Article

Does health predict the reporting of racial discrimination or do reports of discrimination predict health? Findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth

UCLA, Community Health Sciences, 650 Charles E. Young Dr. South, Los Angeles, CA 90024, USA.
Social Science [?] Medicine (Impact Factor: 2.56). 04/2009; 68(9):1676-84. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.02.002
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Racial discrimination may contribute to diminished well-being, possibly through stress and restricted economic advancement. Our study examines whether reports of racial discrimination predict health problems, and whether health problems predict the reporting of racial discrimination. Data come from years 1979 to 1983 of the US National Longitudinal Study of Youth, focusing on respondents of Black (n=1851), Hispanic (n=1170), White (n=3450) and other (n=1387) descent. Our analyses indicate that reports of racial discrimination in seeking employment predict health-related work limitations, although these limitations develop over time, and not immediately. We also find that reports of discrimination at two time-points appear more strongly related to health-related work limitations than reports at one time-point. A key finding is that these limitations do not predict the subsequent reporting of racial discrimination in seeking employment. These findings inform our knowledge of the temporal ordering of racial discrimination in seeking employment and health-related work conditions among young adults. The findings also indicate that future research should carefully attend to the patterns and timing of discrimination.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Gilbert Gee, Jun 30, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
53 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives: Despite burgeoning evidence regarding the pathways by which experiences of racism influence health outcomes, little attention has been paid to the relationship between racism and oral health-related behaviours in particular. We hypothesised that self-reported racism was associated with tooth brushing, and that this association was mediated by perceived stress and sense of control and moderated by social support. Methods: Data from 365 pregnant Aboriginal Australian women were used to evaluate tooth brushing behaviour, socio-demographic factors, psychosocial factors, general health, risk behaviours and racism exposure. Bivariate associations were explored and hierarchical logistic regression models estimated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for tooth brushing. Perceived stress and sense of control were examined as mediators of the association between self-reported racism and tooth brushing using binary mediation with bootstrapping. Results: High levels of self-reported racism persisted as a risk indicator for tooth brushing (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27,0.98) after controlling for significant covariates. Perceived stress mediated the relationship between self-reported racism and tooth brushing: the direct effect of racism on tooth brushing was attenuated, and the indirect effect on tooth brushing was significant (beta coefficient -0.09; biascorrected 95% CI -0.166,-0.028; 48.1% of effect mediated). Sense of control was insignificant as a mediator of the relationship between racism and tooth brushing. Conclusions: High levels of self-reported racism were associated with non-optimal tooth brushing behaviours, and perceived stress mediated this association among this sample of pregnant Aboriginal women.. Limitations and implications are discussed.
    Community dental health 09/2014; 31(3). DOI:10.1922/CDH_3298Ben08 · 0.87 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In recent decades, sociologists have increasingly adopted an intersectionality framework to explore and explain the complex and interconnected nature of inequalities in the areas of race, class, and gender. Using an inclusion-centered approach and a sample of 204 low-socioeconomic-status (SES) African American women, the authors theorize and explore the role of racial and gender discrimination in the stress process. Analyses examine relationships between social stressors (racial and gender discrimination) and individual stressors occurring in each of six distinct social contexts. Furthermore, the authors evaluate the effects of racial and gender discrimination as compared to individual stressors on three indicators of mental health and well-being. Findings suggest that racial and gender discrimination increases risk for poor health and low well-being, working both directly and indirectly through increased vulnerability to individual stressors. This research demonstrates the value of a more comprehensive study of stressors that influence the health of low-SES African American women and other multiply disadvantaged groups.
    Sociological Perspectives 03/2013; 56(1):25-48. DOI:10.1525/sop.2012.56.1.25 · 0.57 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Differences in health between racial groups in the United States are significant and persistent. Many studies have documented these differences as a result of a variety of different social factors. An emerging emphasis is the impact of racism in its various forms on physical and mental health. Social stress theory conceptualizes racism as a social stresssor which can produce negative health consequences for racial minorities. This study uses binary logit and negative binomial regression models of four items from the 2004 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) to test social stress theory and examine the relationship between stress symptoms from perceived racism and overall health (N = 32,585). The effect of race on the experience of emotional and physical stress symptoms from racism is substantial. Furthermore, experiencing both emotional and physical stress from perceived racist treatment is an important factor in predicting the number of poor mental and physical health days, indicating that the experience of stress from perceived racism is related to overall poorer health.
    Sociological Inquiry 02/2013; 83(1). DOI:10.1111/j.1475-682X.2012.00433.x · 0.79 Impact Factor