Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology
2012, Vol. 18, No. 4, 384 –394
© 2012 American Psychological Association
1099-9809/12/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0029781
Strength in Numbers? Cognitive Reappraisal Tendencies and Psychological
Functioning Among Latinos in the Context of Oppression
José A. Soto
Brian E. Armenta
The Pennsylvania State University
University of Nebraska–Lincoln
Christopher R. Perez
Byron L. Zamboanga
The Pennsylvania State University
Smith College
Adriana J. Umaña-Taylor
Richard M. Lee
Arizona State University
University of Minnesota
Seth J. Schwartz
Irene J. K. Park
University of Miami
University of Notre Dame
Que-Lam Huynh
Susan Krauss Whitbourne
San Diego State University
University of Massachusetts Amherst
Thao N. Le
Lindsay S. Ham
Colorado State University
University of Arkansas
The typically positive relationship between cognitive reappraisal and psychological functioning may
be nullified for Latinos embedded within multiple contexts of oppression (Perez & Soto, 2011).
Multiply oppressive contexts are characterized by exposure to oppression at a societal level (distal
oppression), in the immediate environment (proximal oppression), and at an individual level
(personal oppression). We replicated and extended Perez and Soto’s (2011) findings by examining
whether the reappraisal–psychological functioning association was moderated by (a) relative numerical representation of Latinos within the environment (proximal oppression) and (b) personal
perceptions of discrimination (personal oppression) among 425 Latino college students throughout
the United States. For Latinos in high-Latino counties, greater use of reappraisal was associated with
better psychological functioning, regardless of perceived discrimination; this relationship was absent
for Latinos in low-Latino counties who perceived greater discrimination. Findings highlight the
importance of considering how contextual factors can alter the adaptive functions of emotion
regulation strategies.
Keywords: emotion regulation, psychological functioning, oppression, discrimination, ethnic minority
There is evidence that perceptions of discrimination are a powerful and deleterious stressor (Clark, Anderson, Clark, & Williams,
1999; Mallet & Swim, 2005; Plummer & Slane, 1996; Todorova,
Falcón, Lincoln, & Price, 2010). Perceptions of discrimination
across multiple ethnic and cultural groups have been linked to a
number of symptoms indicative of poor physical and psychologi-
José A. Soto and Christopher R. Perez, Department of Psychology, The
Pennsylvania State University; Brian E. Armenta, Department of Psychology, University of Nebraska–Lincoln; Byron L. Zamboanga, Department
of Psychology, Smith College; Adriana J. Umaña-Taylor, School of Social
and Family Dynamics, Arizona State University; Richard M. Lee, Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota; Seth J. Schwartz, Epidemiology and Public Health, Leonard M. Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami; Irene J. K. Park, Department of Psychology, University of
Notre Dame; Que-Lam Huynh, Department of Psychology, San Diego
State University; Susan Krauss Whitbourne, Department of Psychology,
University of Massachusetts Amherst; Thao N. Le, Department of Psychology,
Colorado State University; Lindsay S. Ham, Department of Psychology, University of Arkansas.
The results reported in this article are based on data drawn from the
Multisite University Study of Identity and Culture (MUSIC). We thank
Mike Vernon for his help with data collection and Carey S. Ryan for her
thoughtful feedback on this article.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to José A.
Soto, Department of Psychology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802. E-mail: [email protected]
384
REAPPRAISAL AND PERCEIVED DISCRIMINATION
cal functioning (Paradies, 2006; Pascoe & Smart Richman, 2009;
Williams & Mohammed, 2009). The contributions of perceived
discrimination to poor physical and psychological functioning
appear to exceed those related to other life stressors (e.g.,
divorce, death of family member, illness) or perceived general
stress (Dion, Dion, & Pak, 1992; Wei, Heppner, Ku, & Liao,
2010; Wei, Ku, Russell, Mallinckrodt, & Liao, 2008). In addition to providing a source of unique stress, perceptions of
discrimination may negatively influence psychological functioning by rendering ordinarily useful coping strategies ineffective (C. R. Perez & Soto, 2011). In the present study, we tested
this notion by examining how a context of oppression—a context characterized by exposure to discrimination and groupbased societal devaluation—moderates the association between
cognitive reappraisal tendencies and psychological functioning
among Latino college students across 19 colleges and universities in the United States.
Discrimination, Coping, and Emotion Regulation
The pervasiveness of discrimination in the lives of many U.S.
ethnic minority individuals (Edwards & Romero, 2008; D. Pérez,
Fortuna, & Alegría, 2008; Soto, Dawson-Andoh, & BeLue, 2011)
has prompted researchers to focus on the ways in which individuals cope with the perception that they have been discriminated
against (e.g., Brondolo, ver Halen, Pencille, Beatty, & Contrada,
2009; Major & O’Brien, 2005). Several studies have demonstrated
that the outcomes associated with perceived discrimination can be
moderated by the types of coping strategies that an individual
employs (e.g., Mallet & Swim, 2005; Wei et al., 2008, 2010; Yoo
& Lee, 2005; cf. Greer, 2011). Some studies have focused on the
relationship between discrimination and use of emotion-focused
coping strategies, such as distraction, passive acceptance, and
venting (Joseph & Kuo, 2009; Noh & Kaspar, 2003). However,
few studies have explicitly examined how the association between
the use of specific emotion regulation strategies and psychological
outcomes is moderated by perceived discrimination. This gap in
the literature is particularly striking given that common responses
to perceived discrimination include feelings of anger, anxiety, and
sadness (e.g., Gibbons et al., 2010; Swim, Hyers, Cohen, Fitzgerald, & Bylsma, 2003). As a result, some have argued that understanding how individuals who perceive discrimination regulate
negative emotions represents a critical step in understanding how
perceived discrimination relates to various psychological outcomes (Major & O’Brien, 2005; Swim, Cohen, & Hyers, 1998).
