Emotional Response Profiles to Racial Discrimination

Abstract

The present study examined the association between racial identity and patterns of emotional responses to blatant and subtle racial discrimination vignettes in a sample of 129 African American college students. Using latent profile analyses, we identified eight patterns of emotional responses to the scenarios. Multinomial logistic regression analyses revealed that racial identity was associated with these response patterns. Specifically, private and public regard were related to profiles in the blatant condition, while private regard, centrality, and nationalist ideology were related to profiles in the subtle condition. These findings suggest that there are varied ways in which African American youth respond emotionally to discrimination and that the significance and meaning that one places on race may affect these responses.

Keywords

racial discrimination racial identity emotions African Americans

Racial discrimination has been a topic of interest since the Jim Crow era (Clark & Clark, 1947). Over 60 years later, reports indicate that discriminatory events are common experiences for youth, with reports of 87% of African American youth experiencing discrimination in the past year (Prelow, Danoff-Burg, Swenson, & Pulgiano, 2004; Seaton, Caldwell, Sellers, & Jackson, 2008). Furthermore, these experiences are not only ubiquitous but have profound negative effects on the psychological well-being of African American adolescents and young adults (Neblett, Rivas-Drake, & Umaña-Taylor, 2012; Paradies, 2006; Williams & Mohammed, 2009). Although relatively few studies have examined specific emotional responses to discrimination, recent research has identified such responses as key to understanding the link between discrimination and psychological adjustment (e.g., Carter & Reynolds, 2011; Smart Richman, Pek, Pascoe, & Bauer, 2010).

Racial identity—or the significance and meaning of race to an individual (Sellers, Smith, Shelton, Rowley, & Chavous, 1998)—buffers the relationship between racial discrimination and psychological adjustment in several studies (e.g., Neblett, Shelton, & Sellers, 2004; Sellers & Shelton, 2003). In light of few studies that specifically examine the protective role of racial identity in the context of specific emotional responses to racial discrimination, this study investigated the association between racial identity and these responses among African American college students. This population is a unique group in which to study the relationships of interest given the increased significance of racial discrimination and racial identity development for African American youth during this developmental period (Banks & Kohn-Wood, 2007). Moreover, some evidence suggests that African American college students attending predominantly White universities may be especially vulnerable to negative adjustment as a result of stress related to being a racial or ethnic minority (Wei et al., 2010). In addition to studying emotional responses in African American college students, we were also interested in whether racial identity might differentially influence emotional responses to blatant versus subtle discrimination. Prior research suggests that blatant racism experiences produce stronger reactions to racism (e.g., Jones, Harrell, Morris-Prather, Thomas, & Omowale, 1996) while other more recent studies find that subtle, more ambiguous racism experiences may result in greater impairment (e.g., Salvatore & Shelton, 2007).

Conceptual Models Explaining the Impact of Racism on Well-Being

The biopsychosocial model of racism (Clark, Anderson, Clark, & Williams, 1999) and Harrell’s (2000) multidimensional conceptualization of racism-related stress, two models that build on Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) stress and coping framework, highlight the potentially negative impact of racial discrimination on one’s psychological and physical health. Although neither model has an explicit focus on emotions, both frameworks describe how emotional responses to discrimination are important for determining mental and physical health outcomes. According to Clark et al. (1999), the perception of racism leads to coping responses (e.g., suppressing angry feelings, expressing anger verbally), which, in turn, can lead to amplified psychological and physiological responses and poor health outcomes. Thus, emotional responses can be both part of the coping resources used by an individual as well as a subset of that individual’s psychological stress responses. Harrell (2000) suggests that immediate emotional responses (e.g., sadness, disgust) to racism contribute to the qualitative way in which the stress is experienced, with implications for well-being. For example, an anxious or fearful response might precipitate a certain type of coping (e.g., avoiding those types of experiences) that could, in turn, exacerbate the stressor’s negative effect on the individual’s well-being.

Effects of Racism on African American Well-Being

Cross-sectional and longitudinal work has produced evidence of a robust association between perceived discrimination and negative well-being (e.g., Brody et al., 2006; Seaton et al., 2008). Though the majority of findings center on psychological adjustment, some studies report associations between discrimination and specific emotions including anger, hopelessness, fear, and nervousness (e.g., Brondolo et al., 2005; Broudy et al., 2007). For instance, results from a daily diary study of 113 multiethnic adults (40% African American) indicated that baseline levels of perceived discrimination were associated with daily levels of anger (Broudy et al., 2007). A recent study of 260 individuals (58% African American) by Carter and Forsyth (2010) determined that the most common emotional reactions to discrimination among African American participants were feeling disrespected and angry, and also included emotions such as disappointment and shock. These findings are noteworthy because they shed light on the role of emotions in coping with racial discrimination.

The Role of Racial Identity

Fortunately, not all African American youth who experience racism evidence negative outcomes. Several studies document the protective nature of racial identity in the context of discrimination and well-being (e.g., Banks & Kohn-Wood, 2007; Sellers & Shelton, 2003; Sellers, Copeland-Linder, Martin, & Lewis, 2006). Sellers and colleagues’ Multidimensional Model of Racial Identity (MMRI) defines racial identity as the significance and qualitative meaning that African Americans place on race in defining themselves (Sellers et al., 1998). Briefly, the MMRI describes four dimensions: salience (not reviewed in the present study), centrality, regard, and ideology. Racial centrality is defined as the significance that individuals ascribe to race. Racial regard refers to judgments individuals make about their race and consists of private regard (how one views both being African American and other African Americans) and public regard (the perception of others’ views about African Americans). Ideology—“individuals’ beliefs, attitudes, and opinions” about how African Americans should act—includes the following: assimilationist, humanist, oppressed minority, and nationalist perspectives (Sellers et al., 1998, p. 27). Assimilationist ideology is characterized by an emphasis on the similarities between the African American experience and the broader American experience. Humanist ideology views African Americans as belonging to the larger human race. Oppressed minority ideology stresses similarities between African Americans and other oppressed groups, and nationalist ideology emphasizes the uniqueness of the Black experience (Sellers et al., 1998).

Theory and empirical support linking racial identity and emotions is limited; however, some work in this area has set the stage for future investigations of racial identity and emotional responses to discrimination. Carter, Pieterse, and Smith (2008) proposed that because aspects of racial identity are considered to be personality factors, one might expect the construct to be related to various emotions. In a study of 39 Black adults, they found that racial identity attitude profiles characterized by overvalued beliefs about the goodness of being Black were related to greater anger expression. In another study of 229 Black American adults, Carter and Reynolds (2011) reported that anger, depression, confusion, and tension were positively correlated with racial identity attitudes marked by devaluing Black people and culture, denial of Black identity, and idealizing White people and culture and negatively associated with racial identity attitudes reflecting a commitment to Blacks. Although exploratory, these studies lend credence to the idea that racial identity may influence emotions generally and in the context of discrimination.

