et al. 2009). However, there is some indication that more general parenting practices also play a vital role in promoting positive adjustment (Bean et al. 2006) and buffer against the stress associated with experiencing racial discrimination (Brody et al. 2006; Gibbons et al. 2010). For instance, Brody et al. (2006) demonstrated that supportive and engaged parenting practices reduced the negative impact of racial discrimination on African American adolescents’ adjustment, including fewer depressive symptoms and school conduct problems. Thus, parents’ provision of support in response to these transgressions may be critical for adolescents’ immediate and long-term adjustment. The preponderance of these studies, however, has concentrated on the protective role of maternal support or has failed to distinguish between parental contributions (e.g., father support vs. mother support). Thus, the ways in which father-specific social support can help buffer the impact of race-related discrimination is not well known. Differentiating the protective role of parental support among African American adolescents is of particular interest as investigations have suggested that there is variation in maternal and paternal parenting practices as well their association with adolescent adjustment (e.g., Crouter et al. 2008). Community Social Support Scholars have long asserted that religion is a key feature of the African American cultural experience and an important mechanism for support in the lives of African Americans (Billingsley and Caldwell 1991; Taylor et al. 2001). Although work with adolescent populations has shown the benefits of organized religious practices (e.g., church attendance) (Irvin et al. 2010), studies also have suggested that subjective religious beliefs (e.g., importance of religion in one’s life) are related to positive adjustment (AlFadhli and Kersen 2010; Ball et al. 2003; Barrett 2010; Nasim et al. 2006) as well as buffers against general (Grant et al. 2000) and race-related stressors (Bowen-Reid and Harrell 2002). There also has been an emphasis on the ways in which communities and neighborhoods can impact development. Much of the existing literature has suggested that
123
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29
unsupportive and disorganized neighborhood environments are associated with reduced well-being and increased likelihood of engaging in risky behaviors (Leventhal and Brooks-Gunn 2000). Conversely, studies have shown that neighborhoods with greater cohesion provide a nurturing environment for African American youth (Brown 2008; Taylor et al. 2008). Mentoring relationships, another indicator of community support, also are reported to be critical sources of guidance, and encouragement (Klaw et al. 2003; Fergus and Zimmerman 2005). Moreover, research has suggested that mentoring relationships are alternative sources of support and help youth cope with stress during adolescence (Hurd and Zimmerman 2010). Still, few studies have empirically examined the mitigating role of mentoring relationships on the association between racial discrimination and adolescent adjustment. Family and Community Social Support Factors: A Gendered Approach Although studies have provided support for the protective role of family and community factors among African American adolescents, a gendered approach may better elucidate these associations. Explicating the unique social experiences of African American boys and girls has been an emphasis as studies have demonstrated gender differences across several indicators of psychological well-being and functioning (Grant et al. 2000; Swanson et al. 2003). Additional evidence can be gleaned from studies noting that African American males are more likely to report discriminatory encounters than African American females (Dubois et al. 2002; Fischer and Shaw 1999; Sellers and Shelton 2003) as well as gender variation in the nature of these encounters and the contexts in which they occur (Chavous et al. 2008; Dubois et al. 2002). Further, though the primary focus has been racial identity, there is growing evidence of gender variation in the factors that moderate the association between racial discrimination and adolescent adjustment (Caldwell et al. 2004; Chavous et al. 2008). Also, the larger stress literature has demonstrated that the mitigating role of social support varies for African American boys and girls (Fitzpatrick et al. 2005; Copeland-Linder et al. 2011). Fitzpatrick and colleagues (2005) found that social resources buffered the impact of contextual stress among African American girls, but not for boys. Thus, although studies have indicated that social support is beneficial for male and female youth (e.g., Bean et al. 2006), it is plausible that there is gender variation in which social support domains buffer against racerelated discrimination. Studies have indicated that familial support can serve an important protective and compensatory function for African American girls (Cooper 2009; Corneille et al. 2005;
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29
Trask-Tate et al. 2010). Moreover, among gender comparative studies, investigations have found that African American girls report greater levels of family support (Tamis-Lemonda et al. 2009). Also, studies have shown that familial factors are more strongly associated with girls’ adjustment and mitigate the impact of contextual risks (e.g., Hammack et al. 2004). Additionally, research has indicated that, compared to males, females report greater religiosity (e.g., church attendance) (Levin et al. 1994). Further, though some investigations have found stronger effects for boys (Al-Fadhli and Kersen 2010), studies have suggested that religiosity promotes positive well-being and operates as a stress-buffer for girls, but not boys (Grant et al. 2000). Although familial relationships and religious beliefs also have been related to adjustment outcomes for African American boys (Lindsey et al. 2010; Mandara 2006), research has articulated that neighborhood support and the presence of community mentors are critical to the promotion of positive outcomes and reduced risk among this population (Barbarin 2010; Bryant and Zimmerman 2003; Kogan and Brody 2010; Utsey et al. 2003). Though much of this work has examined within-group variation among African American boys, Nichols et al. (2010) demonstrated that, in comparison to African American girls, communityrelated support was more strongly associated with African American boys’ psychological and school adjustment. Similarly, Mello and Swanson (2007) found that, while there was no such relationship for girls, neighborhood cohesion was related African American boys’ schoolrelated expectations. Though additional work is needed in this area, these studies highlight the potential importance of community support as a promotive and protective factor among African American boys.
Goals of the Current Study The current investigation utilizes the stress-buffering framework (Cohen and Wills 1985) to examine the promotive and protective roles of family- and communityspecific social support. In line with existing studies, we expect that racial discrimination will be associated with negative psychological and school outcomes among African American adolescents. Importantly, we hypothesize that family and community support will mitigate this relationship. However, given indications that African American male and females have distinctive race-related experiences (e.g., Seaton et al. 2010; Sellers and Shelton 2003), an important contribution of this study is a focus on gender variation in the protective role of family- and community-specific social support. We submit that family support and religiosity will be more protective for African
17
American girls. Conversely, we hypothesize that community-related support factors, specifically neighborhood support and mentor presence, will emerge as protective factors for African American boys.
Methods Participants Secondary data was utilized from a school-based pregnancy prevention program in the Mid-Western region of the United States. Recruitment locations included schools located in both suburban and urban communities surrounding a large, urban city. Only baseline data are utilized in the current investigation. A total of 4,256 adolescents completed baseline surveys. For the purposes of this investigation, only African American youth between the ages of 12–18 (M = 15.12; SD = 1.83) were included in analyses (N = 1,942). Median income for the sample was $29,125 (Range: $17,750-$38,500). Though lower in comparison to US estimates, the median income was representative of all African American households residing in the recruitment area ($29,897). Approximately 59 % of the sample was female. Adolescents in this sample resided primarily in single-family homes (79 %). Self-reported grades of the sample was 3.63 out of 5.00 (1 = mostly failing grades; 5 = mostly A’s). Study Procedure After receiving IRB approval, target schools were identified and contacted regarding their interest in participating in the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program. Among participating schools, the research team trained a qualified school or agency staff member as the site evaluation coordinator. Training of the site evaluation coordinator (SEC) involved detailed protocols for collecting study data. In particular, SEC’s were given detailed procedures for maintaining data integrity and issues of confidentiality before data collection began. Procedures were in accordance with the American Psychological Association’s ethical guidelines. A member of the research team and the SEC distributed consent forms prior to data collection. Across sites, the average consent form return rate was approximately 60 %. The SEC attended the first program session to assist the program facilitator with collecting evaluation information. For all youth who returned a positive consent form, the first session included completion of the pre-test evaluation data. During this time, participants who did not return the consent form or who returned negative consent forms engaged in a non-related activity. Surveys took approximately 30–45 min to be completed.