For the purpose of the present study, emotion regulation is
defined as the process by which an individual shapes his or her
emotional experience by favoring some emotions over others,
modifying the intensity and timing of those emotions, and altering
the subjective experiences and behavioral expressions associated
with those emotions (Gross, 1998). Emotion regulation can be
differentiated from coping in that emotion regulation has a narrower focus limited to managing one’s emotional experiences,
whereas coping also includes managing nonemotional goals (e.g.,
talking to a supervisor about unfair treatment; Gross, Richards, &
John, 2006). Of particular interest to the study of perceived discrimination is cognitive reappraisal, an emotion regulation strategy that has been found to be highly effective in managing negative emotions (see John & Gross, 2004). Cognitive reappraisal
385
refers to the process of altering how one thinks about an emotioneliciting event (Gross, 1998) such that (a) the outcome is more
positive (e.g., “Getting a ‘C’ is still passing”) or (b) the event
carries less personal relevance (e.g., “I don’t care about my grade
for this class”). Empirical evidence has consistently linked the use
of cognitive reappraisal to positive outcomes, such as fewer depressive symptoms, less negative affect, more positive affect,
greater well-being, and more successful social interactions (e.g.,
Butler et al., 2003; Gross & John, 2003). It is important to note that
Latinos have been shown to use cognitive reappraisal to the same
extent as other ethnic groups (Whites/European Americans) and
the positive association between use of cognitive reappraisal and
indicators of healthy psychological functioning has been demonstrated with a sample that included Latinos (although these data
were not analyzed separately by ethnic group; Gross & John,
2003). Thus, it stands to reason that Latinos who regularly use
cognitive reappraisal as an emotion regulation strategy (i.e., cognitive reappraisal tendencies) may be particularly successful in
“weathering the storm” of negative emotions that are associated
with perceptions of discrimination.
Cognitive Reappraisal in the Context of Oppression
Despite the well-documented benefits of cognitive reappraisal,
researchers have cautioned that the association between cognitive
reappraisal and psychological outcomes may be influenced by
multiple personal and contextual factors, including sociocultural
(e.g., culture, religion) and individual differences (e.g., personality, trait-emotionality; Butler & Gross, 2009; Consedine, Magai, &
Bonanno, 2002). In fact, prior research suggests that the context in
which members of oppressed groups live might render cognitive
reappraisal protective or detrimental, depending on the resulting
attribution. In the United States, ethnic minorities exist in what can
be characterized as a context of oppression—a context in which
the experience of discrimination and group-based societal devaluation are common for many, although not all, members of the
group (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). For example, ethnic minorities
who are turned down for jobs may feel better if they attribute the
rejection to racism instead of personal inadequacies. However,
they may feel worse if they receive the job and attribute that
benefit to their race as opposed to personal strengths (see Crocker
& Major, 1989; cf. Schmitt & Branscombe, 2002). Other research
has suggested that specific emotion regulation strategies may
actually moderate or mediate the relationship between being stigmatized and outcomes such as self-esteem and psychological distress (Hatzenbuehler, Nolen-Hoeksema, & Dovidio, 2009; Miller
& Kaiser, 2001). However, little empirical attention has been given
to how stigmatization (or being exposed to oppressive contexts)
may moderate the association between emotion regulation strategies and psychological outcomes.
Recently, C. R. Perez and Soto (2011) provided a framework for
understanding the multiple contexts of oppression that may define
the reality of members of many ethnic minority groups. In their
framework, Perez and Soto argued that oppression may be experienced at three separate levels corresponding to distal, proximal,
and personal levels of oppression. Exposure to distal oppression
occurs when one’s ethnic minority group is in a position of
relatively low power within a society (e.g., less political influence,
less economic wealth, fewer resources). By this definition, Latinos
386
SOTO ET AL.
(and members of all other ethnic minority groups) in the United
States are exposed to distal oppression (Hanna, Talley, & Guindon,
2000; A. Torres & Velazquez, 1998). Exposure to proximal oppression occurs when one’s immediate social environment is more
likely to make one’s membership in an oppressed ethnic minority
group salient. Following self-categorization theory (Turner, Hogg,
Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987), exposure to proximal oppression may be operationalized in terms of the relative presence or
absence of other in-group members within one’s immediate social
environment. Whereas distal and proximal oppression are defined
in terms of contextual characteristics, personal oppression is defined as an individual’s beliefs about his or her exposure to
oppression. Perez and Soto argued that exposure to multiple contexts of oppression (i.e., distal, proximal, and personal) may alter
the “adaptive” qualities of cognitive reappraisal tendencies.
In support of their contentions, C. R. Perez and Soto (2011)
found that the relationship between cognitive reappraisal tendencies and psychological functioning (i.e., greater depressive symptoms and lower life satisfaction) was moderated by the context of
oppression. Specifically, they found that for Latinos (i.e., high
distal oppression) living in a rural, predominantly White, U.S.
college town (i.e., high proximal oppression) who also believed
that their group is oppressed (i.e., high personal oppression),
reappraisal was associated with poorer psychological functioning.
However, for those Latinos living in the same area who believed
that their ethnic group was less oppressed (i.e., low personal
oppression), cognitive reappraisal tendencies were associated with
more favorable psychological functioning. It is interesting that, for
Latinos in Puerto Rico, who arguably still experience distal oppression within a U.S. context (see A. Torres & Velazquez, 1998,
for a discussion of U.S.–Puerto Rico relations) but experience low
proximal oppression by virtue of being in the numerical majority
in their immediate social context, Perez and Soto found cognitive
reappraisal tendencies to be associated with more favorable psychological functioning, regardless of personal beliefs regarding
oppression. Thus, it appears that exposure to multiple oppressive
contexts may provide quite a challenge for those Latinos who tend
to cognitively reappraise negative emotions, perhaps because of
the limited number of positive appraisals that can be made within
these contexts (Outlaw, 1993; Utsey, Ponterotto, Reynolds, &
Cancelli, 2000).
Although C. R. Perez and Soto (2011) provide a useful framework for thinking about contexts of oppression, the specific characteristics that distinguish between proximally oppressive and
nonproximally oppressive contexts require further elaboration and
specification. Ethnic oppression is thought to exist within societies
that are hierarchically structured along ethnic lines, that is, societies in which a dominant ethnic group possesses an unequal share
of, and control over, valued social and economic resources (Hanna
et al., 2000; Sidanius, 1993; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Thus, the
notion of ethnic oppression implies a specific intergroup dynamic
and comparison. Given that proximal oppression is conceptualized
as a social environment that increases the salience of one’s membership in an oppressed ethnic minority group, it may be most
appropriate to consider proximally oppressive contexts as those in
which the proportion of one’s ethnic group is small relative to the
proportion of Whites/European Americans (i.e., the numerically,
socially, and economically dominant ethnic group in society at
large) within one’s immediate social environment. To be certain,
being in a numerical minority is likely to make one’s ethnicity and
ethnic identity salient, regardless of the specific ethnic composition of one’s environment (Turner et al., 1987). However, the
salience of the oppressed status of one’s ethnic minority group
would seem to necessitate a comparison (implicit or explicit)
between one’s oppressed ethnic minority group and the majority
ethnic group. Based on this reasoning, for the current study, we
operationalized proximal oppression in terms of the percentage of
Latinos relative to the percentage of Whites/European Americans
in one’s immediate social environment (i.e., county of residence).
