一项探索性研究:种族社会化实践与照顾黑人、双性恋和变性人儿童的照顾者的困境

IF 1.6 3区 心理学 Q2 FAMILY STUDIES Journal of Child and Family Studies Pub Date : 2024-06-27 DOI:10.1007/s10826-024-02874-3
Flóra Faragó
{"title":"一项探索性研究:种族社会化实践与照顾黑人、双性恋和变性人儿童的照顾者的困境","authors":"Flóra Faragó","doi":"10.1007/s10826-024-02874-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study on the racial socialization practices and dilemmas of caregivers of 0–8 year-old BIPOC children utilized an open-ended online survey, with a mixed-methods approach to data analysis. The study included 173 caregivers (i.e., 59% white; 41% BIPOC; 94.2% female) in the U.S. who held a variety of roles (e.g., 33.5% parents/relatives; 28.3% early childhood educators; 12.1% mental health/health professionals). Caregivers were prompted with a message about joy and resilience in BIPOC children. Analysis of open-ended data revealed practices such as the use of books, adult education, talking, preparation for bias or acknowledgment of racism, stereotyping, privilege, anti-bias/anti-racist education, art, music, dance, home language, and miscellaneous topics. Caregivers highlighted the following: (a) Nurturing a positive racial identity and pride in children’s own heritage; (b) Nurturing love and knowledge about racial diversity; (c) Preparation for bias; and, (d) Racial socialization network: Adult-to-adult practices. Regarding racial socialization dilemmas, caregivers highlighted challenges with nurturing a positive racial identity/pride in children’s heritage; nurturing love and knowledge about racial diversity; preparation for bias; and, adult education. Dilemmas were reported about nurturing self-love in a racist world, whiteness, others’ biases, relationships, representation, multiracial families, own biases, age appropriateness, and colorism. Chi-square analyses confirmed that there were no statistically significant differences between white and BIPOC, and familial and non-familial, caregivers’ racial socialization practices and dilemmas. Descriptive results revealed some differences in racial socialization dilemmas by race and role of caregivers.</p>","PeriodicalId":48362,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child and Family Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Exploratory Study: Racial Socialization Practices and Dilemmas of Caregivers Nurturing Young BIPOC Children\",\"authors\":\"Flóra Faragó\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10826-024-02874-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This study on the racial socialization practices and dilemmas of caregivers of 0–8 year-old BIPOC children utilized an open-ended online survey, with a mixed-methods approach to data analysis. The study included 173 caregivers (i.e., 59% white; 41% BIPOC; 94.2% female) in the U.S. who held a variety of roles (e.g., 33.5% parents/relatives; 28.3% early childhood educators; 12.1% mental health/health professionals). Caregivers were prompted with a message about joy and resilience in BIPOC children. Analysis of open-ended data revealed practices such as the use of books, adult education, talking, preparation for bias or acknowledgment of racism, stereotyping, privilege, anti-bias/anti-racist education, art, music, dance, home language, and miscellaneous topics. Caregivers highlighted the following: (a) Nurturing a positive racial identity and pride in children’s own heritage; (b) Nurturing love and knowledge about racial diversity; (c) Preparation for bias; and, (d) Racial socialization network: Adult-to-adult practices. Regarding racial socialization dilemmas, caregivers highlighted challenges with nurturing a positive racial identity/pride in children’s heritage; nurturing love and knowledge about racial diversity; preparation for bias; and, adult education. Dilemmas were reported about nurturing self-love in a racist world, whiteness, others’ biases, relationships, representation, multiracial families, own biases, age appropriateness, and colorism. Chi-square analyses confirmed that there were no statistically significant differences between white and BIPOC, and familial and non-familial, caregivers’ racial socialization practices and dilemmas. Descriptive results revealed some differences in racial socialization dilemmas by race and role of caregivers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48362,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Child and Family Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Child and Family Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-024-02874-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"FAMILY STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Child and Family Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-024-02874-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究采用开放式在线调查和混合方法进行数据分析,探讨了 0-8 岁黑人和印地安人儿童看护者的种族社会化实践和困境。研究对象包括美国的 173 名照顾者(即 59% 的白人;41% 的 BIPOC;94.2% 的女性),他们扮演着不同的角色(例如,33.5% 的父母/亲属;28.3% 的幼儿教育工作者;12.1% 的心理健康/保健专业人员)。研究人员向照顾者们传达了有关 BIPOC 儿童的快乐和适应能力的信息。对开放式数据的分析显示了一些做法,如使用书籍、成人教育、谈话、为偏见或承认种族主义做准备、陈规定型观念、特权、反偏见/反种族主义教育、艺术、音乐、舞蹈、家庭语言和其他主题。照顾者强调了以下几点:(a) 培养积极的种族认同和对儿童自身传统的自豪感;(b) 培养对种族多样性的热爱和了解;(c) 为偏见做好准备;以及 (d) 种族社会化网络:成人对成人的做法。关于种族社会化的困境,照料者强调了在以下方面所面临的挑战:培养积极的种族身份认同/ 以儿童的遗产为荣;培养对种族多样性的热爱和了解;为偏见做好准备;以及成人教育。在种族主义世界中培养自爱、白人、他人的偏见、人际关系、代表性、多种族家庭、自身偏见、年龄适宜性和肤色歧视等方面都存在困境。卡方分析证实,白人与黑人、家庭与非家庭照顾者在种族社会化实践和困境方面没有显著的统计学差异。描述性结果显示,不同种族和不同角色的照顾者在种族社会化困境方面存在一些差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An Exploratory Study: Racial Socialization Practices and Dilemmas of Caregivers Nurturing Young BIPOC Children

This study on the racial socialization practices and dilemmas of caregivers of 0–8 year-old BIPOC children utilized an open-ended online survey, with a mixed-methods approach to data analysis. The study included 173 caregivers (i.e., 59% white; 41% BIPOC; 94.2% female) in the U.S. who held a variety of roles (e.g., 33.5% parents/relatives; 28.3% early childhood educators; 12.1% mental health/health professionals). Caregivers were prompted with a message about joy and resilience in BIPOC children. Analysis of open-ended data revealed practices such as the use of books, adult education, talking, preparation for bias or acknowledgment of racism, stereotyping, privilege, anti-bias/anti-racist education, art, music, dance, home language, and miscellaneous topics. Caregivers highlighted the following: (a) Nurturing a positive racial identity and pride in children’s own heritage; (b) Nurturing love and knowledge about racial diversity; (c) Preparation for bias; and, (d) Racial socialization network: Adult-to-adult practices. Regarding racial socialization dilemmas, caregivers highlighted challenges with nurturing a positive racial identity/pride in children’s heritage; nurturing love and knowledge about racial diversity; preparation for bias; and, adult education. Dilemmas were reported about nurturing self-love in a racist world, whiteness, others’ biases, relationships, representation, multiracial families, own biases, age appropriateness, and colorism. Chi-square analyses confirmed that there were no statistically significant differences between white and BIPOC, and familial and non-familial, caregivers’ racial socialization practices and dilemmas. Descriptive results revealed some differences in racial socialization dilemmas by race and role of caregivers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: Journal of Child and Family Studies (JCFS) international, peer-reviewed forum for topical issues pertaining to the behavioral health and well-being of children, adolescents, and their families. Interdisciplinary and ecological in approach, the journal focuses on individual, family, and community contexts that influence child, youth, and family well-being and translates research results into practical applications for providers, program implementers, and policymakers. Original papers address applied and translational research, program evaluation, service delivery, and policy matters that affect child, youth, and family well-being. Topic areas include but are not limited to: enhancing child, youth/young adult, parent, caregiver, and/or family functioning; prevention and intervention related to social, emotional, or behavioral functioning in children, youth, and families; cumulative effects of risk and protective factors on behavioral health, development, and well-being; the effects both of exposure to adverse childhood events and assets/protective factors; child abuse and neglect, housing instability and homelessness, and related ecological factors influencing child and family outcomes.
期刊最新文献
An Archival Study of the Relationship Between Treatment Duration, Functioning, and Out-of-Home Placement for Youth with Serious Emotional Disturbance in a State-Wide Intensive In-Home Family Treatment Program Sibling-Mediated Early Start Denver Model Support for Young Autistic Children How the COVID-19 Pandemic Influenced Veteran Parents’ Harsh Parenting: Do Parental PTSD and Parental Role Matter? Video Games, Violence Justification and Child-to-Parent Violence The Protective Role of Supportive Relationships in Mitigating Bullying Victimization and Psychological Distress in Adolescents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1