123
18
Before participation, a member of the research team read a description of the study as well as the protocol for maintaining their confidentiality (e.g., assigning students ID numbers). At each recruitment site, the SEC and additional members of the research staff were present to answer any additional questions related to the data collection or survey administration procedure. As surveys were related to a school-wide adolescent health prevention program, participants were not compensated for completing surveys. Measures Racial Discrimination The Everyday Discrimination Scale (Williams et al. 1997) was utilized to assess adolescents’ perceptions of racial discrimination. The Everyday Discrimination scale measures the frequency of routine and more subtle experiences of unfair treatment (0 = never; 3 = frequently). The scale’s stem asks participants: ‘‘Over the last year, in your day-to-day life, how often have any of the following things happened to you.’’ Nine response items that followed the stem (e.g., ‘‘being treated with less courtesy than others’’; ‘‘people acting as if you are not smart’’; ‘‘others being afraid of you’’; ‘‘being called names or insulted’’). Reliability for this scale was .76. Family Factors Mother- and father-adolescent supportiveness and closeness were assessed with two one-item indicators—(1) ‘‘How close are you to your mother/mother figure?’’ and (2) ‘‘How close are you to your father/father figure?’’ Adolescents responded to each question on a 5-point scale (1 = very distant and cold; 5 = very warm and close). Community Factors Three indicators were used to assess community factors. Participants responded to two one-item questions: (1) ‘‘Does religion provide direction in your life (0 = no direction at all; 3 = quite a bit of direction)?’’ An indicator of community mentor availability was constructed utilizing two survey questions: (1) ‘‘Do you have a mentor or person that you go to for guidance or advice (1 = no; 2 = yes)?’’ Participants were then asked to identify this individual. A dichotomous variable was then created to reflect the presence of a non-related mentor within their community (e.g., minister; teacher; counselor; older friend; neighbor). This conceptualization is consistent with previous studies exploring natural mentoring relationships among adolescent populations (Klaw et al. 2003; Zimmerman and Brenner 2010). Additionally, three items adapted from Dembo et al. (1985) were used to measure neighborhood support (e.g., ‘‘My neighborhood is like one big family.’’). Participants responded on a 4-point scale (1 = strongly disagree; 4 = strongly agree). Reliability for this scale was adequate (a = .60).
123
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29
Adolescent Adjustment Depressive Symptoms (Radloff 1977) Level of depressive symptomatology was measured with the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff 1977). Participants responded on a 4-point scale (1 = rarely/none of the time; 4 = most/all of the time) indicating how true each statement was during the past week (e.g., I feel that everything I did was an effort; I feel like crying). Higher scores indicate greater depressive symptomatology. Reliability for this 20-item scale was .90. Studies have indicated that the CES-D is reliable and valid for use with African American adolescents (e.g., Franko et al. 2004). School Behavioral Problems A one-item self-report question assessed school behavioral problems (‘‘How many times have you been suspended from school?’’). Participants responded on a 5-point scale (1 = never; 5 = more than 10 times). School Engagement Three items were used to measure academic-related engagement (1 = not very important at all; 4 = very important). Sample items included: ‘‘How important is it for you get at least a B average this year?’’; ‘‘How important is it for you to come out near the top of the class on exams?’’; and ‘‘How important is it for you to have good enough grades to get into college?’’ Reliability for this scale was adequate (a = .64. Control Variables Given that previous studies have demonstrated associations between a range of sociodemographic factors and the variables of interest (Kogan et al. 2011; Li and Lerner 2011), this investigation controlled for adolescent age and self-reported grades. Additionally, family structure (1 = single-parent household; 2 = two-parent household) and perceived social class (1 = lower; 2 = middle; 3 = upper) were included as indicators of socio-economic status. This investigation also controlled for global stress using the Daily Hassles Questionnaire (DHQ; Rowlison and Felner 1988; Dubois et al. 1994. Respondents were asked to rate on a fourpoint scale (0 = not at all a hassle; 3 = a very big hassle) the extent to which each item (‘‘trying to get good grades’’; ‘‘not being part of the popular group.’’) was a hassle during the past week. Reliability for this measure was .82. Data Analytic Strategy Separate hierarchical regression models were computed for male and female adolescents. Age, family structure, perceived social class, self-reported grades, and global daily hassles were included as control variables in all models
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29
19
Regression Analyses
(Step 1). Racial discrimination was entered in Step 2, followed by family and community factors in Step 3. All continuous variables were centered and used to compute interaction terms (e.g., mother-adolescent support 9 discrimination; father-adolescent support 9 discrimination; mentor presence 9 discrimination; religious connection 9 discrimination; neighborhood support 9 discrimination), which were entered in the last step of the hierarchical regression model. Significant moderating relationships were explored using Aiken and West’s (1991) guidelines for interpreting interactions (e.g., one standard deviation above and below mean). Interactions were plotted and simple slopes were computed using Sibley’s (2008) utility for examining interactions in multiple regression.
Girls: Direct and Interactive Associations As shown in Table 3, perceived racial discrimination was associated with greater depressive symptoms and number of school suspensions for girls. Also, father-daughter closeness and mother-daughter closeness were associated with fewer depressive symptoms. Neighborhood support, mentor presence, and religious connection were unrelated to girls’ depressive symptomatology. Mother-daughter closeness was associated with fewer school suspensions. Father-daughter closeness and community factors (mentor presence; neighborhood support; religious connection) were unrelated to number of school suspensions and school engagement. Three significant two-way interactions emerged. Father-adolescent closeness was a moderator of the association between racial discrimination and girls’ school adjustment (number of school suspensions and school engagement). As shown in Fig. 1, results surprisingly revealed that, for girls reporting greater closeness with their fathers, racial discrimination was related more strongly to a greater number of school suspensions than girls reporting less father-daughter closeness. Although there also was a negative relationship (between discrimination and number of school suspensions) for girls reporting less father-daughter closeness, this association was less marked. The slopes for girls with high and low father-daughter closeness were not significantly different from zero.
Results Descriptive Statistics by Gender Correlations for boys and girls are shown in Table 1. Additionally, t-tests were performed to examine gender differences across the major study variables (Table 2). Analyses indicated that boys reported greater mother- and father-adolescent closeness compared to girls. Additionally, girls reported greater depressive symptoms, fewer school suspensions, and greater school engagement than boys. While girls were more likely to report having a community mentor, boys reported greater neighborhood support.