The Present Study
In the present study, we examined how exposure to proximal
and personal oppression interacts to alter the adaptive qualities of
cognitive reappraisal tendencies among a nation-wide sample of
Latino college students within a distally oppressive context (i.e.,
ethnic minorities within the United States). Specifically, we predicted a three-way interaction among cognitive reappraisal tendencies, percentage of Latinos relative to Whites/European Americans
within one’s immediate social environment (proximal oppression),
and perceptions of ethnic discrimination (personal oppression).
Based on C. R. Perez and Soto’s (2011) context of oppression
perspective, we expected the typically positive relationship between cognitive reappraisal tendencies and psychological functioning to be absent among Latinos high in both proximal and
personal oppression (i.e., low relative composition of Latinos
within one’s social environment and higher perceived levels of
personal discrimination). We otherwise expected the positive association between cognitive reappraisal tendencies and psychological functioning to hold, as demonstrated in prior studies (Gross &
John, 2003), for all other iterations of proximal and personal
oppression (i.e., low in one or both).
Method
Participants
The present sample included 425 Latinos from 19 colleges and
universities across the United States (M age ⫽ 19.89 years, SD ⫽
3.55, range ⫽ 18 –54; 72.5% women). Of these participants, 16.5%
were foreign-born, 44.2% were U.S.-born to at least one foreignborn parent, and 39.3% were U.S.-born to U.S.-born parents.
Information about length of time in the United States was not
collected. A plurality of the sample consisted of those who had
been in school for less than 1 year (i.e., freshmen; 44.9%). The
remainder of the sample was more evenly distributed in terms of
the number of years in college (2 years ⫽ 22.0%, 3 years ⫽ 19.6%,
4 or more years ⫽ 13.5%).
Of the study sites, five universities were located in the Midwest,
four in the Northeast, six in the South, and four in the West; six
were located in urban or suburban areas and 13 were located in
“college towns.” All sites were 4-year institutions; 18 were large
research universities and one was a teaching college. Fourteen of
the institutions were public universities and five were private
schools.
Procedure
Participants completed a wide range of measures via a confidential online survey that took 1–2 hr to complete and for which
REAPPRAISAL AND PERCEIVED DISCRIMINATION
they received course credit. Participants provided implied consent
by reading a consent form online prior to completing the survey
and continuing with the study if they agreed with the consent
statement. All procedures were approved by the respective Internal
Review Boards of the 19 institutions represented in the sample to
ensure compliance with human subject protections.
Measures
The measures described below were used for the present study.
For each scale, negatively phrased items were reverse coded as
necessary and composite mean scores were then computed. Table
1 presents means, standard deviations, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, and correlations between variables, reported separately for
groups low and high in proximal oppression. Overall, the scales
demonstrated good reliability, ranging from .71 to .96.
Cognitive reappraisal tendencies. We used the Cognitive
Reappraisal subscale from the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire
(Gross & John, 2003). Participants responded to six items, such as
“When I want to feel more positive emotion, I change the way I’m
thinking about the situation.” Responses were provided on a
7-point scale, anchored by 1 (strongly disagree) and 7 (strongly
agree). Gross and John (2003) demonstrated adequate internal
consistency for the cognitive reappraisal measure across four subsamples, with an average alpha coefficient of .79. In addition,
3-month test–retest reliability was shown with a coefficient of .69
across the four subsamples (see Gross & John, 2003, for a fuller
description). It is important to note that the subsamples included
significant ethnic diversity, with the number of Latinos ranging
from 9% to 16%.
Perceived discrimination. This was measured with three
items that assess the frequency of previous-year experiences with
ethnic denigration (Pituc, Jung, & Lee, 2009). Participants indicated the number of times during the previous year they had been
“rejected by others,” “denied opportunities,” and “treated unfriendly or rudely by strangers” because of their ethnicity/race.
Participants responded to these items on a 4-point scale, using the
response options 1 (never), 2 (1–2 times), 3 (3– 4 times), and 4 (5
387
or more times). Although this measure has not been widely used
with Latino samples, the items are similar to those included in
measures that are commonly used with Latino participants (e.g.,
Williams, Yu, Jackson, & Anderson, 1997).
Psychological functioning. Multiple facets of psychological
functioning were assessed in terms of self-esteem, life satisfaction,
and symptoms of depression and anxiety.
Self-esteem. Self-esteem was measured with the Rosenberg
(1965) Self-Esteem Scale. Participants responded to 10 items, such
as “On the whole, I am satisfied with myself.” Responses were
provided on a 5-point scale, anchored by 1 (strongly disagree) and
5 (strongly agree). This measure has consistently shown good
internal consistency among diverse samples, with alphas ranging
from .74 to .83 (Moradi & Risco, 2006; Phinney, Ferguson, &
Tate, 1997; Prelow, Weaver, Swenson, & Bowman, 2005).
Life satisfaction. Life satisfaction was measured with the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS; Diener, Emmons, Larsen, &
Griffin, 1985). Participants responded to five items, such as “The
conditions of my life are excellent.” Responses were provided on
a 6-point scale, anchored by 1 (strongly disagree) and 6 (strongly
agree). Adequate internal consistency has been shown with alpha
coefficients ranging from .83 and .85 (Pavot, Diener, Colvin, &
Sandvik, 1991) to .87 (Diener et al., 1985). Reliability of the
SWLS is supported with test–retest correlation coefficients of .84
for both 2 weeks and 1 month (Pavot et al., 1991) and .82 for 2
months (Diener et al., 1985). Convergent validity is supported by
significant correlations between the SWLS and other common
measures of well-being (Diener et al., 1985; Pavot et al., 1991).
Depressive symptoms. We used a modified version of the
20-item Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale
(CES-D; Radloff, 1977). On the original CES-D, participants
indicate the degree to which they had experienced symptoms
associated with major depression (e.g., “I felt lonely”) during the
previous week on a 4-point scale, anchored by 0 (rarely or none of
the time; less than one day) and 3 (most or all of the time; 5–7
days). Two minor modifications were made to this scale for the
present study. First, one item (“I felt that I could not shake off the
Table 1
Means, Standard Deviations, Alpha Coefficients, and Zero-Order Correlations for High and Low Oppressive Contexts
Variable
Cognitive reappraisal
Perceived discrimination
Self-esteem
Life satisfaction
Depressive symptoms
Anxiety symptoms
High proximal oppression
Mean
SD
␣
Low proximal oppression
Mean
SD
␣
Cognitive
reappraisal
Perceived
discrimination
Self-esteem
Life
satisfaction
Depressive
symptoms
Anxiety
symptoms
—
⫺.07
.37ⴱⴱⴱ
.36ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.24ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.20ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.24ⴱ
—
⫺.18ⴱⴱ
⫺.15ⴱⴱ
.23ⴱⴱⴱ
.27ⴱⴱⴱ
.27ⴱ
⫺.15
—
.46ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.60ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.52ⴱⴱⴱ
.30ⴱ
⫺.27ⴱ
.72ⴱⴱⴱ
—
⫺.39ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.29ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.30ⴱ
.13
⫺.59ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.58ⴱⴱⴱ
—
.82ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.25ⴱ
.27ⴱ
⫺.54ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.56ⴱⴱⴱ
.84ⴱⴱⴱ
—
4.86
1.21
.88
1.42
0.51
.71
3.83
0.76
.91
4.24
1.09
.87
2.53
0.73
.96
2.36
0.94
.93
5.10
1.20
.90
1.35
0.56
.80
3.84
0.73
.90
4.04
1.13
.86
2.58
0.75
.94
2.37
0.89
.92
Note. Zero-order correlations for high oppressive contexts appear above the diagonal and zero-order correlations for low oppressive contexts appear below
the diagonal.