Although theoretical formulations of racial identity and emotions have been informed primarily by the extent to which various racial identity theories suggest that emotions are defining characteristics of specific racial identity attitudes, work by Sellers, Morgan, and Brown (2001) also sheds light on the ways in which racial identity might be related to emotional states. In their adaptation of Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) stress and coping theory, Sellers et al. (2001) argued that different dimensions of racial identity might exacerbate or buffer the negative impact of discrimination on psychological functioning via its influence on appraisal and coping. For instance, individuals with high centrality may appraise race-relevant events as ones for which there is a great deal at stake, perceive such events as threatening, and, by extension, experience threat (e.g., fear) or other negative emotions. Alternatively, individuals endorsing high centrality and private regard may be more likely to perceive discrimination (Sellers & Shelton, 2003; Sellers et al., 2006), have more opportunities to hone their coping responses to discrimination, be better equipped to deal with these experiences, and be less likely to experience negative emotions following a racist event. Sellers and colleagues also suggest that racial identity might result in perceptions of threat or challenge (and by extension negative emotions) when events are construed as threatening to individuals’ goals or sense of rights and opportunities. Whereas an individual who views commonalities between African Americans and the rest of society may perceive a discriminatory infraction as threatening to their goals of integrating into mainstream society (and thus, experience threat and other negative emotions), individuals who see similarities between African Americans and other oppressed groups may perceive the same discriminatory event as less threatening (and thus, experience less negative affect) because it does not challenge their goals of building coalitions with others who are similarly oppressed (Sellers et al., 2001).

Limitations of the Current Literature

Several shortcomings of the existing literature must be taken into account as the field seeks to improve its understanding of the association between racial identity and emotional responses to racial discrimination. First, of those studies examining racial identity and mental health, most focus on internalizing symptoms (i.e., depressive symptoms and anxiety) and not emotions. Although the two are related, and emotions (especially negative emotions) may serve as precursors to internalizing symptoms, careful exploration of racial identity and affective responses to discrimination may elucidate potential pathways for disrupting the nefarious nature of discrimination. Second, many studies use global measures of racial discrimination as opposed to measuring responses based on specific racist events. This limitation makes it difficult (a) to track affective responses to discrimination and (b) to understand how racial identity conveys its protective effects in the context of specific events. A third limitation concerns the assessment of emotional responses to discrimination. The majority of studies that examine emotional responses tend to focus on one or two emotions (predominately anger) in isolation, making it difficult to understand the complex nature of emotional responses to discrimination. Since individuals experience multiple emotions at once, it is important to identify which emotions, if any, occur together. Finally, prior studies fail to consider how subtle (i.e., covert, ambiguous, acts such as being overlooked for service) versus blatant (i.e., overt acts such as calling someone a racial slur) discrimination experiences may play out with respect to emotional responses to racism. The seminal work of Lazarus and Folkman (1984) suggests that ambiguous stressors (such as subtle racism) may confer more stress and anxiety and also could reduce threat (and presumably other negative emotions) by allowing individuals to interpret a stressor as more reassuring (e.g., seeing an ambiguous scenario as due to less malicious intentions). Experimental findings are mixed with some studies finding greater negative emotions in the context of blatant racism (e.g., Jones et al., 1996) and others reporting more negative outcomes in the context of subtle discrimination (e.g., Salvatore & Shelton, 2007), highlighting the need for further investigation of this issue. Moreover, the subtlety of a racist event may be particularly worth exploring in the context of racial identity, as Lazarus and Folkman state that person factors (such as identity) are more likely to be salient in the context of ambiguous stressors.

The Current Study

Given the dearth of research that critically examines which emotions co-occur in response to specific discriminatory events of varying subtlety, as well as a lack of work examining how racial identity predicts these responses, the present study employed a visual imagery paradigm (e.g., Jones et al., 1996; Morris-Prather et al., 1996; Vrana & Rollock, 2002) to examine these variables in concert. This approach uses visual imagery and racism analogues to approximate specific discriminatory events and allows for the assessment of immediate emotional responses. To achieve our aims, we conducted the study in two steps. First, we identified patterns of emotional responses for blatant and subtle discrimination. We then examined racial identity as a predictor of those patterns. Based on the previous conceptualization from Sellers et al. (2001) and the empirical work of Carter and Reynolds (2011), we expected that several dimensions of racial identity would predict membership in these emotional profiles. For example, because discrimination may pose a greater threat for those with high centrality and humanist ideology—because more is personally at stake—we expected more threat and other negative emotions (e.g., fear) in individuals with high levels of those dimensions. However, because a positive commitment to African Americans has been associated with fewer negative emotions, we expected that those with high private regard would have less intense negative emotional reactions. Last, given that person factors are more important in the context of ambiguous stress, we expected that more dimensions of racial identity would be related to emotional responses to subtle discrimination.

Method

Participants

The sample consisted of 129 self-identified African American college students (54% female). Participants ranged in age from 18 to 29 years (M = 20.8, SD = 1.81). The median family socioeconomic status was “Middle Class” (46%).

Materials

Study materials included six imagery scenarios, which were adapted from and designed to be consistent with previous work using imagery with African American college students (Jones et al., 1996; Vrana & Rollock, 2002). Scenarios were 100 ± 10 words long and lasted approximately 60 seconds. There were two scenarios for each of the racism conditions: blatant racism (e.g., a police officer unjustly pulls someone over and denigrates the individual’s race), neutral (e.g., an individual approaches a police officer for directions to a restaurant), and subtle racism (e.g., a security guard suspiciously follows an individual around a bookstore). Each scenario had either an African American or a White perpetrator or actor (neutral condition); however, for this study, only the blatant and subtle racism scenarios where the perpetrator was White were used.