Table 1 Correlations of study variables by gender 1
2
1. Age
3
-.04
2. Family structure
-.04
3. Social class
-.12b
-.03
.10b
-.01
4. Self-reported grades
-.05
.07
a
-.05 -.11b
.04 -.04
8. Father support
-.07a
-.13b .05
10. Neighborhood support
-.13
-.09
11. Mentor presence
-.07a
.01
12. Depressive symptoms 13. School suspensions 14. School engagement a
p \ .05;
b
b
6
-.02
7
-.05
-.12
-.04
.03
-.08
.05
-.11b
-.05
.04
.08
a
b
-.07
-.09b .03
.26 -.17b
-.18b
.05
-.08a
-.04
.07
a
.09
b
-.02
.01
-.02
.03 -.07a
-.04 -.02
.01 .05
.15
b
.01
.07 a
-.10
b
-.09b
.01
-.02
b
-.27b .19b
.37
b
.10b -.07a
.37
9
-.07
b
.15b -.05
10
13
14
-.03
-.12b
.01
.05
.03
.04
.08a
.00
.03
.01
-.06
-.08
.16b
.05
.17b
-.07
-.22b
.01
.05 .13b
b
12 .02
-.15
-.10
11 .00
-.00 a
-.13
.00
-.13
-.08 .18
.04 . 05
-.15b .16b
.02 .13b
.33b -.19b
.17b -.12b
.02 .20b
.08
.08
-.12b
-.01
.04
.10
.02
-.12
.14b
.02
.01
-.04
.07
-.06
.01
.00
.08a
-.12b
.05 .11
-.06 .02
b
.03
.07
.00
.13b
.07a
b
-.14
b
-.12b .06a
-.02 .07
-.21
.12b
-.02
a
.01
-.03
-.10b
-.07a
-.13b .03
.00 .04
-.05 .08b
.31
b
-.05 .12b
b
.20b
-.09a
-.10
b
-.02
b
.17b a
-.15
.06 -.10
.29
b
.02
-.02 -.01 .06
8
a
-.03
b
.08
-.05 -.03
-.03
b
b
-.06
6. Racial discrimination 7. Mother support
.02
5
-.13
-.02
5. Global daily hassles
9. Religious connection
4
.17
-.04
-.19b b
-.15
c
p \ .01; p \ .001; correlations below the diagonal are for females
123
20
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29
Table 2 Means and standard deviations by gender
Girls
1. Age
Superscripts in the M (SD) columns denote mean differences by gender ( p \ .05; à p \ .01)
M (SD)
Range
M (SD)
Range
15.00 (1.67)
11.0–18.0
14.95 (1.52)
11.0–18.0
2. Family structure
1.21 (0.27)
1.00–2.00
1.23 (0.27)
1.00–2.00
3. Social class
2.05 (0.60)
1.00–3.00
2.10 (0.60)
1.00–3.00
4. Self-reported grades
3.71 (1.01)à
1.00–5.00
3.50 (1.00)à
1.00–5.00
5. Global daily hassles
1.85 (0.59)
1.00–4.00
1.80 (0.60)
1.00–4.00
6. Racial discrimination
0.97 (0.52)
0.00–2.75
0.98 (0.54)
0.00–3.00
7. Mother support
3.39 (0.78)à
1.00–5.00
3.54 (0.73)à
1.00–5.00
8. Father support
2.79 (0.73)
1.00–5.00
2.93 (1.00)
1.00–5.00
9. Religious connection
2.52 (1.36)à
0.00–4.00
2.90 (0.95)à
0.00–4.00
10. Neighborhood support
2.44 (0.70)à
1.00–4.00
2.63 (0.75)à
1.00–4.00
11. Mentor presence 12. Depressive symptoms
à
1.81 (0.39) 1.83 (0.49)à
1.00–2.00 1.00–3.70
à
1.70 (0.45) 1.75 (0.45)à
1.00–2.00 1.00–3.44
13. School suspensions
1.99 (1.08)à
1.00–5.00
2.41 (1.32)à
1.00–5.00
à
1.60–4.00
3.76 (0.32)à
2.00–4.00
14. School values
For girls reporting greater father-daughter closeness, racial discrimination was unrelated to school engagement (Fig. 2). However, results indicated that for girls reporting less closeness and support from their fathers, racial discrimination was associated with greater school engagement. Slopes for the high and low values of father closeness were not significant. Additionally, mentor presence moderated the association between racial discrimination and school suspensions. For girls without a mentor, racial discrimination was positively associated with number of school suspensions. This association did not exist for girls indicating that they had a community mentor. The simple slopes for girls with and without a community mentor were not significantly different from zero (Fig. 3). Boys: Direct and Interactive Associations Similar to girls, racial discrimination was associated positively with greater depressive symptoms and number of school suspensions among boys. Also, as depicted in Table 4, mother-son closeness was associated with fewer school suspensions and greater school engagement. Additionally, greater neighborhood support was related to fewer depressive symptoms. Father-son closeness, mentor presence, and religious connection were not associated directly with boys’ adjustment. Analyses revealed three significant two-way interactions. Mentor presence moderated the relationship between racial discrimination and school adjustment outcomes (school engagement; school suspensions). For boys who reported having a mentor, racial discrimination was associated with fewer school suspensions and greater school engagement. However, for African
123
Boys
3.82 (0.28)
American boys not indicating the presence of a community mentor, racial discrimination was related to less positive school adjustment (a greater number of school suspensions; lower school engagement). A simple slopes test indicated that racial discrimination better predicted school suspensions for boys without a mentor (p = .02) in comparison to boys with a mentor. The slopes for school engagement were not significant at the low (no mentor) or high values (mentor) (Figs. 4, 5). Also, religious connection was a significant moderator of the association between racial discrimination and number of school suspensions among boys. Results indicated that racial discrimination was associated with greater school suspensions for boys who reported less religious connection in comparison to boys who reported greater religious connection. While the slope for the high value (high religious connection) was not significant, the slope was significant for boys who reported less religious connection (p = .04) (Fig. 6).
Discussion The current investigation examined the promotive and protective roles of family- and community-specific social support on the adjustment of African American adolescents. Moreover, an equally important goal of this study was to examine gender variation in these associations. Three key findings emerged in this investigation. First, in line with previous studies, racial discrimination was associated with negative adjustment among African American adolescents. Second, there was some suggestion that
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29
21
Table 3 Regression analysis of racial discrimination, family and community factors predicting African American girls’ adjustment (N = 1,184) Depressive symptoms B
SE B
School suspensions
b
B
SE B
School engagement
b
B
SE B
b
Step 1: Control variables Age
.02
.01
.06
-.03
.03
-.01
-.01
.01
-.03
Family structure (1 = single-parent; 2 = two-parent)
.05
.08
.03
-.13
.19
-.03
-.03
.06
-.02
Perceived social class
-.01
.06
-.04
School grades
-.04
.02
-.10a
.04
d
Global daily hassles
.29
DR2 F statistic Step 2: Racial discrimination DR
.35
.13 16.55 .33
2
F statistic
.10
.13
.04
.02
.03
.04
-.22
.05
-.22d
.09
.01
.29d
.09
.07
.10
-.03
.03
-.07
.03
-.01
.02
-.02
.04 4.97 .04
.32d
.29
.09 11.17 .09
.22c
-.01
.10
.02
.00
26.21
5.60
8.92
Step 3: Family and community factors Mother-adolescent closeness (MAC)
-.08
.03
-.09c b
-.15
.06
-.05b
-.01
Father-adolescent closeness (FAC)
-.04
.02
-.08
.05
.05
-.02
.02
.02
.06
Neighborhood support
-.01
.03
-.01
.04
-.07
.01
.02
.02
.04
Mentor presence
-.04
.06
-.10
-.10
.13
-.03
.02
.04
.03
Religious connection
-.01
.02
-.02
-.02
.05
-.02
.01
.02
.02
DR2 F statistic
.02
.01
.01
15.23
3.54
4.63
Step 4: Two-way interactions MAC 9 discrimination
-.04
.05
-.03
-.18
.11
.04
.04
.06
FAC 9 discrimination Neighborhood support 9 discrimination
-.01 -.03
.04 .06
-.04 .02
.28 .00
.10 .14
.12c .00
-.10 .06
.03 .04
-.17d .07
.01
.11
.20
-.52
.26
-.18b
-.05
.07
-.10
-.01
.05
-.11
.13
.11
.06
.01
.03
.02
Mentor presence 9 discrimination Religious connection 9 discrimination DR2 Full model F statistic a
b
c
-.07
.00
.03
.03
10.93
3.49
4.22
d
p \ .10; p \ .05; p \ .01; p \ .001
promotive factors varied by gender. Specifically, maternal and neighborhood support emerged as promotive factors for boys’ adjustment. However, father and mother support were associated directly with girls’ adjustment. Third, there was evidence of gender variation in the examined protective factors. In particular, religious connection and mentor presence buffered the association between racial discrimination and boys’ school adjustment but not for girls. Conversely, father support and mentor presence emerged as significant moderators for girls but not for boys. Perceived Discrimination and Adolescent Adjustment This investigation indicated that, for both African American male and female adolescents, racial discrimination was associated with greater depressive symptoms and number of school suspensions. Importantly, these relationships were quite robust, with racial discrimination being
negatively related to adjustment over and above that of global daily hassles. These findings were consistent with cross-sectional and longitudinal studies of African American male and female adolescents’ psychological and school-related adjustment (Brody et al. 2006; Caldwell et al. 2004; Prelow et al. 2006; Seaton et al. 2009; Sellers et al. 2006). It also should be noted that, while racial discrimination explained greater variance in depressive symptoms, relatively little variance in the number of school suspensions was explained. Thus, there are additional factors that may illuminate African American adolescents’ behavior within the school context. Also, despite prior research suggesting that racial discrimination is associated with more negative academic outcomes (Chavous et al. 2008; Dotterer et al. 2009; Neblett et al. 2006), the current investigation, did not demonstrate an association between adolescents’ perceptions of racial discrimination and their school engagement,
123
22
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29 3.000
4.000
Number of School Suspensions
Number of School Suspensions
3.500
2.500
2.000
1.500
1.000
3.000
2.500
2.000
1.500
1.000
0.500 Low Father Closeness
0.500 No Mentor
High Father Closeness 0.000 Low Discrimination
High Discrimination
Fig. 1 Two-way interaction of father-adolescent closeness and racial discrimination predicting African American girls’ number of school suspensions
School Engagement
4.000
3.500
High Discrimination
Fig. 3 Two-way interaction of mentor presence and racial discrimination predicting African American girls’ number of school suspensions
Gender Variation in the Promotive Role of Family and Community Support
3.000
2.500
2.000
Low Father Closeness High Father Closeness Low Discrimination
High Discrimination
Fig. 2 Two-way interaction of father closeness and racial discrimination predicting African American girls’ school engagement
a finding which was similar for African American boys and girls. It is possible that the discrimination measure utilized in this study explains this non-significant relationship, such that school-specific discrimination experiences may be more strongly associated with school related engagement than global racial discrimination. Furthermore, the engagement measure in this investigation assessed the importance that youth placed on educational success (e.g., importance of grades; college attendance) and did not tap into other engagement domains (e.g., behavioral
123
Low Discrimination
engagement in the classroom). As indicated by previous studies (Dotterer et al. 2009; Smalls et al. 2007), experiences with racial discrimination may adversely impact youths’ academic self-beliefs and academic efficacy. Thus, inclusion of additional measures of school engagement could have further elucidated this association.
4.500
1.500
Mentor 0.000
We found partial support that promotive factors varied for male and female youth. In line with our expectations, both maternal and paternal closeness and support were associated with girls’ adjustment. In explanation of these findings, socialization practices emphasizing relational connectedness may impact females’ orientation to social relationships. Moreover, relationally-influenced socialization practices can influence how these relationships are associated with females’ functioning and well-being. Multiple studies have demonstrated that social support, particularly from the family domain, is associated with girls’ depressive symptomatology (Mandara and Pikes 2008; Mandara and Murray 2000; Smetana and Daddis 2002). Further, studies have demonstrated that, during adolescence, girls are more sensitive to dynamics in the parent-adolescent relationship (Crawford et al. 2001). Thus, results indicating that both maternal and paternal supports are related to girls’ adjustment provide partial support for the promotive role of family factors for girls. Although there is some support for the link between familial social support and girls’ adjustment, this
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29
23
Table 4 Regression analysis of racial discrimination, family and community factors predicting African American boys’ adjustment (N = 758) Depressive symptoms B
SE B
School suspensions
b
B
SE B
b
School engagement B
SE B
b
Step 1: Control variables Age
-.02
.02
-.06
-.02
.05
-.02
-.01
.01
.02
Family structure (1 = single-parent; 2 = two-parent)
-.02
.04
-.01
.22
.17
.05
.01
.05
.01
Perceived social class
.01
.07
.00
-.38
.19
-.12b
.08
.06
.06
School grades
.04
.03
.09
-.35
.09
-.25d
.10
.02
.25d
.13
c
-.04
.04
-.06
.04
.03
.19c
Global daily hassles DR2 F statistic Step 2: Racial discrimination DR
2
F statistic
.18
.04
d
.24
.06 5.52 .24
.37
.18
.10 8.14 .05
.28d
.29
.07 5.91 .14
.12b
.02
.07
.01
.00
9.18
7.31
4.75
Step 3: Family and community factors Mother-adolescent closeness (MAC)
-.12
.04
-.18c
-.17
.12
-.09
.10
.03
Father-adolescent closeness (FAC)
-.02
.03
-.03
.07
.08
.05
-.01
.02
-.03
Neighborhood support
-.07
.03
-.12b
-.13
.11
-.08
.02
.03
.05
Mentor presence
-.01
.06
.01
-.10
.19
-.03
.02
.05
.03
Religious connection
-.02
.03
.04
-.09
.08
-.06
.03
.02
.09
DR2 F statistic
.03
.00
.02
6.22
4.24
3.82
Step 4: Two-way interactions MAC 9 discrimination FAC 9 discrimination Neighborhood support 9 discrimination Mentor presence 9 discrimination Religious connection 9 discrimination DR
2
Full model F statistic a
-.02
.07
-.01
-.32
.22
-.10
.09
.06
.09
.03 .02
.05 .06
.04 .02
-.07 -.08
.15 .18
-.03 .02
-.05 -.05
.04 .06
-.07 -.03
-.17
.13
-.25
-.77
.37
-.40b
.20
.10
.35b
.02
.05
.02
-.28
.13
-.34b
-.07
.04
-.07a
.00
.03
.01
4.25
3.81
3.12
p \ .10; bp \ .05; cp \ .01; dp \ .001
investigation also suggested the importance of these social connections for boys. Interestingly, boys reported higher mean levels of both maternal and paternal support. Though there is some suggestion that, in comparison to girls, boys report greater closeness and support (Grant et al. 2000), this finding contrasts multiple studies demonstrating that girls report greater levels of family social support or that no gender differences exist in levels of family social support (Bean et al. 2006; Tamis-Lemonda et al. 2009). However, despite higher mean levels of family support, only maternal support was related to boys’ depressive symptomatology and their school engagement. Coupled with the non-significant association between paternal support and African American boys’ adjustment, this study may point to role of the mother-son relational dyad in promoting positive outcomes for boys’ adjustment. Although work has articulated the distinctiveness of this relationship as well as potential implications for the positive trajectories of African
