No description available.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / AIM Racial identity has been shown to buffer against the effects of racial discrimination among African Americans. Recently, researchers have developed a more comprehensive assessment of racial identity through the construction of profiles. These profiles help better identify combinations of racial identity that are most protective, as well as those that have the potential to increase risk. To date a majority of the research has been conducted on internalizing and academic outcomes, with limited research on externalizing outcomes, such as substance use. The current study aimed to fill this gap in the literature. METHODS 345 African American college students (80.0% female, 88.4% USA-born, and Mage=21.56) completed measures on racial identity, racial discrimination, internalizing symptomology, academic motivation, and substance use. RESULTS Four racial identity profiles were identified and labeled race-focused (n=228), multiculturalist (n=64), integrationist (n=38), and undifferentiated (n=15). Several direct effects were observed. Multigroup analysis, stratified by profile, revealed several direct relationships between racial identity profiles and outcomes. The probability of being in the multiculturalist profile was negatively associated with depression and stress and positively associated with academic motivation. The probability of being in the race-focused profile was positively associated with cannabis use and the probability of being in the integrationist profile was negatively associated with academic motivation. Being in the undifferentiated profile was not significantly related to any of the outcomes. Two specific moderating effects were also observed; individuals in the integrationist profile were significantly lower in academic motivation as a result of racial discrimination than individuals in the race-focused profile (b=0.10, SE=0.05, p=0.046). Individuals in the integrationist profile were also higher in stress as a result of racial discrimination than individuals in the race-focused profile, however this effect was only trending toward significance (b=-0.14, SE=0.08, p=0.080). CONCLUSION Based on these results, there is evidence for the differential direct and moderating associations of racial identity profiles with various health and behavioral outcomes, such that some appear protective whereas others increase risk. These findings can be used to inform future research related to racial identity and interventions for African Americans experiencing racial discrimination.

No description available.

The present research investigated the role that a leader’s gender plays in influencing Black Americans’ discrimination-claiming attitudes and behaviors. Using cross-sectional (Study 1) and experimental (Study 2 & Study 3) methods, these studies test a mediational model predicting that Blacks will have more positive discrimination-claiming outcomes when they have a White female leader than White male leader because targets will perceive the female leaders as less racially prejudiced than male leaders. Results from Study 1 revealed that Black employees viewed their female supervisors as less prejudiced towards Blacks than they viewed their male supervisors. Furthermore, Study 1 demonstrated that the less prejudiced that Blacks perceived their supervisors to be, the better discrimination-claiming outcomes they had. However, there was no evidence that perceived leader prejudice mediated the effect of leader gender on discrimination-claiming outcomes. These findings did not replicate in Study 2 where Black participants were randomly assigned to imagine they had a White female or male leader. Specifically, participants viewed the White male and female leader as equally prejudiced and had the same predicted claiming outcomes when imagining claiming discrimination to a White male vs. female leader. Study 3, in which Black participants took part in an organizational simulation with either a White female or male leader, replicated Study 1 in that female leaders were perceived as lower in prejudice than male leaders. Furthermore, Study 3 revealed preliminary evidence that perceived prejudice may mediate the effect of leader gender on perceived costs associated with claiming discrimination. Implications for how leaders can encourage targets to report discrimination, as well as a potential “leadership advantage” for female leaders are discussed. / 1 / Stefanie L Simon

“Diversity” has become one of the most commonly used words by U.S. corporations. Indeed, many companies claim that they have spent millions, sometimes billions of dollars to create an egalitarian workplace for all workers. Given the amount of money spent and the increased amount of research that corporations have done on the issue of diversity, we should expect some progress in terms of equality or equal rights for minority and female workers. However, while there has been a substantial increase in the rise of corporate philosophy espousing diversity, there is also overwhelming data that suggests minorities and women are still unable to obtain opportunities or to achieve success at the same rates as their white male counterparts. How can we explain the apparent contradictions? Furthermore, why are many companies that have historically barred minorities and women from their workplace now publicizing their support for racial and gender integration? I suggest that corporations are using the word “diversity” as an ideological tool designed to promote themselves at the forefront of equality in the U.S. Using in-depth interviews conducted with 40 middle and senior-level managers and upper-level executive officers from Fortune 1000 companies, I find that while the word diversity is frequently uttered by managers (and strategically used in various media outlets), most managers are unable to clearly define diversity. Moreover, while managers claim their companies are interested in diversity, there is no convincing evidence that would suggest this is true. Thus, my findings suggest that many corporations use “diversity” as a shield to hide the fact that nothing has really changed in the structure of U.S corporations. That is, U.S. corporations have been, and continue to be, exclusive clubhouses for upper class white males.

Racial discrimination in capital punishment has been documented from the 1700s to today. Among the 32 states that still have the death penalty, some have implemented measures at a legislative or judicial level to prevent the arbitrary imposition of the death penalty. The goal of this thesis is to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the result of one such effort, the North Carolina Racial Justice Act. Doing so will help determine if this is a model that other states should replicate, and if so, how it should be altered for a successful reimplementation.