Procedure

The current study was approved by the appropriate institutional review board at the institution where the research was conducted. Students were recruited via flyers and various university listservs for a study examining “African Americans’ responses to challenging situations.” The study consisted of a two-session experiment, with both sessions lasting approximately an hour. The primary purpose of the first session was to obtain consent, assess subjective race-related experiences, and to prepare the participants for the experimental protocol of the second session. The second session was conducted approximately 1 week after participants completed the first session. Consistent with the procedure described by Vrana and Rollock (2002), the experimenter described the structure of the imagery trials and instructed participants to “imagine the scene as if it were happening to them.” After this prompt, participants were instructed to sit back and relax at which time they underwent a neutral practice trial after a brief pause. Each trial consisted of a prestimulus period (i.e., the participant sat quietly and awaited the beginning of the scenario), instruction period (i.e., the participant listened to an audio presentation of the scenario), an imagine period (i.e., the participant actively imagined personally experiencing the discrimination experience), and a recovery period (i.e., the participant stopped imagining the scene and concentrated on relaxing). Each of these four periods lasted 60 seconds. Following the practice trial, participants underwent the six imagery trials described in the Materials section. The presentation of the vignettes was randomized with the constraint that one scenario in each of the three racism conditions (Blatant, Neutral, Subtle) appeared in the first three scenarios and one appeared in the second three scenarios. After each recovery period, participants completed a mood rating scale which was followed by a brief pause until the start of the next trial.

Measures

Demographics

Information on age (measured in years), gender (male or female), self-reported family socioeconomic status (ranging from “Poor” to “Wealthy”), and self-reported physical and mental health status (5-point Likert-type scale from “Poor” to “Excellent”) was collected from each participant.

Racial Identity

The Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity–Short Form (MIBI-S; Martin, Wout, Nguyen, Gonzalez, & Sellers, 2010) was used to assess three of the four dimensions of racial identity proposed by the MMRI (i.e., centrality, regard, ideology). Participants were asked to respond to each of the 27 items using a 7-point Likert-type rating scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree) indicating the degree to which they agreed with each statement. Racial centrality assessed the degree to which race was a central aspect of the individual’s identity (e.g., “Being Black is an important reflection of who I am”; 4 items; α = .72). Racial regard assessed the degree of positive feelings toward one’s racial group (e.g., “I’m happy that I am Black”; Private regard; 3 items; α = .85) and how individuals felt others viewed Blacks (e.g., “Overall, Blacks are considered good by others”; Public regard; 4 items; α = .84). Assimilationist ideology assessed the view that Blacks should emphasize mainstream American identity over a Black identity (e.g., “Blacks should strive to be full members of the American political system”; 4 items; α = .69). Humanist ideology assessed the belief that people should be viewed in light of their similarities with all human beings instead of social identities such as race (e.g., “Blacks should judge Whites as individuals and not as members of the White race”; 4 items; α = .67). Oppressed minority ideology assessed the extent to which individuals viewed the similarities between Blacks and other oppressed minority groups (e.g., “The racism Blacks have experienced is similar to that of other minority groups”; 4 items; α = .63). Nationalist ideology highlighted the uniqueness of Blacks’ experiences as an oppressed group in the United States (e.g., “Whenever possible, Blacks should buy from other Black businesses”; 4 items; α = .63). Scale reliabilities may have been compromised by the small number of items on each subscale; however, mean inter-item correlations for the ideology subscales ranged from .32 to .35 suggesting adequate internal consistency (Briggs & Cheek, 1986).

Mood Rating Scale

Participants completed a mood rating scale developed by Sutherland and Harrell (1986) consisting of eight Likert-type questions assessing their self-reported moods during each scenario (1 = not at all to 9 = Very). The eight moods included positive (i.e., self-assured, happy, and pleasant) and negative (i.e., distress, fear, anger, disgust, and tense) moods. This rating scale has been used in similar studies exploring emotional responses to discrimination (e.g., Jones et al., 1996; Morris-Prather et al., 1996).

Statistical Analysis

Latent GOLD (Vermunt & Magidson, 2005) was used to perform latent profile analysis (LPA) on the eight moods assessed to identify patterns of emotional responses first for the blatant and then subtle racism vignettes. LPA is a model-based cluster analysis that provides statistical criteria for identifying a plausible cluster solution from the input data. These include the likelihood ratio chi-squared statistic (L²) and the Bayesian information criterion (BIC), an index of model fit and parsimony. In general, a model with the largest association explained (i.e., the greatest reduction in L² from the one-class model) and the lowest BIC value is preferred.

Because multiple patterns of emotional responses emerged, multinomial logistic regression was chosen to determine if the seven racial identity dimensions predicted membership in a particular emotional cluster (Hosmer & Lemeshow, 2000). The reference category was the cluster with the largest n (labeled below) for both the blatant and subtle conditions.

Results

Preliminary Analyses: Mood and Racial Identity Variables

Mood Ratings

Means, standard deviations, and F tests for the main effect of racism condition are presented in Table 1. On average, participants reported higher negative moods in the blatant and subtle conditions. In particular, participants in the blatant condition reported high levels of distressed, fearful, angry, disgusted, and tense moods. Relative to the blatant condition, participants in the subtle condition reported slightly lower levels of distressed, angry, disgusted, and tense moods. Participants reported higher levels of positive moods such as pleasant self-assured, and happy, in the neutral condition as compared with the other conditions.

Table 1.

Mean and Standard Deviations of Mood Ratings by Racial Discrimination Condition.

Mood rating		Blatant	Neutral	Subtle	F
Pleasant	M	1.79	6.49	2.60	360.55
Pleasant	SD	1.28	1.64	1.56
Distressed	M	6.13	1.84	5.15	169.45
Distressed	SD	2.10	1.45	2.30
Fearful	M	3.95	1.38	2.45	80.52
Fearful	SD	2.42	0.95	1.70
Self-Assured	M	4.75	6.48	5.43	31.17
Self-Assured	SD	2.41	1.78	2.14
Angry	M	7.50	1.34	6.80	514.39
Angry	SD	1.96	1.02	2.16
Disgusted	M	7.54	1.24	6.09	583.52
Disgusted	SD	1.89	0.74	2.69
Happy	M	1.59	6.14	2.16	268.67
Happy	SD	1.21	1.88	1.42
Tense	M	6.84	2.13	6.22	250.96
Tense	SD	1.93	1.66	2.03

Note: All means were significantly different from one other for all eight mood ratings (Bonferroni, p < .001).

Racial Identity

Participants, on average, reported high levels of private regard (M = 6.12, SD = 0.97) and assimilationist ideology (M = 5.98, SD = 0.87). Participants endorsed centrality (M = 5.10, SD = 1.08) and humanist (M = 5.41, SD = 0.97), oppressed minority (M = 4.72, SD = 1.08), and nationalist ideologies (M = 3.96, SD = 0.93) at slightly lower levels, and scored below the midpoint on public regard (M = 3.27, SD = 1.05), indicating that, on average, they did not feel others viewed Blacks favorably.