American males (Bush 2004), further studies are necessary to understand fully how dynamics of this dyad impacts the psychological and school adjustment of African American boys. Additionally, this investigation found that father-adolescent closeness was related to girls’ adjustment, namely their reported depressive symptoms. Extant studies have suggested that the father-daughter relationship has important implications for girls’ psychological adjustment (Russell and Saebel 1997). Though few studies have explored the father-daughter dyad within African American families, there is some suggestion that greater closeness and supportiveness in father-daughter relationships is positively associated with African American girls’ outcomes (e.g., Cooper 2009; Coley 2003; Trask-Tate et al. 2010). For instance, Trask-Tate et al. (2010) found that greater father support was related to less psychological distress among African American girls. As studies have
123
24
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29 4.000
3.500
3
Number of School Suspensions
Number of School Suspensions
3.5
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
3.000
2.500
2.000
1.500
1.000
0.500 No Mentor Mentor
High Religion 0.000
0 Low Discrimination
High Discrimination
Fig. 4 Two-way interaction of mentor presence and racial discrimination predicting African American boys’ number of school suspensions
Low Discrim
High Discrim
Fig. 6 Two-way interaction of religious connection and racial discrimination Predicting African American boys’ school suspensions
Swanson 2007). Thus, neighborhood support may help foster positive psychological adjustment for African American boys. It should be noted, however, that there was not overwhelming support for this association across outcomes examined in this study, which underscores the need for additional work in this area.
4.500 4.000
School Engagement
Low Religion
3.500 3.000
Gender Variation in the Protective Role of Family and Community Support
2.500 2.000 1.500
No Mentor Mentor
1.000
Low Discrim
High Discrim
Fig. 5 Two-way interaction of mentor presence and racial discrimination predicting African American boys’ school engagement
suggested that there is increased conflict between mothers and daughters during adolescence (Smetana et al. 2004), support received from fathers may be an alternative source of support and help to foster positive psychological functioning in a time of increased mother-daughter conflict. There was relatively little support for gender variation in the association between community factors and adolescent adjustment. Specifically, this study found that greater neighborhood support was associated with more positive psychological adjustment among African American boys. Boys who perceived more supportive neighborhood environments also reported fewer depressive symptoms. Previous investigations have noted that neighborhood cohesion was associated with boys’ adjustment (Mello and
123
In addition, this investigation provided some support that protective factors varied for African American girls and boys. One noteworthy finding was that, though the nature of the interaction was in an unpredicted direction, father closeness moderated the relationship between racial discrimination and African American girls’ school suspensions. For girls reporting greater father support, perceived discrimination was associated with greater school behavior problems. Although the same pattern emerged for girls reporting less supportive relationships with their fathers, it was less marked. Due to the curious and unexpected nature of this finding, it is important to consider possible explanations. First, it is possible that the cross-sectional nature of this study design can explain these findings. In particular, studies have noted that child characteristics and behaviors can motivate parents’ interactions and involvement with their children. Thus, it is possible that our findings reflect fathers’ responses to their daughters’ experiences with racial discrimination and their school adjustment. For instance, increased school behavior problems may prompt fathers’ to be more supportive and engaged during a time of increased stress.
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29
Also, a potential explanation for the observed interaction between father support and racial discrimination could be the potential contributions of mothers’ parenting behaviors. Research has suggested that the concerted effort of maternal and paternal parenting practices is an important consideration when examining youth adjustment (Cabrera et al. 2009; Coley and Morris 2002; Leadbeater et al. 1996). For example, Leadbeater et al. (1996) found that, when mother-father conflict was high, father involvement was associated with greater externalizing behaviors for African American and Hispanic children. Also, given the high number of adolescents residing in single-parent, primarily female-headed households in this investigation, fathers’ residential status may be an important consideration. In particular, studies have indicated that father residential status may moderate the relationship between father engagement (e.g., support and trust) and African American girls’ outcomes (Coley 2003). A different pattern emerged regarding girls’ school engagement. As predicted, for girls reporting greater closeness with their fathers, racial discrimination was unrelated to school engagement (Fig. 2). However, when father-daughter closeness was low, racial discrimination was associated with greater school engagement. Though contrary to our expectations, these findings may underscore African American girls’ awareness of their environment and perceptions regarding behaviors needed to change these conditions. Specifically, increased racial discrimination, coupled with less support from fathers, may propel some girls to focus their efforts on academic and career success as a means of transcending these barriers. Existing studies have suggested that awareness of social barriers may promote greater academic engagement and aspirations among African American girls (O’Connor 1997). Furthermore, our investigation suggests that there is even greater complexity in this relationship, such that girls’ awareness of available supports and these race-related behaviors have implications for the academic-related beliefs and aspirations. As several studies have indicated contrasting findings, additional work is necessary to contextualize these associations. Mentor presence emerged as a protective factor for boys. Among boys reporting having a community mentor, racial discrimination was unrelated to their school behavioral problems and school engagement. However, for boys not reporting mentor presence in their lives, racial discrimination was related to less positive school adjustment (greater school behavioral problems; lower school engagement). This finding is of particular interest given articulations that community mentors have been suggested as critical to the promotion of positive adjustment among African American male youth (Barbarin 2010).
25
Specifically, studies have demonstrated the positive impact of non-familial mentors on African American males’ adjustment (e.g., Kogan and Brody 2010; Utsey et al. 2003). We can also glean support for studies indicating that community-level resources were more strongly associated with African American boys’ adjustment outcomes in comparison to African American girls (Nichols et al. 2010). To date, however, few studies have explored whether mentor presence mitigates the negative association between racial discrimination and African American boys’ adjustment. Our study adds to the existing empirical literature on the potential influence of community mentors on the adjustment of African American male adolescents. Work has suggested that religiosity is an important stress buffer for African American women and girls (Grant et al. 2000). However, our investigation did not support our initial hypothesis. This investigation found that religious connection was protective for African American boys and partially mitigated the negative association between racial discrimination and boys’ adjustment. Among boys reporting less religious connection, the association between school behavior and reported discrimination was greater for boys reporting a greater religious connection. Thus, this investigation indicated that religious connection partially buffered the association between racial discrimination and boys’ school behavior. Previous work by Spencer et al. (2003), which found that religious coping and beliefs about the importance of religion were associated with greater emotional well-being among African American boys, but not African American girls, bolsters our study findings. Although social support factors moderated the association between racial discrimination and indicators of school adjustment, social support did not buffer against diminished psychological adjustment. Thus, while directly promoting psychological adjustment, individual social support factors may not completely mitigate the deleterious impact of racial discrimination on diminished psychological wellbeing. Although our discrimination measure did not examine the contexts in which these encounters occurred, existing studies have suggested that African American adolescents report experiencing racial discrimination within the school context (Chavous et al. 2008; Fisher et al. 2000). Therefore, it is conceivable that the examined social support factors are in response to youths’ experiences at school and may include strategies for coping within the school context. Further, these strategies may include both instrumental and emotional forms of social support. Although we were not able to tap into the nature of this support or if it is in response to prior experiences, this investigation suggests that social support sources can partially buffer the negative association between racial discrimination and school adjustment.