This study investigates how white and foreign-owned mining companies have complied with the Mining and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) and Mining Charter, the core of the Broad- Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) policy in South Africa‟s mining industry. The Mining Charter demands that white and foreign-owned companies transfer 15 per cent equity to blacks by 2009, increasing to 26 per cent by 2014. It also demands 40 per cent black control and management of mining companies regardless of the shareholding that blacks own. The study used a sample of 72 mining companies to explore broad aspects; these include changes in equity ownership (company shareholding and mining assets) and in particular mining deals concluded by white and foreign-owned companies with blacks between 1990 and 2012. It also explored black representation on the board and management of mining companies and conducted interviews with 35 executives from 27 mining companies. The study findings are that equity targets are low and reached only 7.4 per cent (R1.8trillion- £163billion) of the total market capitalisation of the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) as per 12 July 2011. However there is an emergence of large black owned-owned companies (those with 50 + 1 share) such as African Rainbow Nation, Exxaro, Shanduka Resources and Royal Bafokeng, empowered enterprises (25 +1 share) and a broad category of beneficiaries including consortiums, community shareholders and Employee Share Ownership groups which some hold small amount of shares (between 1-5 per cent). Most deals however were concluded by the Anglo American and BHP Billiton. Out of the 468 board members and 226 managers identified, black representation on the board and top management of white and foreign-owned companies was 25.9 and 18.5 respectively. In companies where blacks have majority shareholding board membership was 53.7 per cent and top management at 35.7per cent. The study has highlighted impediments faced by blacks in the mining industry. They lack capital, some are in debts and others liquidated, use poor technology and face difficulties in accessing land and export markets. The first main argument of the study is that the impediments and lack of government support limits their success and survival in the industry. The second is that ownership structure determines control in the mining industry. The reasons are historical, as the industry‟s corporate structure was and is still concentrated, has cross shareholding, significant control of assets by financial institutions and families and low voting shares are conditions are used in empowerment mining deals. This is challenging to the attainment of the 40 per cent target of control and management demanded by the Charter. The conclusion from this study is that the entire B-BBEE implementation process in the mining industry is controlled by the white and foreign-owned companies. They have a free hand in the choice of black-owned companies; which assets to have full ownership and which to offer shares or sell to blacks; the type of shares they offer; the conditions to attach to the transactions; and the manner that they deal with their community partners. This situation arose mainly because blacks lack their own funds and face a host of impediments. Unless the government establishes institutions to guide and monitor implementation of its B-BBEE policy and puts in place support mechanisms for black entrepreneurs, black equity ownership and attainment of management and control of mining assets will remain limited.

INTRODUCTION: In the United States, Blacks and Hispanics compared to Whites are disproportionately infected with HIV. Testing for HIV is critical to reduce HIV transmission, lower risk behaviors, and improve access to treatment among persons living with HIV. However, racial & ethnic minorities are tested at later stages of HIV. Previous studies that examined racial discrimination and HIV testing reported inconsistent findings and additional knowledge is needed to understand whether differential treatment based on race is an important barrier to HIV testing. AIM: We examined whether HIV testing is influenced by how an individual reacts to race-based treatment, rather than experiences of discrimination alone, among Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics; and we determined if this relationship was modified race and ethnicity. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the 2012 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System’s (n=12,579) self-reported HIV testing data and Reaction to Race (RR) module, which captures experiences of differential treatment based on race and an individual’s reaction to racialized treatment. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association between RR-based treatment and HIV testing. Statistical interaction between RR-based treatment and race was assessed. RESULTS: Approximately 21% participants reported ever being tested for HIV, and 19% of the participants had one or more experiences of RR-based treatment. Prevalence of HIV testing was higher among Blacks (62%) and Hispanics (33%) compared to Whites (32%). In an adjusted model, the odds of HIV testing among those who reported one experience of Reactions to Race based treatment was 1.37 (95% CI: 1.08-1.75) times the odds among those with no experiences of RR-based treatment. We did not detect statistical interaction between RR-based treatment and HIV testing by race. DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest that experiences of racial discrimination may be counter intuitively associated with increased HIV testing overall and within each racial and ethnic group. Additional research is needed to clarify settings in which experiences of race-based treatment and the associated reactions to the treatment can positively or negatively influence HIV testing behaviors.

An Examination of Perceived Discrimination and Stress in Interracial Relationships by Sharon Sirmons Conger MS, Troy University, Florida Campus, 2006 BA, Baptist College of Florida, 2003 Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy General Psychology Walden University February 2015   There is a potential increase in stress for White women in interracial relationships with Black men due to perceived racial discrimination that may not have been previously experienced. The purpose of this quantitative study was to measure stress before and after the relationship due to perceived racial discrimination for these women. Guided by the status exchange theory and the stress process model, it was hypothesized that White women in interracial relationships with Black men would not experience stress due to racial discrimination prior to the relationship but would experience stress once in the relationship. Paired-sample t tests were used to measure the statistical significance between the mean scores from the General Ethnic Discrimination Scale (GED, before the relationship) to the corresponding questions on the GED-Revised (after involvement in the relationship) and the level of stress experienced due to perceived racial discrimination among a sample of 39 White women. A standard multiple regression was used to examine whether the perpetrator (family, friends, or strangers) of the perceived discrimination affected the amount of total stress experienced. The results indicate that the participants experienced an increase in perceived racial discrimination after their involvement in an interracial relationship in most areas identified in the study with a significant increase in stress; family was the most stressful. The results of the study could be used by members of interracial relationships and by counselors who work them to facilitate social change by offering more effective coping skills on how perceived racial discrimination affects stress for White women in interracial relationships.

African American youth experience individual and institutional level discrimination (e.g., Berkel et al., 2009; Jones, 1997). These experiences negatively impact their overall well-being (e.g., Harris-Britt et al., 2007; Wang & Huguley, 2012). African American parents use racial socialization to teach their children strategies to cope with racial discrimination (e.g., McAdoo, 2002; Peters, 1997). Given the positive impact of racial socialization on the negative outcomes associated with discrimination (e.g., Bynum et al., 2007), more work is needed to understand how contextual factors influence this process. The current study used qualitative methods to examine racial socialization in response to two levels of school-based discrimination. Directed content analysis was used on transcripts from ten focus groups of African American parents (N= 73). Results indicated that parents provided similar cultural socialization messages in response to both levels of discrimination whereas preparation for bias messages differed. Implications for preparing youth for school-based discrimination are discussed.