ⴱ
p ⬍ .05. ⴱⴱ p ⬍ .01. ⴱⴱⴱ p ⬍ .001.
388
SOTO ET AL.
blues, even with help from my family or friends”) was altered (“I
felt down or unhappy”) to avoid confusion from the use of a
culturally specific idiom. Second, responses were provided on a
5-point scale, anchored by 1 (strongly disagree) and 5 (strongly
agree). Although the underlying factor structure of the CES-D has
yielded mixed results in ethnically diverse samples (see Crockett,
Randall, Shen, Russell, & Driscoll, 2005, for a review), the full
scale has consistently been found to be internally reliable, with
alphas ranging from .84 to .87 among a number of Latino samples
(e.g., Crockett et al., 2005; L. Torres, 2010). In fact, a metaanalytic review of Latino depression found the CES-D to be the
most commonly used measure of depressive symptoms (Menselson, Rehkopf, & Kubzansky, 2008).
Anxiety symptoms. Anxiety was measured with 18 items intended to assess previous-week experiences with symptoms indicative of anxiety disorders. The items reflect experiences with
physical tension, restlessness, sleep disturbance, excessive worrying, and irritability (e.g., “I felt tense and have had trouble relaxing,” “My sleep has often been restless or disturbed,” “I have been
very irritable and in a bad mood,” and “I have been worrying a
lot”). Seven items were adapted from the Beck Anxiety Inventory
(A. T. Beck, Epstein, Brown, & Steer, 1988); the 11 remaining
items were based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders criteria for generalized anxiety disorder. Responses
were provided on a 5-point scale, anchored by 1 (strongly disagree) and 5 (strongly agree). Although these items have not been
previously used, the measure demonstrated strong internal consistency in the present study (␣s ⫽ .92–.93; see Table 1).
Oppression. As in the study conducted by C. R. Perez and
Soto (2011), distal oppression was a constant in our study owing
to the fact that Latinos hold relatively little social power within the
United States (Hanna et al., 2000). Proximal oppression was computed using ethnic composition data for the individual counties in
which an individual’s school was located. This allowed us to
numerically characterize the ethnic makeup of the environment in
which these campuses were located, while also taking into account
neighboring areas where students living off campus might live and
frequent. We relied on the national ratio of Latinos to non-Latino
Whites within the United States (16.3%/63.7%, respectively, or a
ratio of .255; U.S. Census Bureau, 2011) as a cutoff value for
categorizing low and high proximal oppression. Those sites with a
Latinos to non-Latino Whites representation ratio of .26 or above
(i.e., relatively high Latino representation) were considered low in
proximal oppression (sites ⫽ 6; n ⫽ 352; e.g., Riverside County,
California); those sites with a relative Latino representation of less
than 26% (i.e., relatively low Latino representation) were classified as high in proximal oppression (sites ⫽ 13; n ⫽ 73; e.g.,
Lancaster County, Nebraska). Given that low proximal oppression
was operationalized as greater numerical representation relative to
Whites, it is not surprising that a greater number of Latino participants came from the low proximal oppression sites.
Control variables. Evidence suggests that gender (e.g.,
Alfaro, Umaña-Taylor, Gonzales-Backen, Bámaca, & Zeiders,
2009; Delgado, Updegraff, Roosa, & Umaña-Taylor, 2011) and
nativity status (e.g., D. Pérez et al., 2008; Sternthal, Slopen, &
Williams, 2011; Tillman & Weiss, 2009) may modify the meaning
and consequences of perceived discrimination. Given the small
cell sizes (e.g., 12 foreign-born individuals in high proximal oppression contexts), we were unable to test gender or nativity status
interactions, but we did include gender and nativity status as
control variables in our analyses. In addition, owing to the wide
age range of our sample, we also included participant age as a
control variable in our analyses.
Data Analytic Plan
We estimated a series of latent variable path models using
Mplus release 6.1 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998 –2010), with maximum likelihood estimation with robust standard errors to account
for missing data and non-normality. Given our goal of testing
theoretically derived, substantive hypotheses, rather than evaluating measurement properties of individual scales, we elected to use
three-item parcels for measures with more than three items (see
Little, Cunningham, Shahar, & Widaman, 2002). Following Little
and colleagues’ (2002) recommendation, we randomly assigned all
items within each measure to one of three arbitrary categories
(first, second, or third). Items within each category were then
averaged to create three-item parcels for each measure. Item parcels were created for all of the measures except perceived discrimination, because this measure is already composed of three items.
The three perceived discrimination items and three-item parcels
for each of the remaining scales were used as indicators of their
respective constructs in our analyses.
Initial analyses of our model (described below) provided virtually identical patterns of results for the four psychological functioning variables separately (i.e., self-esteem, life satisfaction, depressive symptoms, and anxiety symptoms). A confirmatory factor
analysis including cognitive reappraisal tendencies, perceived discrimination, and the higher order psychological functioning variable provided a good fit to the data, based on Hu and Bentler’s
(1999) recommended criteria, ␹2(128) ⫽ 358.70, comparative fit
index (CFI) ⫽ .96, root mean square error of approximation
(RMSEA) ⫽ .06, standardized root mean square residual
(SRMR) ⫽ .08. Thus, for the sake of brevity, we used the latent
self-esteem, life satisfaction, depressive symptoms (reverse
coded), and anxiety symptoms (reverse coded) variables as indicators of a higher order psychological functioning variable. The
standardized factor loadings for the higher order factor were as
follows: satisfaction with life ⫽ .50, self-esteem ⫽ .66, anxiety
symptoms ⫽ .89, and depressive symptoms ⫽ .99.
To test our hypothesis that the association between cognitive
reappraisal and psychological functioning was moderated by exposure to proximal and personal oppression, we used a series of
latent variable mixture models. This approach is necessary to test
moderation involving both categorical variables (proximal oppression) and continuous latent variables (reappraisal and psychological functioning).1,2 An interaction between the latent cognitive
1
An alternative approach would be to use multiple-group path analyses
with observed, composite scale scores, with a product term to reflect the
interaction between cognitive reappraisal tendencies and perceived discrimination. This, however, would require us to make assumptions regarding our measures that are rarely tenable (e.g., tau equivalence), and thus
weaken the accuracy of the associations among the variables.