There were also significant bivariate correlations among racial identity variables and between racial identity and sociodemographic variables. For example, racial centrality was positively correlated with private regard, assimilationist ideology, nationalist ideology, and negatively correlated with humanist ideology. Family socioeconomic status was positively correlated with private regard and assimilationist ideology. Bivariate correlations for sociodemographic correlates and all racial identity subscales are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2.

Bivariate Correlations of Demographic and Racial Identity Variables.

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1. Sex	—
2. Age	.14	—
3. Family SES	−.11	−.05	—
4. Centrality	−.05	−.02	.05	—
5. Private Regard	−.08	−.06	.20*	.64**	—
6. Public Regard	.14	−.08	.15	.06	.17	—
7. Assimilationist	.02	−.01	.18*	.25**	.32**	.03	—
8. Humanist	.05	−.10	−.08	−.25**	−.05	.18*	.35**	—
9. Minority	−.04	.09	−.12	.01	.00	.07	.02	.22*	—
10. Nationalist	−.12	.04	.08	.45**	.36**	−.10	−.06	−.40**	−.07	—

Note: SES = socioeconomic status.

p < .05. **p < .01.

Emotional Responses Profiles

Latent profile analysis was used to estimate six latent profile models (ranging from one to six profiles) from the eight moods assessed in the study for both the blatant and subtle racism vignettes. Of the six models estimated for the blatant racism condition, the four-cluster model appeared to be the most appropriate solution. It had the lowest BIC (3525.69), a nonsignificant bootstrap p value (.19), and a substantial reduction in L² (13.84%) over the baseline. Although the five- and six-cluster models showed further reductions in L² than the four-cluster model, these models also had larger BICs suggesting that they are not as parsimonious as the four-cluster model. Thus, we adopted the four-cluster model as our final solution.

Next, the raw and standardized means of each racial identity variable were used to describe and label the profiles (see Table 3). The largest cluster for the blatant racism condition was labeled Moderate Distressed, Disgusted, and Angry (n = 54, 42% of sample). This cluster was characterized by scores near the sample mean on all eight of the moods assessed. With respect to the raw means, this cluster had relative high scores on disgust; moderate scores on fearful, distressed, angry, tense, and self-assured mood ratings; and low scores on ratings of pleasant and happy moods. The second largest cluster was labeled Disgusted and Angry, but Unafraid (n = 36, 28%). This cluster was characterized by high scores on angry, disgusted, and tense mood; moderate scores on self-assured and distressed mood; and low scores on pleasant, fearful, and happy mood. This cluster scored approximately 0.75 SD above the mean for angry mood and 0.75 SD below the mean for fearful mood. The third largest cluster (n = 27, 21%), High Distressed, Disgusted, and Angry, Fearful, had high scores on distressed, angry, disgust, and tense mood; moderate scores on self-assured and fearful mood; and low scores for pleasant and happy mood. Individuals in this cluster scored over 1 SD above the mean for distressed and fearful mood. Finally, the fourth, and smallest cluster (n = 12, 9%), Attenuated, endorsed low to moderate levels on all of the moods assessed. Members of this cluster scored more than 2 SD below the mean for angry mood, 1 to 2 SD above the mean for pleasant and happy mood, and more than 1 SD below the mean for distressed, disgusted, fearful, angry, and tense mood. Figure 1 presents a graphic summary of the four emotional response profiles using standardized means of the mood rating variables for the blatant racism condition.

Table 3.

Means, z Scores, and Standard Deviations of Emotional Profiles—Blatant.

Cluster	Emotion	z Score (SD)	M (SD)
Moderate distressed, disgusted, and angry (n = 54)	Pleasant	.27 (.98)	2.13 (1.25)
	Distressed	−.21 (.78)	5.69 (1.65)
	Fearful	.07 (.78)	4.11 (1.90)
	Assured	−.30 (.73)	4.06 (1.77)
	Angry	−.31 (.54)	6.89 (1.06)
	Disgusted	−.28 (.84)	7.02 (1.58)
	Happy	.14 (.87)	1.76 (1.05)
	Tense	−.34 (.72)	6.17 (1.40)
Disgusted and angry, but unafraid (n = 36)	Pleasant	−.55 (.22)	1.08 (0.28)
	Distressed	−.08 (1.07)	5.94 (2.25)
	Fearful	−.65 (.69)	2.36 (1.66)
	Assured	.62 (1.03)	6.28 (2.50)
	Angry	.71 (.16)	8.89 (0.32)
	Disgusted	.45 (.51)	8.39 (0.96)
	Happy	−.47 (.14)	1.03 (0.17)
	Tense	.42 (.69)	7.64 (1.33)
High distressed, disgusted, and angry, fearful (n = 27)	Pleasant	−.32 (.79)	1.37 (1.00)
	Distressed	1.00 (.50)	8.22 (1.05)
	Fearful	1.19 (.65)	6.81 (1.57)
	Assured	−.30 (1.03)	4.04 (2.50)
	Angry	.75 (.10)	8.96 (0.19)
	Disgusted	.75 (.10)	8.96 (0.19)
	Happy	−.40 (.35)	1.11 (0.42)
	Tense	.88 (.36)	8.52 (0.70)
Attenuated (n = 12)	Pleasant	1.15 (1.54)	3.25 (1.96)
	Distressed	−1.09 (.67)	3.83 (1.40)
	Fearful	−1.07 (.20)	1.33 (0.49)
	Assured	.16 (1.08)	5.17 (2.62)
	Angry	−2.39 (.61)	2.83 (1.19)
	Disgusted	−1.79 (1.21)	4.17 (2.29)
	Happy	1.66 (1.86)	3.58 (2.23)
	Tense	−1.72 (1.00)	3.50 (1.93)

Figure 1.

Standardized mean frequencies of mood by emotional response profile—Blatant condition.

On the basis of statistical criteria, we also adopted a four-cluster solution for the subtle racism condition (see Table 4). For this condition, the largest cluster was labeled Moderate Tense and Disgusted (n = 62, 48% of sample). This cluster was characterized by scores near the sample mean on all eight of the moods assessed and had relative high scores on angry mood; moderate scores on distressed, disgust, tense, and self-assured mood ratings; and low scores on ratings of fearful, pleasant, and happy moods. The second largest cluster was labeled High Tense, Disgusted, and Angry, but Unafraid (n = 26, 20%). This cluster was characterized by high scores on angry, disgusted, and tense mood; moderate scores on self-assured and distressed mood; and low scores on pleasant, fearful, and happy mood. This cluster scored approximately 1 SD above the mean for tense mood, 0.75 SD above the mean for angry mood, and 0.75 SD below the mean for fearful and happy mood. The third largest cluster (n = 24, 19%), Attenuated, endorsed moderate scores on pleasant and self-assured moods and low scores on distressed, fearful, angry, disgusted, happy, and tense moods. Individuals in this cluster scored approximately 1 SD above the mean for pleasant and happy mood and approximately 1 to 2 SD below the mean for distressed, angry, disgusted, and tense mood. Finally, the fourth, and smallest cluster (n = 16, 13%), Disgusted and Angry, Assured, endorsed very high scores on angry and disgusted mood; high scores on distressed, tense, and self-assured mood; moderate scores on fearful mood; and very low levels of pleasant and happy mood. Figure 2 presents a graphic summary of the four emotional responses profiles using standardized means of the mood rating variables for the subtle racism condition.

