Multiracial people are the fastest growing population in the United States; yet despite their growing population size, they often experience prejudice, stigma, and discrimination (Pew Research Center, 2015). Research suggests that racist discrimination—both in its overt and covert forms—is associated with mental health concerns for multiracial people (e.g., Sue & Spanierman, 2020; Townsend et al., 2009; Tran et al., 2016). Currently, very few studies have assessed proximal stressors, or those related to subjective perceptions and appraisals, with samples of multiracial people. Research with other racial minority groups suggests that expectations of rejection and internalized racism are significant stressors for these populations (Chan & Mendoza‐Denton, 2008; Henson et al., 2013). While several measures currently exist that examine the race-based stressors multiracial people encounter, none of the scales adequately address proximal stressors (Franco & O’Brien, 2018; Salahuddin & O’Brien, 2011; Yoo et al., 2016). The purpose of the present study is to address the limitations of previous measures and develop a measurement of race-related proximal minority stressors for multiracial people. Based on a review of multiracial minority stressors (i.e., expectations of rejection, internalized monoracism, and concealment of multiracial identity) and psychological distress and well-being, a measure of minoritized multiracial stress was developed (the Minoritized Multiracial Stress Scale; MMSS). The proposed MMSS was evaluated by eight expert reviewers and a pilot study of 13 multiracial people. Items were modified based on their feedback and the scale was subsequently administered to a sample of 569 self-identified multiracial people. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to determine and confirm factor structure. A four-factor structure model consisting of internalized monoracism, concealment and concealment motivation, expectations of rejection, and what appeared to be a pride construct, emerged from the exploratory factor analysis. The pride factor was not supported in the confirmatory factor analysis. The final model confirmed in the confirmatory factor analysis sample and supported in the full sample was composed of three factors: internalized monoracism, concealment and concealment motivation, and expectations of rejection. Convergent, concurrent, and discriminant validity were established. The present research proposes a valid and reliable measurement of proximal stressors for multiracial people. Implications of the MMSS, its limitations, and future directions for clinical and research work are discussed.

Multiracial people are the fastest growing population in the United States; yet despite their growing population size, they often experience prejudice, stigma, and discrimination (Pew Research Center, 2015). Research suggests that racist discrimination—both in its overt and covert forms—is associated with mental health concerns for multiracial people (e.g., Sue & Spanierman, 2020; Townsend et al., 2009; Tran et al., 2016). Currently, very few studies have assessed proximal stressors, or those related to subjective perceptions and appraisals, with samples of multiracial people. Research with other racial minority groups suggests that expectations of rejection and internalized racism are significant stressors for these populations (Chan & Mendoza‐Denton, 2008; Henson et al., 2013). While several measures currently exist that examine the race-based stressors multiracial people encounter, none of the scales adequately address proximal stressors (Franco & O’Brien, 2018; Salahuddin & O’Brien, 2011; Yoo et al., 2016). The purpose of the present study is to address the limitations of previous measures and develop a measurement of race-related proximal minority stressors for multiracial people. Based on a review of multiracial minority stressors (i.e., expectations of rejection, internalized monoracism, and concealment of multiracial identity) and psychological distress and well-being, a measure of minoritized multiracial stress was developed (the Minoritized Multiracial Stress Scale; MMSS). The proposed MMSS was evaluated by eight expert reviewers and a pilot study of 13 multiracial people. Items were modified based on their feedback and the scale was subsequently administered to a sample of 569 self-identified multiracial people. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to determine and confirm factor structure. A four-factor structure model consisting of internalized monoracism, concealment and concealment motivation, expectations of rejection, and what appeared to be a pride construct, emerged from the exploratory factor analysis. The pride factor was not supported in the confirmatory factor analysis. The final model confirmed in the confirmatory factor analysis sample and supported in the full sample was composed of three factors: internalized monoracism, concealment and concealment motivation, and expectations of rejection. Convergent, concurrent, and discriminant validity were established. The present research proposes a valid and reliable measurement of proximal stressors for multiracial people. Implications of the MMSS, its limitations, and future directions for clinical and research work are discussed.