2
Ideally, we would have modeled community ethnic composition as a
continuous variable, and estimated a three-way interaction between cognitive reappraisal tendencies, perceive discrimination, and community ethnic composition. Unfortunately, this approach is computationally demanding and would require computer-processing capabilities that are not widely
available.
REAPPRAISAL AND PERCEIVED DISCRIMINATION
reappraisal and perceived discrimination variables was specified,
and paths were included from cognitive reappraisal, perceived
discrimination, and their interaction to psychological functioning.
Low and high proximal oppression sites were specified as known
latent classes. Given the specification of known classes, this analysis is functionally equivalent to a multiple-group approach to
testing moderation with categorical variables. Finally, paths from
our control variables (i.e., gender [0 ⫽ women, 1 ⫽ men], nativity
status, and age) to psychological functioning were included. The
path coefficients for the control variables were constrained to be
equivalent between the known classes in our analyses.3
A significant cognitive reappraisal–perceived discrimination interaction coefficient would indicate that the association between
cognitive reappraisal and psychological functioning varies based
on levels of perceived discrimination. Whether this interaction is
further moderated by proximal oppression (i.e., a three-way interaction) is determined by comparing (a) a model in which the
interaction path coefficient is allowed to be estimated separately
for low and high proximal oppression sites (i.e., unconstrained
model) with (b) a model in which the interaction path coefficient
is constrained to be equal for low and high proximal oppression
sites (i.e., constrained model). Significant interactions were plotted
at 1 standard deviation above and below the means of cognitive
reappraisal and perceived discrimination, and the associations (i.e.,
simple slopes) between cognitive reappraisal and psychological
functioning were tested at 1 standard deviation above and below
the mean of perceived discrimination (Aiken & West, 1991).
Results
Before testing our hypothesized three-way interaction (Reappraisal ⫻ Proximal Oppression ⫻ Personal Discrimination),
we examined whether our primary study variables (i.e., cognitive reappraisal, perceived discrimination, self-esteem, life satisfaction, depressive symptoms, and anxiety symptoms) were
associated with proximal oppression (high vs. low) or gender
using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and nativity and
age via correlation analysis. Our results showed that the low
and high proximal groups did not significantly differ on any of
the variables, Fs(1, 410 – 423) ⫽ 0.03–2.52, ␩2s ⫽ ⬍.001–.006,
ps ⫽ .11–.93.4 There was a significant gender difference on
perceived discrimination, F(1, 405) ⫽ 5.02, ␩2 ⫽ .01, p ⫽ .03,
such that men reported slightly more perceived discrimination
(M ⫽ 1.47) than did women (M ⫽ 1.33).5 There were no other
gender differences, Fs(1, 405– 423) ⫽ 0.008 –1.85, ␩2s ⫽
⬍.001–.004, ps ⫽ .18 –.93. Nativity status was not significantly
correlated with any of the variables, rs(409 – 423) ⫽ ⫺.05 to
.08, ps ⫽ .12–.91. Age, however, was significantly associated
with self-esteem, r(423) ⫽ .10, p ⫽ .03, and depressive symptoms, r(418) ⫽ ⫺.13, p ⫽ .007, such that older individuals
reported higher levels of self-esteem and fewer depressive
symptoms. There were no other age effects, rs(409 – 423) ⫽
⫺.08 to .03, ps ⫽ .12–.82.
For our latent variable mixture models, tests of relative model fit
(i.e., constrained vs. unconstrained) are provided based on the log
likelihood (LL) and Bayesian information criteria (BIC) values.
The log likelihood values for alternative models were used to
compute the change in ⫺2*log likelihood statistic (⌬–2LL), which
has a chi-square distribution with degrees of freedom for the test
389
equal to the differences in parameters estimated within the respective models. For BIC, lower values are indicative of better model
fit. Moreover, according to Raftery (1995), when comparing alternative models, a BIC change between 2 and 6 provides positive
evidence of model differences, between 6 and 10 provides strong
evidence of model differences, and greater than 10 provides very
strong evidence of model differences.
The latent variable mixture model in which the path coefficients
for cognitive reappraisal tendencies, perceived discrimination, and
their interaction were allowed to estimate separately for individuals in low versus high proximal oppression contexts provided a LL
value of ⫺7323.388 and a BIC value of 15106.02. Constraining
the path coefficients for the main effects (i.e., cognitive reappraisal
tendencies and perceived discrimination) did not significantly reduce the fit of the model, LL ⫽ ⫺7323.54, ⌬–2LL(df ⫽ 2) ⫽ 0.30,
p ⫽ .86. Moreover, a BIC change of ⫺11.79 indicated that the
constrained model should be preferred to the unconstrained model.
As shown in Figure 1, across contexts of proximal oppression,
cognitive reappraisal tendencies were positively associated with
psychological functioning, whereas perceived discrimination was
negatively associated with psychological functioning. Constraining the path coefficient for the cognitive reappraisal by perceived
discrimination interaction resulted in a significant drop in model
fit, LL ⫽ ⫺7325.67, ⌬–2LL(df ⫽ 1) ⫽ 4.268, p ⫽ .04. Moreover,
a BIC increase of 9.61 suggested that the unconstrained interaction
model should be preferred to the constrained interaction model.
This indicates that the interaction between cognitive reappraisal
and perceived discrimination differed significantly for individuals
in low and high proximal oppression contexts, consistent with our
hypothesis.
As Figure 1 illustrates, the interaction was statistically significant for those Latinos in high proximal oppression contexts, but
the interaction was not statistically significant for their counterparts in low proximal oppression contexts. Although not shown in
the figure, there was a positive and significant association between
age and psychological functioning (b ⫽ 0.02, p ⫽ .04). However,
gender (b ⫽ ⫺0.08, p ⬎ .05) and nativity status (b ⫽ ⫺0.02, p ⬎
.05) were not significantly associated with psychological functioning. It should be noted that excluding the control variables
strengthened the main and interactive associations of cognitive
reappraisal tendencies and perceived discrimination to psychological functioning.
The interaction between cognitive reappraisal tendencies and
perceived discrimination for individuals in high proximal oppres3
Indices of model fit are not available for latent variable interaction or
mixture models. To ascertain the general fit of the model, we first estimated a multiple-group path model that did not include the latent variable
interaction for low and high proximal oppression. This model provided a
good fit to the data, ␹2(173) ⫽ 430.51, CFI ⫽ .96, RMSEA ⫽ .06,
SRMR ⫽ .07 (see Hu & Bentler, 1999).