Table 4.

Means, z Scores, and Standard Deviations of Emotional Profiles—Subtle.

Cluster	Emotion	z Score (SD)	M (SD)
Moderate tense and disgusted (n = 62)	Pleasant	.09 (.83)	2.74 (1.29)
	Distressed	−.07 (.82)	4.98 (1.89)
	Fearful	.36 (.91)	3.06 (1.55)
	Assured	−.02 (.94)	5.39 (2.01)
	Angry	.09 (.56)	7.00 (1.2)
	Disgusted	.05 (.75)	6.23 (2.01)
	Happy	.12 (.89)	2.32 (1.27)
	Tense	−.09 (.65)	6.03 (1.32)
High tense, disgusted, and angry, but unafraid (n = 26)	Pleasant	−.38 (1.07)	2.00 (1.67)
	Distressed	.14 (1.06)	5.46 (2.45)
	Fearful	−.72 (.25)	1.23 (0.43)
	Assured	−.15 (1.05)	5.12 (2.25)
	Angry	.72 (.26)	8.35 (.56)
	Disgusted	.45 (.91)	7.31 (2.46)
	Happy	−.71 (.26)	1.15 (.37)
	Tense	.91 (.39)	8.08 (0.80)
Attenuated (n = 24)	Pleasant	.81 (.95)	3.88 (1.48)
	Distressed	−.82 (.73)	3.25 (1.68)
	Fearful	−.61 (.39)	1.42 (0.65)
	Assured	−.12 (.96)	5.17 (2.06)
	Angry	−1.68 (.62)	3.17 (1.34)
	Disgusted	−1.26 (.74)	2.71 (1.99)
	Happy	.92 (1.20)	3.46 (1.69)
	Tense	−1.38 (.74)	3.42 (1.50)
Distressed and angry, assured (n = 16)	Pleasant	−.94 (.32)	1.13 (.50)
	Distressed	1.29 (.35)	8.13 (0.81)
	Fearful	.69 (1.49)	3.63 (2.53)
	Assured	.50 (1.13)	6.50 (2.42)
	Angry	.99 (.12)	8.94 (0.25)
	Disgusted	.96 (.29)	8.69 (0.79)
	Happy	−.68 (.38)	1.19 (0.54)
	Tense	.94 (.44)	8.13 (0.89)

Figure 2.

Standardized mean frequencies of mood by emotional response profile—Subtle condition.

Racial Identity and Affective Patterns to Discrimination

Blatant Condition

The multinomial logistic regression model for blatant discrimination revealed a good fit on the basis of the racial identity variables, χ²(363, N = 129) = 299.79, p = .99 (using deviance criterion), R² = .21 (Nagelkerke). Analyses revealed that how participants viewed other African Americans (private regard), as well as how they felt others viewed African Americans (public regard) were associated with the High Distressed, Disgusted, and Angry, Fearful pattern in the blatant condition. Individuals who felt very strongly that others viewed Blacks in a positive manner were significantly less likely to be in this cluster, as compared with the Moderate Distressed, Disgusted, and Angry group (odds ratio [OR] = 0.55, p < .05). A similar relationship was found with respect to the Disgusted and Angry, but Unafraid category, but these findings did not reach significance (OR = 0.66, p = .08).

In terms of private regard, results indicated that those who felt more positively about being Black (and about other Blacks) had greater odds of belonging to the High Distressed and Angry group (compared with the Moderate Distressed, Disgusted, and Angry group), OR = 2.65, p < .05. Higher private regard suggested a greater odds of being in the Distressed and Angry, Unafraid and Attenuated profiles, but these relationships failed to reach significance (OR = 1.95, p = .09; OR = 2.54, p = .07, respectively).

Subtle Condition

In the subtle condition, the multinomial logistic regression model also revealed a good fit on the basis of the racial identity variables, χ²(360, N = 129) = 287.34, p = .99 (using deviance criterion), R² = .24 (Nagelkerke). Private regard was associated with the High Tense, Disgusted, and Angry, but Unafraid profile. Similar to findings in the blatant condition, positive feelings about African Americans were associated with much greater odds of being in the High Tense, Disgusted, and Angry, but Unafraid group as compared with the reference cluster (Moderate Tense and Angry), OR = 2.45, p < .05.

In addition, private regard, centrality, and nationalist ideology were associated with the Attenuated pattern. Higher levels of private regard were associated with greater odds of being in the Attenuated cluster, compared with the reference cluster (OR = 1.97, p < .05). However, the more importance an individual placed on being Black (i.e., high centrality), the less likely the individual was to display emotions consistent with the Attenuated cluster (OR = 0.50, p < .05). Moreover, high levels of nationalist ideology were significantly associated with lower odds of being in the Attenuated group (OR = 0.42, p < .05). Complete results for both conditions are presented in Table 5.

Table 5.

Multinomial Logistic Regression of Profiles on Racial Identity.