123
26
Limitation and Future Directions Despite the contributions of this investigation, it is not without limitation. First, our study utilized a cross-sectional, single-informant design. Thus, we are not able to establish temporal order of the explored relationships. It is possible that youth who have less positive indicators of adjustment (e.g., depressive symptoms; school suspensions) might perceive more discriminatory experiences. Longitudinal studies (e.g., Seaton et al. 2009; Brody et al. 2006), however, have demonstrated that discrimination has a long-term, negative impact on adolescent adjustment. Additionally, this sample was primarily composed of adolescents residing in single-family households and may not be representative of all African American adolescents. Also, given that the amount of variance explained by social and community support was relatively low, there may be additional sources that are relevant to the adjustment of African American adolescents. For instance, studies have provided evidence that sibling and peer relationships provide a buffering role for African American adolescents (Benhorin and McMahon 2008; Soli et al. 2009). Thus, future studies should examine additional domains of social support and whether their protective function varies by gender. In addition, prospective studies should utilize qualitative or mixed-method approaches to further explicate the role of gender in African American adolescents’ meaning-making surrounding issues of racial discrimination and available contextual supports. Conclusions and Implications Given that studies have demonstrated the negative influence of racial discrimination on African American adolescents’ psychological and school adjustment (Caldwell et al. 2004; Seaton 2009; Sellers et al. 2006), research continues to focus on the identification of protective factors. To date, studies have provided evidence for the mitigating role of race-related factors (e.g., racial identity; racial socialization) (Neblett et al. 2006). Still, consistent with culturally-specific developmental frameworks (e.g., Boykin 1986; Garcia-Coll et al. 1996; Spencer et al. 2003), there may be additional contextual resources and assets that serve to promote positive outcomes for African American youth as well as protective against contextual stressors. Our investigation suggests that family and community supports may promote positive adjustment. Further, while racial discrimination may be stressful for African American adolescents and lead to negative adjustment, this investigation suggested that the examined social support factors can partially buffer this association. Importantly, these findings suggest that these associations are best understood with a gendered approach, with indications that promotive
123
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29
and protective factors vary for African American boys and girls. Given assertions that African American males and females have distinct contextual risks and evidence of gender differences across a number of outcomes, our study provides support for the development of culturally-specific programming that acknowledges the vital role of gender in promoting positive psychological and school adjustment for African American male and female youth.
References Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Al-Fadhli, H. M., & Kersen, T. (2010). How religious, social, and cultural capital factors influence educational aspirations of African American adolescents. Journal of Negro Education, 79(3), 380–389. Ball, J., Armistead, L., & Austin, B. (2003). The relationship between religiosity and adjustment among African-American, female, urban adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 26(4), 431–446. doi: 10.1016/S0140-1971(03)00037-X. Barbarin, O. A. (2010). Halting African American boys’ progression from pre-K to prison: What families, schools, and communities can do! American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 80(1), 81–88. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-0025.2010.01009.x. Barrett, B. (2010). Religion and habitus: Exploring the relationship between religious involvement and educational outcomes and orientations among urban African American students. Urban Education, 45(4), 448–479. doi:10.1177/0042085910372349. Bean, R., Barber, B., & Crane, D. (2006). Parental support, behavioral control, and psychological control among African American youth: The relationships to academic grades, delinquency, and depression. Journal of Family Issues, 27(10), 1335–1355. Benhorin, S., & McMahon, S. D. (2008). Exposure to violence and aggression: protective roles of social support among urban African American youth. Journal of Community Psychology, 36(6), 723–743. Billingsley, A., & Caldwell, C. H. (1991). The church, the family and the school in the African American community. Journal of Negro Education, 60, 427–440. Bowen-Reid, T. L., & Harrell, J. P. (2002). Racist experiences and health outcomes: An examination of spirituality as a buffer. Journal of Black Psychology, 28(1), 18–36. doi:10.1177/00957 98402028001002. Boykin, A. W. (1986). The triple quandary and the schooling of African American children. In N. Neiser (Ed.), The school achievement of minority children (pp. 57–92). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Brody, G. H., Murry, V., Gerrard, M., Gibbons, F. X., McNair, L., Brown, A. C., et al. (2006). The Strong African American Families Program: Prevention of youths’ high-risk behavior and a test of a model of change. Journal of Family Psychology, 20(1), 1–11. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.20.1.1. Brown, D. L. (2008). African American resiliency: Examining racial socialization and social support as protective factors. Journal of Black Psychology, 34(1), 32–48. doi:10.1177/0095798407310 538. Bryant, A. L., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2003). Role models and psychosocial outcomes among African American adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 18(1), 36–67. doi:10.1177/ 0743558402238276.
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29 Bush, L. (2004). How black mothers participate in the development of manhood and masculinity: What do we know about black mothers and their sons? Journal of Negro Education, 73(4), 381–391. doi:10.2307/4129623. Cabrera, N. J., Shannon, J. D., & La Taillade, J. J. (2009). Predictors of coparenting in Mexican American families and links to parenting and child social emotional development. Infant Mental Health Journal, 30(5), 523–548. doi:10.1002/imhj.20227. Caldwell, C., Wright, J., Zimmerman, M., Walsemann, K., Williams, D., & Isichei, P. (2004). Enhancing adolescent health behaviors through strengthening non-resident father-son relationships: a model for intervention with African-American families. Health Education Research, 19(6), 644–656. Chavous, T. M., Rivas-Drake, D., Smalls, C., Griffin, T., & Cogburn, C. (2008). Gender matters, too: The influences of school racial discrimination and racial identity on academic engagement outcomes among African American adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 44(3), 637–654. Cohen, S., & Wills, T. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98(2), 310–357. doi:10.1037/ 0033-2909.98.2.310. Coley, R. (2003). Daughter-father relationships and adolescent psychosocial functioning in low-income African American families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65(4), 867–875. Coley, R., & Morris, J. (2002). Comparing father and mother reports of father involvement among low-income minority families. Journal of Marriage And Family, 64(4), 982–997. doi:10.1111/ j.1741-3737.2002.00982.x. Cooper, S. M. (2009). Associations between father-daughter relationship quality and the academic engagement of African American adolescent girls: Self-esteem as a mediator? Journal of Black Psychology, 35(4), 495–516. doi:10.1177/0095798409339185. Copeland-Linder, N., Lambert, S. F., Chen, Y., & Ialongo, N. S. (2011). Contextual stress and health risk behaviors among African American adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40(2), 158–173. doi:10.1007/s10964-010-9520-y. Corneille, M. A., Ashcraft, A. M., & Belgrave, F. Z. (2005). What’s culture got to do with it? Prevention programs for African American adolescent girls. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 16(4, Suppl B), 38–47. doi:10.1353/hpu.2005. 0109. Crawford, T. N., Cohen, P., Midlarsky, E., & Brook, J. S. (2001). Internalizing symptoms in adolescents: Gender differences in vulnerability to parental distress and discord. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 11(1), 95–118. doi:10.1111/15327795.00005. Crouter, A. C., Baril, M. E., Davis, K. D., & Mchale, S. M. (2008). Processes linking social class and racial socialization in African American dual-earner families. Journal of Marriage And Family, 70(5), 1311–1325. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00568.x. Dembo, R., Schmeidler, J., Burgos, W., & Taylor, R. (1985). Environmental setting and early drug involvement among innercity junior high school youths. International Journal of the Addictions, 20(8), 1239–1255. Dotterer, A. M., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (2009). Sociocultural factors and school engagement among African American youth: The roles of racial discrimination, racial socialization, and ethnic identity. Applied Developmental Science, 13(2), 61–73. doi:10.1080/10888690902801442. DuBois, D. L., Burk-Braxton, C., Swenson, L. P., Tevendale, H. D., & Hardesty, J. L. (2002). Race and gender influences on adjustment in early adolescence: Investigation of an integrative model. Child Development, 73(5), 1573–1592. doi:10.1111/1467-8624. 00491. Dubois, D. L., Felner, R. D., & Meares, H. (1994). Prospective investigation of the effects of socioeconomic disadvantage, life
27 stress, and social support on early adolescent adjustment. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103, 511–522. Fergus, S., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2005). Adolescent resilience: A framework for understanding healthy development in the face of risk. Annual Review of Public Health, 26, 399–419. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.26.021304.144357. Fischer, A. R., & Shaw, C. M. (1999). African Americans’ mental health and perceptions of racist discrimination: The moderating effects of racial socialization experiences and self-esteem. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46(3), 395–407. Fisher, C. B., Wallace, S. A., Fenton, R. E., Fisher, C. B., Wallace, S. A., & Fenton, R. E. (2000). Adolescent discrimination distress index. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29, 679–695. Fitzpatrick, K. M., Piko, B. F., Wright, D. R., & LaGory, M. (2005). Depressive Symptomatology, Exposure to Violence, and the Role of Social Capital Among African American Adolescents. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 75(2), 262–274. doi: 10.1037/0002-9432.75.2.262. Franko, D., Striegel-Moore, R., Brown, K., Barton, B., McMahon, R., Schreiber, G., et al. (2004). Expanding our understanding of the relationship between negative life events and depressive symptoms in black and white adolescent girls. Psychological Medicine, 34, 1319–1330. doi:10.1017/S0033291704003186. Garcia-Coll, C. G., Maberty, G., Jenkins, R., McAdoo, H. P., Crnic, K., Wasik, B. H., et al. (1996). An integrative model for the study of developmental competencies in minority children. Child Development, 67, 1891–1914. Gaylord-Harden, N. K., & Cunningham, J. A. (2009). The impact of racial discrimination and coping strategies on internalizing symptoms in African American youth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(4), 532–543. Gibbons, F. X., Etcheverry, P. E., Stock, M. L., Gerrard, M., Weng, C., Kiviniemi, M., et al. (2010). Exploring the link between racial discrimination and substance use: What mediates? What buffers? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,. doi: 10.1037/a0019880. Grant, K. E., O’Koon, J. H., Davis, T. H., Roache, N. A., Poindexter, L. M., Armstrong, M. L., et al. (2000). Protective factors affecting low-income urban African American youth exposed to stress. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 20(4), 388–417. doi: 10.1177/0272431600020004002. Hammack, P. L., Richards, M. H., Luo, Z., Edlynn, E. S., & Roy, K. (2004). Social support factors as moderators of community violence exposure among inner-city African American young adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33(3), 450–462. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp3303_3. Harris-Britt, A., Valrie, C. R., Kurtz-Costes, B., & Rowley, S. J. (2007). Perceived racial discrimination and self-esteem in African American youth: Racial socialization as a protective factor. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 17(4), 669–682. Hurd, N., & Zimmerman, M. (2010). Natural mentors, mental health, and risk behaviors: A longitudinal analysis of African American adolescents transitioning into adulthood. American Journal of Community Psychology, 46(1/2), 36–48. doi:10.1007/s10464010-9325-x. Irvin, M., Farmer, T., Leung, M., Thompson, J., & Hutchins, B. (2010). School, community, and church activities: Relationship to academic achievement of low-income African American early adolescents in the rural Deep South. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 25(4), 1–21. Klaw, E. L., Rhodes, J. E., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (2003). Natural mentors in the lives of African American adolescent mothers: Tracking relationships over time. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 32(3), 223–232. doi:10.1023/A:10225517215. Kogan, S. M., & Brody, G. H. (2010). Linking parenting and informal mentor processes to depressive symptoms among rural African
123
28 American young adult men. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16(3), 299–306. doi:10.1037/a0018672. Kogan, S. M., Brody, G. H., & Chen, Y. (2011). Natural mentoring processes deter externalizing problems among rural African American emerging adults: A prospective analysis.American Journal of Community Psychology, 48(3–4), 272–283. doi: 10.1007/s10464-011-9425-2. Leadbeater, B., Way, N., & Raden, A. (1996). Why not marry your baby’s father? Answers from African American and Hispanic adolescent mothers. In B. Leadbeater, N. Way, B. Leadbeater, & N. Way (Eds.), Urban girls: Resisting stereotypes, creating identities (pp. 193–209). New York, NY: New York University Press. Leventhal, T., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2000). The neighborhoods they live in: The effects of neighborhood residence on child and adolescent outcomes. Psychological Bulletin, 126(2), 309–337. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.126.2.309. Levin, J. S., Taylor, R. J., & Chatters, L. M. (1994). Race and gender differences in religiosity among older adults: Findings from four national surveys. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 49, S137–S145. Li, Y., & Lerner, R. M. (2011). Trajectories of school engagement during adolescence: Implications for grades, depression, delinquency, and substance use. Developmental Psychology, 47(1), 233–247. doi:10.1037/a0021307. Lindsey, M. A., Joe, S., & Nebbitt, V. (2010). Family matters: The role of mental health stigma and social support on depressive symptoms and subsequent help seeking among African American boys. Journal of Black Psychology, 36(4), 458–482. doi: 10.1177/0095798409355796. Mandara, J. (2006). The impact of family functioning on African American males’ academic achievement: A review and clarification of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 108(2), 206–223. Mandara, J., & Murray, C. B. (2000). Effects of parental status, income, and family functioning on African-American adolescent self-esteem. Journal of Family Psychology, 14(3), 475–490. Mandara, J., & Pikes, C. L. (2008). Guilt trips and love withdrawal: Does psychological control predict depressive symptoms among African American adolescents? Family Relations: Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 57, 603–611. Mello, Z. R., & Swanson, D. P. (2007). Gender differences in African American adolescents’ personal, educational, and occupational expectations and perceptions of neighborhood quality. Journal of Black Psychology, 33(2), 150–168. doi:10.1177/00957984072 99514. Nasim, A., Utsey, S. O., Corona, R., & Belgrave, F. Z. (2006). Religiosity, refusal efficacy, and substance use among African-American adolescents and young adults. Journal of Ethnicity in Substance Abuse, 5(3), 29–49. doi:10.1300/J233 v05n03_02. Neblett, E. W., Philip, C. L., Cogburn, C. D. & Sellers, R. M. (2006). African American Adolescents’ Discrimination Experiences and Academic Achievement: Racial Socialization as a Cultural Compensatory and Protective Factor. Journal of Black Psychology, 32, 199–218. Neblett, E. W., Smalls, C. P., Ford, K. R., Nguyen, H. X., & Sellers, R. M. (2009). Racial socialization and racial identity: African American parents’ messages about race as precursors to identity. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(2), 189–203. Neblett, E. W., White, R. L., Ford, K. R., Philip, C. L., Nguyeˆn, H. X., & Sellers, R. M. (2008). Patterns of racial socialization and psychological adjustment: Can parental communications about race reduce the impact of racial discrimination? Journal of Research on Adolescence (Blackwell Publishing Limited), 18(3), 477–515.
