Race and Social Problems最新文献

This study investigated the main and interactive effects of identity-based challenges, discrimination, and Multiracial pride on psychological distress in Biracial emerging adults. Additionally, we examined whether these associations may differ by Biracial sub-group (e.g., Black-White, Asian-White, Latinx-White, and minority-minority) given their unique racial experiences. Participants were 326 Biracial emerging adults (M_age = 19.57 years old; 75.2% female) recruited from three public universities in the United States for an online survey. For all Biracial groups, identity-based challenges were associated with greater psychological distress. After testing a series of competing multi-group regression models, results indicated that the relations between distress and our predictors: identity-based challenges, discrimination, and Multiracial pride do indeed differ across Biracial sub-group. The most apparent and unique differences were displayed by the Black-White Biracial sub-group. These findings highlight identity-based challenges as a unique risk in the Biracial population and suggest that a principled comparison between Biracial sub-groups is necessary to tease apart group-specific associations between these constructs and psychological distress.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, news media are expected to play a critical role in reducing health disparities. However, we know little about whether and how disparities in COVID-19 have been covered in national and local U.S. newspapers. This study examined whether minority health gained news attention and whether partisan bias affected related coverage in the early stages of the pandemic. Results indicate that minority groups have been underrepresented in COVID-19 news articles. Left-leaning newspapers were more likely to discuss minorities in COVID-19 news than least biased media. Left-leaning and right-leaning newspapers did not differ in the number of articles mentioning racial/ethnic minorities. COVID-19 news exceeded the average U.S. reading comprehension level and require some college education to understand but did not differ in readability levels among partisan newspapers. Left-leaning newspapers used significantly more medical terms and affiliated scientific facts to describe COVID-19 than right-leaning newspapers. Implications include avoiding potential failures in informing the public (especially the racial/ethnic minorities) essential scientific facts about disease prevention and increasing public trust in health news coverage.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been reported to disproportionately impact racial/ethnic minorities in the USA, both in terms of infections and deaths. This racial disparity in the COVID-19 outcomes may result from the segregation of minorities in neighborhoods with health-compromising conditions. We, thus, anticipate that neighborhoods would be especially vulnerable to COVID-19 if they are of present-day economic and racial disadvantage and were redlined historically. To test this expectation, we examined the change of both confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths from April to July, 2020, in zip code tabulation areas (ZCTAs) in the New York City using multilevel regression analysis. The results indicate that ZCTAs with a higher proportion of black and Hispanic populations are associated with a higher percentage of COVID-19 infection. Historically low-graded neighborhoods show a higher risk for COVID-19 infection, even for ZCTAs with present-day economic and racial privilege. These associations change over time as the pandemic unfolds. Racial/ethnic minorities are bearing the brunt of the COVID-19 pandemic's health impact. The current evidence shows that the pre-existing social structure in the form of racial residential segregation could be partially responsible for the disparities observed, highlighting an urgent need to stress historical segregation and to build a less segregated and more equal society.

Scholars have offered a range of perspectives on the twenty-first century racial landscape with little consensus about either the current state of the U.S. racial hierarchy or its future trajectory. We offer a more comprehensive assessment, using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health) to study racial stratification across a number of socioeconomic outcomes. We pay particular attention to the robustness of results across different categorization schemes that account for self-identification and interviewer classification, as well as racial fluidity. Although we observe that White and Asian Americans generally have the best socioeconomic outcomes, on average, while Black Americans and American Indians have the worst, we also find meaningful differences in patterns of stratification both across outcomes and depending on how race is operationalized. These differences in stratification are reflected in the estimated number of strata as well as the rank order of racial categories. Our results suggest that ongoing debates about the nature of the U.S. racial hierarchy can be partly explained by methodological decisions about which outcomes to study and how best to measure race.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12552-021-09351-2.