	Blatant			Subtle
	Cluster 2: “Distressed and Angry, Unafraid”	Cluster 3: “High Distressed and Angry, Fearful”	Cluster 4: “Attenuated”	Cluster 2: “High Tense, Disgusted, and Angry, Unafraid”	Cluster 3: “Attenuated”	Cluster 4: “Disgusted and Angry, Assured”
Centrality	.81 (.43-1.51)	.97 (.49-1.96)	.62 (.26-1.44)	.59 (.30-1.12)	.50* (.25-.99)	1.05 (.45-2.48)
Private Regard	1.95+ (.90-4.21)	2.65* (1.01-6.93)	2.54 (.95-6.84)	2.45* (1.05-5.73)	1.97* (1.01-3.83)	2.10 (.64-6.84)
Public Regard	.66+ (.42-1.05)	.55* (.32-.92)	.89 (.43-1.84)	.76 (.47-1.24)	1.12 (.66-1.92)	.83 (.47-1.49)
Assimilationist	1.56 (.82-2.98)	1.58 (.76-3.27)	.79 (.31-1.99)	1.44 (.72-2.90)	.80 (.41-1.59)	2.41 (.92-6.31)
Humanist	1.16 (.65-2.07)	1.11 (.60-2.07)	.90 (.36-2.25)	1.26 (.70-2.28)	.77 (.37-1.57)	1.07 (.53-2.16)
Oppressed Minority	1.32 (.85-2.03)	1.31 (.82-2.09)	1.78 (.88-3.61)	1.11 (.70-1.76)	1.26 (.77-2.08)	1.38 (.78-2.42)
Nationalist	1.22 (.68-2.20)	1.04 (.54-2.01)	.62 (.25-1.53)	.98 (.52-1.84)	.42* (.20-.87)	.86 (.39-1.88)

Note: Odds ratio (95% confidence interval); Reference category: Cluster 1: Blatant (“Moderate Distressed, Disgusted, and Angry”); Subtle: (“Moderate Tense and Disgusted”).

p < .10. *p < .05.

Discussion

Patterns of Emotional Responses to Racism

The primary objective of our study was to examine the association between racial identity and patterns of emotional responses to racial discrimination vignettes. To accomplish this aim, we first needed to identify the patterns of emotional responses to blatant and subtle forms discrimination in our sample. We found that there were four emotional profiles for each condition. In the blatant condition, these patterns included individuals who had moderate levels of several negative emotions; individuals who experienced high levels of anger and disgust, but without fear; individuals with high levels of negative emotions, as well as fear; and individuals who did not express high levels of any negative emotions. In the subtle condition, patterns included individuals with moderate displays of tense and disgusted mood; individuals with high levels of these same moods, but with the absence of fear; an Attenuated cluster similar to that in the blatant condition; and individuals who were distressed and angry, but also assured. These results are consistent with prior research (e.g., Broudy et al., 2007; Carter & Forsyth, 2010), which indicates that negative emotions such as anger, feeling disrespected, and outrage are commonly experienced following experiences with discrimination. At the same time, other profiles were characterized by negative emotions that have been less frequently discussed in the context of discrimination (e.g., tension and fear), positive emotions such as self-assuredness, the absence of fear, and low emotional expression. The Attenuated profile is particularly noteworthy in that it could be reflective of unresponsiveness to racism-related stress, differential appraisal and processing of racist events, or even resilience to racism. Regardless of interpretation, the range of profiles reveals that there exists a diversity of patterns with regard to African Americans’ responses to racial discrimination, that African Americans’ responses to racial discrimination are not characterized solely by negative emotions, and that individuals can simultaneously experience multiple emotions in the context of racial discrimination.

In addition to the diversity of patterns we observed across individuals in the study, we took note of several differences in emotional responses to the vignettes as a function of subtle versus blatant discrimination. We noted that the subtle condition reflected the greater expression of tense emotions in our study. Indeed, Lazarus and Folkman (1984) suggested that ambiguity (i.e., when information necessary for appraisal is unclear or insufficient) might result in threat emotions such as anxiety due to individuals’ limited sense of control and uncertainty about the nature of a threat. This increased tension may have been reflective of individuals in the subtle condition trying to making sense of what the scenario represented (e.g., Why am I being followed around the store? What will happen, and what can I do about it?). However, threat emotions were not exclusive to the subtle discrimination vignettes, as we also noted that there were generally higher levels of fear in the blatant condition as compared with the subtle condition. Although previous work has indicated that African Americans may be better equipped to cope with more overt forms of racism (e.g., Salvatore & Shelton, 2007), the “in-your-face” nature of this type of discrimination (e.g., being called a racial epithet) may be more likely to produce fear than covert racism. Finally, the subtle condition resulted in the presence of a Distressed and Angry, Assured cluster. Although this cluster represents only a small proportion of the sample, self-assuredness was not prominent in any of the blatant profiles. It may be that for this small number of individuals, ambiguous events such as being skipped in line may elicit some confidence, perhaps indicative of agency that these individuals feel in the face of subtle racism. Taken together, these results suggest that it is important to take into account the subtle versus blatant nature of discriminatory events when trying to understand individual differences in responses to discrimination.

The Role of Racial Identity in Cluster Membership

In seeking to understand whether particular dimensions of racial identity were related to emotional response patterns, we found that regard, centrality, and ideology were all related to cluster membership. Consistent with our prediction and with theory, more dimensions of racial identity (regard, centrality, and ideology) predicted subtle response to discrimination, while only regard predicted emotional responses to the blatant vignettes. With respect to regard, we found that public regard was related to a decreased likelihood of being in the High Distressed and Angry, Fearful cluster in the blatant condition. Although Sellers et al. (2006) reported a protective effect of low public regard in an African American adolescent sample, this result suggests that there may be some benefit of high public regard in the context of a specific discriminatory event. For example, it may be that if youth feel that others see African Americans favorably, they can either dismiss the scene as an isolated event or deny the experience since it is not consistent with their positive out-group view. We also found that high private regard was related to a greater likelihood of being in the high negative emotion profiles for both the blatant and subtle conditions. Sellers et al. (2001) suggested that African Americans feeling very positively about their race may lead them to see situations that have deleterious consequences for African Americans as personal affronts, resulting in more negative emotions. It is also interesting to note that, at least in the subtle condition, private regard was associated with a lack of fear. As noted previously, Sellers et al. (2001) note that the same individuals who may appraise a discriminatory situation as threatening also may be more prepared and confident in their ability to cope with racism. Consistent with this proposition, private regard was also associated with membership in the Attenuated cluster in the subtle condition. The link between private regard and the absence of fear and attenuated emotional responses in the subtle condition is also consistent with several studies that report a positive relationship between private regard and personal self-esteem (e.g., Rowley, Sellers, Chavous, & Smith, 1998; Settles, Navarrete, Pagano, Abdou, & Sidanius, 2010). It may be that for some, feeling good about African Americans translates to greater self-esteem and less bother by these events. The dual findings for private regard suggest the construct does not necessarily dictate one emotional response; rather, individuals who view African Americans favorably may respond in different ways to discrimination. Moreover, these effects may depend on the subtle (versus blatant) nature of the discriminatory event.