123
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29 Nichols, T. M., Kotchick, B. A., Barry, C., & Haskins, D. G. (2010). Understanding the educational aspirations of African American adolescents: Child, family, and community factors. Journal of Black Psychology, 36(1), 25–48. doi:10.1177/00957984093 44084. O’Connor, C. (1997). Dispositions toward (collective) struggle and educational resilience in the Inner city: A case analysis of six African-American high school students. American Educational Research Journal, 34(4), 593–629. doi:10.2307/1163351. Prelow, H. M., Mosher, C. E., & Bowman, M. A. (2006). Perceived racial discrimination, social support, and psychological adjustment among African American college students. Journal of Black Psychology, 32(4), 442–454. Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385–401. doi:10.1177/01466216770010 0306. Rowlison, R., & Felner, R. (1988). Major life events, hassles, and adaptation in adolescence: Confounding in the conceptualization and measurement of life stress and adjustment revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(3), 432–444. Russell, A., & Saebel, J. (1997). Mother–son, mother–daughter, father–son, and father–daughter: Are they distinct relationships? Developmental Review, 17(2), 111–147. doi:10.1006/drev.1996. 0431. Seaton, E. K. (2009). Perceived racial discrimination and racial identity profiles among African American adolescents. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15(2), 137–144. doi: 10.1037/a0015506. Seaton, E. K., Caldwell, C. H., Sellers, R. M., & Jackson, J. S. (2010). An intersectional approach for understanding perceived discrimination and psychological well-being among African American and Caribbean Black youth. Developmental Psychology, 46(5), 1372–1379. doi:10.1037/a0019869. Seaton, E. K., & Yip, T. (2009). School and neighborhood contexts, perceptions of racial discrimination, and psychological wellbeing among African American adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(2), 153–163. Seaton, E. K., Yip, T., & Sellers, R. M. (2009). A longitudinal examination of racial identity and racial discrimination among African American adolescents. Child Development, 80(2), 406–417. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01268.x. Sellers, R. M., Caldwell, C. H., Schmeelk-Cone, K. H., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2003). Racial identity, racial discrimination, perceived stress, and psychological distress among African American young adults. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 44(3), 302–317. doi:10.2307/1519781. Sellers, R. M., Copeland-Linder, N., Martin, P. P., & Lewis, R. (2006). Racial identity matters: The relationship between racial discrimination and psychological functioning in African American adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16(2), 187–216. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2006.00128.x. Sellers, R. M., & Shelton, J. (2003). The role of racial identity in perceived racial discrimination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(5), 1079–1092. doi:10.1037/0022-3514. 84.5.1079. Sibley, C. G. (2008). Utilities for examining interactions in multiple regression [computer software]. University of Auckland. Smalls, C., White, R., Chavous, T., & Sellers, R. (2007). Racial ideological beliefs and racial discrimination experiences as predictors of academic engagement among African American adolescents. Journal of Black Psychology, 33(3), 299–330. Smetana, J., & Daddis, C. (2002). Domain-specific antecedents of parental psychological control and monitoring: The role of parenting beliefs and practices. Child Development, 73, 563–580.
J Child Fam Stud (2013) 22:15–29 Smetana, J. G., Metzger, A., & Campione-Barr, N. (2004). African American Late Adolescents Relationships with Parents: Developmental Transitions and Longitudinal Patterns. Child Development, 75(3), 932–947. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00715.x. Soli, A. R., McHale, S. M., & Feinberg, M. E. (2009). Risk and protective effects of sibling relationships among African American adolescents. Family Relations, 58(5), 578–592. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2009.00576.x. Spencer, M. B., Fegley, S. G., & Harpalani, V. (2003). A theoretical and empirical examination of identity as coping: Linking coping resources to the self-processes of African American youth. Applied Developmental Science, 7(3), 181–188. doi:10.1207/S15 32480XADS0703_9. Swanson, D., Cunningham, M., & Spencer, M. (2003). Black males’ structural conditions, achievement patterns, normative needs and ‘opportunities’. Urban Education, 38(5), 608–633. doi:10.1177/ 0042085903256218. Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., Briggs, R. D., McClowry, S. G., & Snow, D. L. (2009). Maternal control and sensitivity, child gender, and maternal education in relation to children’s behavioral outcomes in African American families. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(3), 321–331. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2008.12.018. Taylor, R., Chatters, L. M., Hardison, C., & Riley, A. (2001). Informal social support networks and subjective well-being
29 among African Americans. Journal of Black Psychology, 27(4), 439–463. doi:10.1177/0095798401027004004. Taylor, R. D., Seaton, E., & Dominguez, A. (2008). Kinship support, family relations, and psychological adjustment among lowincome African American mothers and adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 18(1), 1–22. Thoits, P. A. (2011). Mechanisms linking social ties and support to physical and mental health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 52(2), 145–161. doi:10.1177/0022146510395592. Trask-Tate, A., Cunningham, M., & Lang-DeGrange, L. (2010). The importance of family: The impact of social support on symptoms of psychological distress in African American girls. Research in Human Development, 7(3), 164–182. doi:10.1080/15427609. 2010.504458. Utsey, S. O., Howard, A., & Williams, O. (2003). Therapeutic group mentoring with African American male adolescents. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 25(2), 126–139. Williams, D. R., Yu, Y., Jackson, J. S., & Anderson, N. B. (1997). Racial differences in physical and mental health. Journal of Health Psychology, 2(3), 335–351. Zimmerman, M. A., & Brenner, A. (2010). Resilience in adolescence: Overcoming neighborhood disadvantage. In J. W. Reich, A. J. Zautra, & J. S. Hall (Eds.), Handbook of adult resilience (pp. 283–308). New York: Guilford Press.
123