4
The degrees of freedom for the analyses in this paragraph vary because
of slightly different patterns of missing data. As noted earlier, for our
primary analyses, missing data were taken into consideration using maximum likelihood estimation with robust standard errors.
5
Although the overall endorsed rates of perceived discrimination were
fairly low (M ⫽ 1.38) across the sample, item response theory analyses
conducted with these data suggest that even at low levels of endorsement,
the items assess moderate to high levels of the underlying perceived
discrimination construct. The results of these analyses may be requested
from the first or second author.
SOTO ET AL.
390
sion contexts is depicted in Figure 2. Simple slopes analyses
indicated that the association between cognitive reappraisal tendencies and psychological functioning was significantly positive
for Latinos in high proximal oppression contexts who perceived
lower levels of discrimination, b ⫽ 0.572, t ⫽ 3.947, p ⬍ .01, but
was not statistically significant for Latinos in high proximal oppression contexts who perceived higher levels of discrimination,
b ⫽ ⫺0.27, t ⫽ ⫺1.863, p ⬎ .05.6
Discussion
Perceiving discrimination can lead members of ethnic minority
groups to mobilize a variety of resources in efforts to cope with
their experiences with this uniquely powerful stressor (Armenta &
Hunt, 2009; Clark et al., 1999; Joseph & Kuo, 2009; Scott, 2003).
Emotion regulation strategies may be particularly important in
managing the response to negative emotions typically elicited by
discriminatory experiences (Swim et al., 2003). The present study
examined how cognitive reappraisal tendencies, a typically adaptive emotion regulation strategy (e.g., Gross & John, 2003), were
associated with psychological functioning among Latino college
students embedded within varying levels of oppression. In line
with previous research, we showed that proximal and personal
oppression jointly moderated the relationship between cognitive
reappraisal tendencies and psychological functioning.
For Latinos in counties with a lower percentage of Latinos
relative to non-Latino Whites (high proximal oppression) and who
perceived higher levels of discrimination (high personal oppression), cognitive reappraisal tendencies were not significantly associated with psychological functioning. The positive association
between cognitive reappraisal tendencies and psychological functioning held, however, for Latinos experiencing high proximal
oppression contexts who perceived lower levels of discrimination,
and for Latinos in counties with a larger percentage of Latinos
relative to non-Latino Whites, regardless of their level of perceived
discrimination. Thus, as argued by C. R. Perez and Soto (2011),
and in line with their findings with a sample of Latinos in a small,
predominately White U.S. community, our results suggest that
cognitive reappraisal may be an ineffective emotion regulation
Cognitive
Reappraisal
Tendencies
.151***
High = -.427***
Low = -.042
Perceived
Discrimination
Psychological
Functioning
-.305***
Figure 1. Unstandardized parameter estimates for final latent variable
mixture model testing the associations of cognitive reappraisal tendencies,
perceived discrimination, and proximal oppression contexts to psychological functioning. Paths moderated by relative county-level representation of
Latinos classified as high (lower proportion of Latinos) and low (higher
proportion of Latinos) proximal oppression contexts. ⴱⴱⴱ p ⬍ .01.
Figure 2. Association between cognitive reappraisal tendencies and psychological functioning moderated by perceived discrimination (PD) for
Latinos in high proximal oppression contexts. ns ⫽ nonsignificant. ⴱⴱⴱ p ⬍
.001.
strategy for Latinos who are exposed to multiple levels of oppression.
Our findings add to those of C. R. Perez and Soto (2011) in
demonstrating the moderating effects of sociocultural contexts that
had been previously theorized or empirically suggested by other
researchers interested in the relationship between emotion regulation and health (Butler & Gross, 2009; Cheung & Park, 2010;
Consedine et al., 2002). It is important to note that these findings
were not due to differences in personal oppression (i.e., perceived
discrimination in this case) between low and high proximal oppression groups as no differences were observed on any of the
dependent variables. This is consistent with Perez and Soto’s study
in which high and low proximal oppression groups did not differ in
their level of personal oppression (oppressed minority ideology in
that study). Rather, it appears to be the unique combination of
experiencing all three levels of oppression (distal, proximal, and
personal) that nullifies the benefits of being a frequent reappraiser.
These results also extend Perez and Soto’s context of oppression
perspective by demonstrating the importance of relative ethnic
composition in understanding proximal oppression contexts. This
supports our argument that the oppressive characteristics of proximal environments are best understood by considering power relations among ethnic groups within a society (Sidanius, 1993;
Sidanius & Pratto, 1999).
It is interesting that findings similar to these were reported by
Yoo and Lee (2005), who found that among Asian Americans who
highly identified with their ethnic group, cognitive restructuring
tendencies (i.e., cognitive reappraisal) were positively associated
with psychological well-being among those who perceived low
levels of discrimination but not among those who perceived high
levels of discrimination. Although Yoo and Lee considered constructs corresponding to distal (i.e., minority status within a society) and personal (i.e., perceived discrimination) oppression, they
6
We also estimated a latent variable mixture model using absolute
percentage of Latinos and compared it with our model using the relative
percentage of Latinos. Based on criteria outlined by Raftery (1995), the
model in which the relative percentage of Latinos was used (BIC ⫽
14864.85) provided a better fit to the data than did the model in which the
absolute percentage of Latinos was used (BIC ⫽ 15046.91; ⌬BIC ⫽
182.06).
REAPPRAISAL AND PERCEIVED DISCRIMINATION
391
did not explicitly measure proximal oppression. However, the
construct of ethnic identity may be related to proximal oppression
in that one’s sense of self as a cultural being can develop in
reaction to being a numerical minority (e.g., ethnic/racial salience).
Emerging research on African American adolescents also has
shown that contexts high in discrimination can negate the positive
effects associated with other adaptive coping strategies (e.g., problem solving; Cogburn et al., 2011). Thus, the moderating effect of
contexts of oppression observed in our study among Latinos may
also generalize to other U.S. ethnic minority groups.
of these goals may help protect against the particularly harmful
conditions that exist where diversity is not highly visible, but
discrimination is frequently perceived. Moreover, research by
Kross, Ayduk, and Mischel (2005) suggests that not all thinking
about negative events is harmful. Individuals who can adopt a
self-distanced perspective and focus on why a particular negative
event happened do not show the same increased negativity as those
who take an immersed perspective or focus solely on what occurred. Future work will need to consider whether this “cool”
processing model also applies to discriminatory situations.
Emotion Regulation and Discrimination
Limitations
One of the questions raised by these findings is why cognitive
reappraisal fails to be adaptive for Latinos (who are defined as
distally oppressed) in contexts where they perceive relatively
higher levels of discrimination (high personal oppression) and are
numerically underrepresented relative to members of the dominant
ethnic group (high proximal oppression). For the Latinos students
in this study, this means that these are individuals in higher
education (where they are already underrepresented) who may feel
particularly out of their element or disconnected from other Latinos. This can be especially difficult for a highly collectivistic and
family-oriented cultural group. In addition, these individuals may
possibly experience group-based attacks while simultaneously
lacking the support of other Latinos to help combat the effects of
such discrimination or its psychological impact. In such contexts,
cognitive reappraisal strategies may fail to yield a satisfactory
reframing of discriminatory experiences (i.e., thinking about the
situations in a manner that allows individuals to feel good about
the experience). Indeed, as suggested by Outlaw (1993), racism
may not allow for a positive reappraisal. When combined with the
fact that emotion regulation processes can be psychologically
and physically draining (Gailliot et al., 2007), a rather unpleasant scenario can begin to unfold. In response to discriminatory
experiences, Latinos who habitually use cognitive reappraisal
may valiantly search for positive aspects only to find themselves ruminating about the event, thereby prolonging the negative effects and emotions associated with discrimination. The
resulting process may also represent a maladaptive thought
pattern, whereby the thoughts themselves may be accurate or
based in reality, but nevertheless serve the function of increasing depressive mood (J. S. Beck, 1995). Future empirical work
is needed to clearly specify the mechanisms behind this
effect.
Although our results paint a rather bleak picture for the use of
cognitive reappraisal among those who experience discrimination
at multiple levels, the full story contains a positive message as
well. For Latino college students who perceived low discrimination or resided in communities with a relatively high Latino
composition, cognitive reappraisal tendencies were associated with
positive psychological functioning. Our findings may lend credence to efforts in place at various college campuses across the
nation to increase diversity and decrease discrimination. Similarly,
building educational institutions around communities where diversity is already rich could also decrease the experience of proximal
oppression. Our results suggest that successfully achieving either
The present findings should be interpreted in light of some
important limitations. First, the cross-sectional design used in the
present study does not permit us to ascertain the directionality of
the observed associations. For obvious reasons, the associations
among contexts of oppression, discrimination, and emotion regulation are difficult to disentangle experimentally, but this question
is important to tackle moving forward. Second, although our
sample improved on prior studies by collecting data from various
regions across the United States, the sample was limited to college
students, was largely composed of women, and included relatively
few foreign-born individuals in proximal oppression sites. For this
reason, we were unable to determine whether the associations that
we found vary by gender or nativity status or apply to noncollege
samples. Given that previous findings suggest that the effects of
discrimination may differ between Latinos and Latinas (e.g.,
Alfaro et al., 2009; Delgado et al., 2011) and between immigrant
and U.S.-born Latinos (e.g., D. Pérez et al., 2008; Sternthal et al.,
2011), it will be important for future studies to recruit large
samples that are more balanced to adequately test for moderation
by gender and nativity status. Third, our measure of cognitive
reappraisal assessed only general tendencies and did not assess
specific kinds of cognitive reappraisals that might be associated
with poorer psychological functioning. Being able to accurately
assess how individuals cognitively reappraise in the precise moment of a discriminatory event might help uncover the mechanisms by which cognitive reappraisal can be ineffective in multiply
oppressive contexts. Finally, although we were able to collect data
from several sites, there were not enough sites to examine potential
multilevel effects (i.e., nesting within schools). We have no strong
reasons to expect substantial nesting effects; nonetheless, multilevel analyses will provide an opportunity to further consider
contextual influences on the associations between exposure to
oppression, cognitive reappraisals, and psychological functioning.
Conclusions
As psychologists grapple with understanding the processes of
perceived discrimination and ways that ethnic minority populations might cope with such experiences, it behooves us to pay
attention to the specific strategies employed by members of specific ethnic minority communities. In doing so, it is important to
consider contextual factors that influence the everyday realties of
U.S. ethnic minority groups. The simultaneous experience of different levels of oppression among Latino college students may
SOTO ET AL.
392
effectively remove one such strategy— cognitive reappraisal—
from their set of potential coping strategies. The implications of
these findings stretch well beyond the laboratory and into several
aspects of the real world. For this group of Latinos, who are
embedded within multiple levels of oppression, trying to reframe
negative events into more positive ones may backfire against a
backdrop of prejudice and discrimination. At the same time, increased diversity in one’s environment may contribute to better
psychological health for members of U.S. ethnic minority groups.
Thus, simply increasing the number of Latinos in the environment
may significantly help change the social dynamic for Latino college students (and possibly members of other ethnic minority
groups), suggesting there really can be strength in numbers.
References
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and
interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Alfaro, E. C., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Gonzales-Backen, M., B́amaca, M. Y.,
& Zeiders, K. (2009). Discrimination, academic motivation, and academic success among Latino adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 32,
941–962. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.08.007
Armenta, B. E., & Hunt, J. S. (2009). Responding to societal devaluation:
Effects of perceived personal and group discrimination on the group
identification and self-esteem of Latinos/as. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12, 23–39. doi:10.1177/1368430208098775
Beck, A. T., Epstein, N., Brown, G., & Steer, R. A. (1988). An inventory
for measuring clinical anxiety: Psychometric properties. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 893– 897. doi:10.1037/0022006X.56.6.893
Beck, J. S. (1995). Cognitive therapy: Basics and beyond. New York, NY:
Guildford Press.
Brondolo, E., ver Halen, N. B., Pencille, M., Beatty, D., & 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. doi:10.1007/s10865-008-9193-0
Butler, E. A., Egloff, B., Wilhelm, F. H., Smith, N. C., Erikson, E. A., &
Gross, J. J. (2003). The social consequences of expressive suppression.
Emotion, 3, 48 – 67. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.3.1.48
Butler, E. A., & Gross, J. J. (2009). Emotion and emotion regulation:
Integrating individual and social levels of analysis. Emotion Review, 1,
86 – 87. doi:10.1177/1754073908099131
Cheung, R. Y. M., & Park, I. J. K. (2010). Anger suppression, interdependent self-construal, and depression among Asian American and European American college students. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority
Psychology, 16, 517–525. doi:10.1037/a0020655
Clark, R., 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
Cogburn, C. D., Brodish, A., Fuller-Rowell, T., Peck, S., Malanchuk, O.,
& Eccles, J. (2011, January). Racial discrimination during young adulthood: Effects on mental health and the role of adaptive self-regulatory
strategies. Poster session presented at the meeting of the Science of
Research on Discrimination and Health, Washington, DC.
Consedine, N. S., Magai, C., & Bonanno, G. A. (2002). Moderators of the
emotion inhibition– health relationship: A review and research agenda.