Both centrality and nationalist ideology were associated with a decreased likelihood of being in the attenuated cluster in the subtle condition. This finding is not necessarily consistent with Sellers and colleagues’ prediction that high race central individuals and individuals who endorse nationalist ideology might be more prepared to deal with racism as a result of greater practice dealing with these events, or because racially discriminatory events do not challenge goals of building coalitions within the race. However, the authors suggest that more emotionally intense patterns may be related not only to appraisal of discriminatory events but also to the coping strategies that individuals employ. Thus, responding with lower levels of anger, tension, and disgust may not align with the coping repertoire used by those for whom being Black is central, nor for those who emphasize the uniqueness of the Black experience. Instead, these individuals may be more likely to respond with problem-focused coping strategies as a result of greater feelings of personal control (Sellers et al., 2001).

It is interesting to note that the many of the dimensions of racial identity that emerged as predictive of emotional patterns in our study have been identified in the literature as protective (e.g., Caldwell, Kohn-Wood, Schmeelk-Cone, Chavous, & Zimmerman, 2004; Rowley et al., 1998; Sellers & Shelton, 2003). Although these dimensions are related to less negative outcomes in the face of discrimination in the aforementioned studies, they are generally associated with more negative emotions immediately following discrimination in the present study. This almost paradoxical relationship between immediate negative experiences and later positive outcomes demonstrates that racial identity may operate in different ways based on how proximal or distal the outcomes are, as well as how subtle or blatant the discriminatory event is, and further highlights the importance of studying racial discrimination at the level of the event.

Clinical Implications

In addition to the implications of studying racial discrimination at the level of the event, our findings lend themselves to several implications for clinical practice with African American clients. First, clinicians should note that there are numerous ways in which African Americans respond to discrimination. Although the literature has focused primarily on negative responses to discrimination (e.g., anger, fear), some African American clients may experience positive emotions that may serve a protective function (e.g., self-assuredness) or a combination of positive and negative emotions following discriminatory experiences. Second, clinicians should be mindful that not all experiences with racial discrimination are the same and the type of discrimination African Americans encounter (e.g., subtle vs. blatant) may inform their emotional responses (and the impact of racial identity on those responses). Thus, clinicians should inquire as to the nature of stressors their clients face. Third, the link between several dimensions of racial identity and emotional responses to discrimination in our study (which in and of themselves may act as precursors to psychopathology) highlights the need for clinicians to be aware of the significance of race to their clients, the positive and negative judgments African American clients make about their race, and their attitudes, opinions, and beliefs about how Blacks should act. Moreover, clinicians will need to be comfortable and conversant in engaging their clients around these topics. As such, training and skills development in this regard should be ongoing. The evolving body of work linking racial identity to psychological responses to racism also will lay the foundation for the incorporation of racial identity into health communication interventions (Brondolo, verHalen, Pencille, Beatty, & Contrada, 2009). For instance, health brochures might emphasize traditional African diets or contain graphics that reflect the racial identity of the target group (Resnicow et al., 2009). In addition, this line of research may impact culturally informed treatment interventions with the potential to address well-documented racial disparities in mental health service utilization (Tolan & Dodge, 2005).

Limitations and Future Directions

While our study makes several important contributions, there are some limitations that lend themselves to future research. First, while our study involves a sample that may be particularly of interest (i.e., college students), we are limited in our ability to generalize these findings. Given the varying impact of discrimination at particular developmental epochs and socioeconomic differences in the impact of racial discrimination, future work should include broader participants from broader age and class spectrums. Second, while our use of visual imagery paradigms provides several advantages over retrospective self-report approaches, future research could employ methods such as diary methodology or the use of confederates to further capture real-life experiences with discrimination. Third, while our study captured a broad range of moods, we might expect that additional emotions not captured in our study (e.g., agitation, sadness, surprise, etc.) might also be experienced during racism-related stress events. Thus, future research should explore a fuller variety of emotions. Fourth, the current study focused on direct effects, but recent reviews (e.g., Williams & Mohammed, 2009) have emphasized the need for exploring mechanisms through which negative emotions might affect health (e.g., appraisal, self-esteem), suggesting the need for longitudinal work. Observing how emotional processes related to experiences with discrimination change over time would provide a more complete view of the ultimate health impact of discrimination. Finally, we note that several of the racial ideology subscales had modest reliability. Although the mean–interitem correlations were suggestive of adequate internal consistency, the modest alphas may have increased measurement error in our study. One potential remedy would be to use the complete racial identity measure, as opposed to the shortened form used in this study.

Conclusion

Our study adds to the small but growing literature investigating affective responses to racial discrimination. In addition, this work adds to the budding research seeking to unpack the well-established findings regarding the protective nature of racial identity. Our results indicate that African American college students experience multiple emotions and respond in distinct ways following exposure to discrimination, that situational characteristics affect these responses, and that the significance and meaning of race can predict these responses. It is our hope that future research will build on this work to further elucidate emotional responses to discrimination, ultimately identifying avenues through which to disrupt discrimination’s deleterious impact, and alleviate the psychological distress of African Americans who experience racism.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported, in part, through funding from the National Science Foundation (SES-0932268; Principal Investigator: Enrique W. Neblett Jr.).

References

Banks

K. H.

Kohn-Wood

L. P.

(2007). The influence of racial identity profiles on the relationship between racial discrimination and depressive symptoms. Journal of Black Psychology, 33, 331-334. doi:10.1177/0095798407302540

Briggs

S. R.

Cheek

J. M.

(1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of Personality, 54, 106-148.

Brody

G. H.

Chen

Murry

V. M.

Simons

R. L.

Gibbons

F. X.

Cutrona

C. E.

(2006). Perceived discrimination and the adjustment of African American youths: A five-year longitudinal analysis with contextual moderation effects. Child Development, 77, 1170-1189. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00927.x

Brondolo

Thompson

Brady

Appel

Cassells

Tobin

J. N.

Sweeney

(2005). The relationship of racism to appraisals and coping in a community sample. Ethnicity & Disease, 15, 14-19. Retrieved from http://ishib.org/?page_id=39

Brondolo

verHalen

N. B.

Pencille

Beatty

Contrada

R. J.

(2009). Coping with racism: A selective review of the literature and a theoretical and methodological critique. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 32, 64-88.

Broudy

Brondolo

Coakley

Brady

Cassells

Tobin

J. N.

Sweeney

(2007). Perceived ethnic discrimination in relation to daily moods and negative social interactions. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 30(1), 31-43. doi:10.1007/s10865-006-9081-4

Caldwell

C. H.

Kohn-Wood

Schmeelk-Cone

Chavous

T. M.

Zimmerman

M. A.

(2004). Racial discrimination and racial identity as risk or protective factors for violent behaviors in African American young adults. American Journal of Community Psychology, 33(1-2), 91-105. doi:10.1023/B:AJCP.0000014321.02367.dd

Carter

R. T.

Forsyth

(2010). Reactions to racial discrimination: Emotional stress and help-seeking behaviors. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 2, 183-191. doi:10.1037/a0020102

Carter

R. T.

Pieterse

A. L.

Smith

S. I.

II. (2008). Racial identity status profiles and expressions of anger in Black Americans: An exploratory study. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 36, 101-112. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1912.2008.tb00074.x

10.

Carter

R. T.

Reynolds

A. L.

(2011). Race-related stress, racial identity status attitudes, and emotional reactions of Black Americans. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17, 156-162. doi:10.1037/a0023358

11.

Clark

K. B.

Clark

M. P.

(1947). Racial identification and preference in Negro children. In Newcomb

T. M.

Hartley

E. L.

(Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 169-178). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

12.

Clark

Anderson

N. B.

Clark

V. R.

Williams

D. R.

(1999). Racism as a stressor for African Americans: A biopsychosocial model. American Psychologist, 54, 805-816. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.54.10.805

13.

Harrell

S. P.

(2000). A multidimensional conceptualization of racism-related stress: Implications for the well-being of people of color. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 70, 42-58. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1939-0025

14.

Hosmer

D. W.

Jr. Lemeshow

(2000). Applied logistic regression (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.

15.

Jones

D. R.

Harrell

J. P.

Morris-Prather

C. E.

Thomas

Omowale

(1996). Affective and physiological responses to racism: The roles of Afrocentrism and mode of presentation. Ethnicity & Disease, 6(1-2), 109-122.

16.

Lazarus

R. S.

Folkman

(1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York, NY: Springer.

17.

Martin

P. P.

Wout

D. A.

Nguyen

H. X.

Gonzalez

R. D.

Sellers

R. M.

(2010). Investigating the psychometric properties of the Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity in two samples: The development of the MIBI-S. Unpublished manuscript.

18.

Morris-Prather

C. E.

Harrell

J. P.

Collins

Leonard

K. L.

Boss

Lee

J. W.

(1996). Gender differences in mood and cardiovascular responses to socially stressful stimuli. Ethnicity & Disease, 6(1-2), 123-131.

19.

Neblett

E. W.

Rivas-Drake

Umaña-Taylor

A. J.

(2012). The promise of racial and ethnic protective factors in promoting ethnic minority youth development. Child Development Perspectives, 6, 295-303.

20.

Neblett

E. W.

Shelton

J. N.

Sellers

R. M.

(2004). The role of racial identity in managing daily hassles. In Philogène

(Ed.), Race and identity: The legacy of Kenneth Clark (pp. 77-90). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

21.

Paradies

(2006). A systematic review of empirical research on self-reported racism and health. International Journal of Epidemiology, 35, 888-901.

22.

Prelow

H. M.

Danoff-Burg

Swenson

R. R.

Pulgiano

(2004). The impact of ecological risk and perceived discrimination on the psychological adjustment of African American and European American youth. Journal of Community Psychology, 32, 375-389. doi:10.1002/jcop.20007

23.

Resnicow

Davis

Zhang

Tolsma

Alexander

Wiese

Strecher

(2009). Tailoring a fruit and vegetable intervention on ethnic identity: Results of a randomized study. Health Psychology, 28, 394-403. doi:10.1037/a0015217

24.

Rowley

S. J.

Sellers

R. M.

Chavous

T. M.

Smith

M. A.

(1998). The relationship between racial identity and self-esteem in African American college and high school students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 715-724. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.715

25.

Salvatore

Shelton

J. N.

(2007). Cognitive costs of exposure to racial prejudice. Psychological Science, 18, 810-815. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01984.x

26.

Seaton

E. K.

Caldwell

C. H.

Sellers

R. M.

Jackson

J. S.

(2008). The prevalence of perceived discrimination among African American and Caribbean Black youth. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1288-1297. doi:10.1037/a0012747

27.

Sellers

R. M.

Copeland-Linder

Martin

P. P.

Lewis

R. L.

(2006). Racial identity matters: The relationship between racial discrimination and psychological functioning in African American adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16, 187-216. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2006.00128.x

28.

Sellers

R. M.

Morgan

Brown

T. N.

(2001). A multidimensional approach to racial identity: Implications for African American children. In Neal-Barnett

(Ed.), Forging links: Clinical-developmental perspectives on African American children (pp. 23-56). Westport, CT: Praeger.

29.

Sellers

R. M.

Shelton

J. N.

(2003). The role of racial identity in perceived racial discrimination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1079-1092. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.5.1079

30.

Sellers

R. M.

Smith

M. A.

Shelton

J. N.

Rowley

S. A. J.

Chavous

T. M.

(1998). Multidimensional model of racial identity: A reconceptualization of African American racial identity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(1), 18-39. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0201_2

31.

Settles

I. H.

Navarrete

C. D.

Pagano

S. J.

Abdou

C. M.

Sidanius

(2010). Racial identity and depression among African American women. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16, 248-255. doi:10.1037/a0016442

32.

Smart Richman

Pek

Pascoe

Bauer

D. J.

(2010). The effects of perceived discrimination on ambulatory blood pressure and affective responses to interpersonal stress modeled over 24 hours. Health Psychology, 29, 403-411. doi:10.1037/a0019045

33.

Sutherland

M. E.

Harrell

J. P.

(1986). Individual differences in physiological responses to fearful, racially noxious, and neutral imagery. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 6, 133-150.

34.

Tolan

P. H.

Dodge

K. A.

(2005). Children’s mental health as a primary care and concern: A system for comprehensive support and service. American Psychologist, 60, 601-614.

35.

Vermunt

J. K.

Magidson

(2005). Factor analysis with categorical indicators: A comparison between traditional and latent profile approaches. In van der Ark

L. A.

Croon

M. A.

Sijtsma

(Eds.), New developments in categorical data analysis for the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 41-62). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

36.

Wei

Liao

K. Y.

Chao

R. C.

Mallinckrodt

Tsai

Botello-Zamarron

(2010). Minority stress, perceived bicultural competence, and depressive symptoms among ethnic minority college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57, 411-422.

37.

Vrana

S. R.

Rollock

(2002). The role of ethnicity, gender, emotional content, and contextual differences in physiological, expressive, and self-reported emotional responses to imagery. Cognition & Emotion, 16(1), 165-192. doi:10.1080/02699930143000185

38.

Williams

D. R.

Mohammed

S. A.

(2009). Discrimination and racial disparities in health: Evidence and needed research. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 32(1), 20-47. doi:10.1007/s10865-008-9185-0