The current study examines the effect of religious orientation, social dominance orientation, right wing authoritarianism, and group socialization on the degree to which covert prejudice beliefs are endorsed. This study is novel in that individual and intergroup factors are simultaneously considered. Unlike much of the existing research, the study measures all six types of religious orientation for a nuanced examination of the different approaches to religion and the effect this has on attitude formation and maintenance. The study also demonstrates higher levels of generalizability in that questionnaires were distributed to a diverse sample and also considered many forms of discrimination (racism, sexism, classism, and heterosexism). Additionally, relevant prejudice measures that better represent covert, modern day prejudice are used in the current study. Social dominance orientation (SDO) was strongly and positively correlated with all four types of subtle prejudice. In hierarchical regression modeling, right wing authoritarianism was the strongest predictor variable for all prejudice outcome variables. SDO was the second strongest predictor for all variables except for benevolent sexism. Demographic and religious orientation predictors varied by prejudice outcome variable. Only immanence and intrinsic emerged as significant religious orientations predictors. Multiple regression models with only religious orientation predictors were also conducted to examine the relationship of each religious orientation to each prejudice when the other religious orientations were held constant. Different trends for different prejudice attitudes were found for intrinsic and immanence orientations. Quest orientation was negatively correlated with prejudice and extrinsic religious orientation was positively correlated with prejudice for all prejudice outcome variables. Increasing intolerance with more indiscriminately pro- or anti-religious responding was not elicited. Instead a pattern of increasing pro-religiosity was related to higher prejudice scores. Progressive congregational factors correlated with lower colorblind racial attitudes, benevolent sexism, classism, and homonegativity among congregants.

Employers' racism and preferences regarding Blacks in relation to: cultural appearance, womens' physical attractiveness, and darkness of complexion.

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of perceived discrimination on Samoan health. This study employed purposive data collection and was conducted quantitatively using a questionnaire format, which measured everyday perceived discrimination, depression, and physical health.

What are the perceptions, attitudes, and feelings of Arab-Muslim students about racism and prejudice towards their ethnicity and religious affiliation before September 11, 2001 and after?.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / With over 40 years of research on the well-documented issue of racial disparities in school discipline, scholars have begun to explore a plethora of plausible causalities for this phenomenon. Recent literature on the causal agents have centered on cultural differences and/or racial prejudices held by educators. Building from this emerging logic, this dissertation specifically focused on the disposition (e.g. enduring traits, character type, mentality, and temperament) of educators and its influence, if any, on discipline-related outcomes. Additionally, this exploratory study sought to build a conceptual map for future research to explore how educators' dispositions may act as conduits between systemic racism and the historic racial disparities in discipline-related outcomes. Through an intensive, multiyear embedded case study of four middle schools with both high and low rates of racial disproportionality in school discipline and with the creation and use of the Four Domains, this dissertation explored whether discipline-related outcomes are the result of systemic racism mediated by educators' dispositions. Findings from the analysis suggested the existence of shared characteristics among the dispositions of those categorized as high and low referring. Specific to those findings, trends within low referring teachers suggested that low referring teachers maintain high and consistent expectations of student behavior, but allowed for flexibility in how their discipline response was mediated out among their students. Despite a deferred approach within discipline response, low referring teachers were consistent and did not show favoritism. On the contrary, high referring teachers were inconsistent with their responses and demonstrated biases in actions and beliefs. Accordingly, it was found that high referring teachers held racially deficit beliefs about Black students and their families. Additionally, high referring teachers were more represented by the Four Domains in comparison to lower referring teachers. As a result, findings from the Four Domains support the existence of a causal link among systemic racism, higher referring teachers, and racial disparities in school discipline. In particular, it was found that classroom teachers engage in and hold racially deficit views of Blacks and these same teachers disproportionately refer Black students for out-of-school suspension.

Notre dissertation investigue les actions individuelles et légales de contestation des discriminations raciales ou ethniques par ses victimes, objet rarement étudié en psychologie sociale. Alors que les actions collectives s’inscrivent dans un cadre des relations intergroupes, nos études montrent que les actions individuelles restent plutôt dans le cadre de relations perçues endogroupales par les acteurs qui contestent les discriminations. Les implications en termes d’identité sociale dans ce type d’action sont différentes et nous postulons qu’une catégorisation à un niveau supra-ordonné (ex. comme membre de la société hôte ou être humain) facilite l’entreprise des actions individuelles de contestation des discriminations par la voie légale. L’égalitarisme qui rend saillant ce niveau de catégorisation supra-ordonné, et en tant que croyance qui délégitime le statut désavantagé des individus stigmatisés, faciliterait la remise en question du statu quo en augmentant la perception de la discrimination ainsi que la tendance à s’engager dans des actions de lutte contre les discriminations par la voie légale. De plus, motivés par des démarches qui rentabilisent le rapport coûts-bénéfices, les individus portés par l’égalitarisme et qui perçoivent la discrimination s’engageraient plus facilement dans des actions de contestation lorsqu’ils pensent qu’ils peuvent le faire au bénéfice de la collectivité plutôt que dans leur propre intérêt uniquement. D’autre part, l’entreprise d’actions contre les discriminations par la voie légale nécessite une connaissance relative de ces lois qui fonctionnent comme des normes injonctives indiquant aux individus ce qui est admis ou non en société (ex. caractère interdit de la discrimination). Une source experte (ex. organisme de lutte contre le racisme) qui véhicule ce type de normes injonctives anti-racistes serait particulièrement influente dans l’entreprise d’actions légales pour lutter contre les discriminations. / Doctorat en Sciences Psychologiques et de l'éducation / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished