Suchergebnisse

There is consistent evidence of the health‐harming effects of discrimination. However, it remains unclear whether discrimination contributes to persistent racial and ethnic health disparities. One hindrance to documenting the association between discrimination and health disparities is ongoing methodological issues, particularly the role of question wording in assessing self‐reports of discrimination. Using two nationally representative surveys, we investigate whether the prevalence, distribution, and mental and physical health consequences of differential treatment vary by question wording—"discrimination" versus "unfair treatment." We find that "unfair treatment" yields greater reports of everyday forms of differential treatment relative to reports of "discrimination," while the latter yields greater reports of major forms of differential treatment. In addition, the negative effect of "unfair treatment" on mental health is stronger than that of "discrimination," while the latter has a stronger negative effect on physical health. However, the effect of question wording on reports of differential treatment and its association with health is largely unique to non‐Hispanic whites. We conclude that unfair treatment and discrimination reflect distinct concepts that should not be used interchangeably.

Research on Americans' self-reported experiences of discrimination or unfair treatment (hereafter collectively referred to as differential treatment) has proliferated since the 1960s. Despite the growth of this research, some health scholars express concern about how to effectively measure self-reported experiences of differential treatment. Specifically, it has been suggested that the term discrimination is emotionally charged and that more neutral terms, such as unfair treatment, should be used instead. This study documents trends in question wording used to capture self-reported differential treatment in publicly accessible U.S. health and social science surveys. Our systematic review of 221 publicly available surveys reveals that there was a slight decline in social scientists' use of the once dominant term discrimination. Yet, there has been no consensus in question wording in health surveys, as health scholars increasingly use discrimination, unfair treatment, or other (e.g., because you are) or multiple terms ( discrimination or unfair treatment) at nearly equal frequencies. We conclude by discussing the potential implications of these shifts and disciplinary variations in question wording on discrimination research and highlighting several important directions for future research.

<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Racial/ethnic minorities in the United States not only experience discrimination personally but also witness or hear about fellow in-group members experiencing discrimination (ie, group-level discrimination). The objective of our study was to examine whether the effects of group-level discrimination on mental and physical health are different from those of personal level discrimination among Black Americans by drawing upon social psychology research of the Personal/Group Discrimination Discrepancy. <strong></strong></p><p><strong>Design and Setting: </strong>We conducted a secondary analysis of cross-sectional survey data from a larger study. <strong></strong></p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>One hundred and twenty participants, who self-identified as Black/ African Americans during the laboratory sessions (57.5% women, mean age = 48.97, standard deviation = 8.58) in the parent study, were included in our analyses. <strong></strong></p><p><strong>Main Predictor Measures: </strong>Perceived personal- level discrimination was assessed with five items that were taken from two existing measures, and group-level racial discrimination was assessed with three items. <strong></strong></p><p><strong>Main Outcome Measures: </strong>Self-reported physical and mental health were assessed with a modified version of SF-8. <strong></strong></p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Perceived personal-level racial discrimination was associated with worse mental health. In contrast, perceived group-level racial discrimination was associated with better mental as well as physical health. <strong></strong></p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Perceived group-level racial discrimination may serve as one of several health protective factors even when individuals perceive personal-level racial discrimination. The present findings demonstrate the importance of examining both personal- and group-level experiences of racial discrimination as they independently relate to health outcomes for Black Americans. <em>Ethn Dis. </em>2016;26:453-460; doi:10.18865/ ed.26.3.453 </p>

The association between physicians' and patients' racial attitudes and poorer patient–physician communication in racially discordant medical interactions is well-documented. However, it is unclear how physicians' and patients' racial attitudes independently and jointly affect their behaviors during these interactions. In a secondary analysis of video-recorded medical interactions between non-Black physicians and Black patients, we examined how physicians' explicit and implicit racial bias and patients' perceived past discrimination influenced their own as well as one another's affect and level of engagement. Affect and engagement were assessed with a "thin slice" method. For physicians, the major findings were significant three-way interactions: physicians' affect and engagement were influenced by their implicit and explicit racial bias (i.e., aversive racism), but only when they interacted with patients who reported any incidence of prior discrimination. In contrast, patients' affect was influenced only by perceived discrimination. Theoretical and clinical implications of current findings are discussed.