Review of General Psychology, 6, 204 –228. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.6.2
.204
Crocker, J., & Major, B. (1989). Social stigma and self-esteem: The
self-protective properties of stigma. Psychological Review, 96, 608 –
630. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.608
Crockett, L. J., Randall, B. A., Shen, Y.-L., Russell, S. T., & Driscoll, A. K.
(2005). Measurement equivalence of the Center for Epidemiological
Studies Depression scale for Latino and Anglo adolescents: A national
study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 47–58. doi:
10.1037/0022-006X.73.1.47
Delgado, M. Y., Updegraff, K. A., Roosa, M. W., & Umaña-Taylor, A. J.
(2011). Perceived discrimination and Mexican-origin youth adjustment:
The moderating roles of mothers’ and fathers’ cultural orientations and
values. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 125–139. doi:10.1007/
s10964-009-9467-z
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The
Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49,
71–75. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
Dion, K. L., Dion, K. K., & Pak, A. W. (1992). Personality-based hardiness
as a buffer for discrimination-related stress in members of Toronto’s
Chinese community. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 24,
517–536. doi:10.1037/h0078755
Edwards, L. M., & Romero, A. J. (2008). Coping with discrimination
among Mexican descent adolescents. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral
Sciences, 30, 24 –39. doi:10.1177/0739986307311431
Gailliot, M. T., Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Maner, J. K., Plant,
E. A., Tice, D. M., . . . Schmeichel, B. J. (2007). Self-control relies on
glucose as a limited energy source: Willpower is more than a metaphor.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 325–336. doi:
10.1037/0022-3514.92.2.325
Gibbons, F. X., Etcheverry, P. E., Stock, M. L., Gerrard, M., Weng, C.,
Kiviniemi, M., & O’Hara, R. E. (2010). Exploring the link between
racial discrimination and substance use: What mediates? What buffers?
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 785– 801. doi:
10.1037/a0019880
Greer, T. M. (2011). Coping strategies as moderators of the relationship
between race- and gender-based discrimination and psychological symptoms for African American women. Journal of Black Psychology, 37,
42–54. doi:10.1177/0095798410380202
Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2, 271–299. doi:10.1037/
1089-2680.2.3.271
Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion
regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and wellbeing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 348 –362.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348
Gross, J. J., Richards, J. M., & John, O. P. (2006). Emotion regulation in
everyday life. In D. K. Snyder, J. A. Simpson, & J. N. Hughes (Eds.),
Emotion regulation in families: Pathways to dysfunction and health (pp.
13–35). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:
10.1037/11468-001
Hanna, F. J., Talley, W. B., & Guindon, M. H. (2000). The power of
perception: Toward a model of cultural oppression and liberation. Journal of Counseling & Development, 78, 430 – 441. doi:10.1002/j.15566676.2000.tb01926.x
Hatzenbuehler, M. L., Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Dovidio, J. (2009). How
does stigma “get under the skin”? The mediating role of emotion
regulation. Psychological Science, 20, 1282–1289. doi:10.1111/j.14679280.2009.02441.x
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance
structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
John, O. P., & Gross, J. J. (2004). Healthy and unhealthy emotion regulation: Personality processes, individual differences, and life span development. Journal of Personality, 72, 1301–1334. doi:10.1111/j.14676494.2004.00298.x
Joseph, J., & Kuo, B. C. H. (2009). Black Canadians’ coping responses to
racial discrimination. Journal of Black Psychology, 35, 78 –101. doi:
10.1177/0095798408323384
REAPPRAISAL AND PERCEIVED DISCRIMINATION
Kross, E., Ayduk, O., & Mischel, W. (2005). When asking “why” does not
hurt: Distinguishing rumination from reflective processing of negative
emotions. Psychological Science, 16, –709 –715. doi:10.1111/j.14679280.2005.01600.x
Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002).
To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits.
Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151–173. doi:10.1207/
S15328007SEM0902_1
Major, B., & O’Brien, L. T. (2005). The social psychology of stigma.
Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 393– 421. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych
.56.091103.070137
Mallett, R. K., & Swim, J. K. (2005). Bring it on: Proactive coping with
discrimination. Motivation and Emotion, 29, 407– 437. doi:10.1007/
s11031-006-9014-0
Menselson, T., Rehkopf, D. H., & Kubzansky, L. D. (2008). Depression
among Latinos in the United States: A meta-analytic review. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76, 355–366. doi:10.1037/0022006X.76.3.355
Miller, C. T., & Kaiser, C. R. (2001). A theoretical perspective on coping
with stigma. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 73–92. doi:10.1111/0022-4537
.00202
Moradi, B., & Risco, C. (2006). Perceived discrimination experiences and
mental health of Latina/o American persons. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 53, 411– 421. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.53.4.411
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998 –2010). Mplus User’s Guide (6th
ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
Noh, S., & Kaspar, V. (2003). Perceived discrimination and depression:
Moderating effects of coping, acculturation, and ethnic support. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 232–238. doi:10.2105/AJPH.93.2.232
Outlaw, F. H. (1993). Stress and coping: The influence of racism on the
cognitive reappraisal processing of African Americans. Issues in Mental
Health Nursing, 14, 399 – 409. doi:10.3109/01612849309006902
Paradies, Y. (2006). A systematic review of empirical research on selfreported racism and health. International Journal of Epidemiology, 35,
888 –901. doi:10.1093/ije/dyl056
Pascoe, E. A., & Smart Richman, L. (2009). Perceived discrimination and
health: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 531–554.
doi:10.1037/a0016059
Pavot, W., Diener, E., Colvin, C. R., & Sandvik, E. (1991). Further
validation of the Satisfaction With Life Scale: Evidence for the crossmethod convergence of well-being measures. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 57, 149 –161. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa5701_17
Perez, C. R., & Soto, J. A. (2011). Cognitive reappraisal in the context of
oppression: Implications for psychological functioning. Emotion, 11,
675– 680. doi:10.1037/a0021254
Pérez, D., Fortuna, L., & Alegría, M. (2008). Prevalence and correlates of
everyday discrimination among U.S. Latinos. Journal of Community
Psychology, 36, 421– 433. doi:10.1002/jcop.20221
Phinney, J., Ferguson, D., & Tate, J. (1997). Intergroup attitudes among
ethnic minority adolescents: A causal model. Child Development, 68,
955–969. doi:10.2307/1132044
Pituc, S. P., Jung, K.-R., & Lee, R. M. (2009, August). Development and
validation of a brief measure of perceived discrimination. Poster presented at the 37th Annual Asian American Psychological Association
Conference, Toronto, Canada.
Plummer, D. L., & Slane, S. (1996). Patterns of coping in racially stressful
situations. Journal of Black Psychology, 22, 302–315. doi:10.1177/
00957984960223002
Prelow, H. M., Weaver, S. R., Swenson, R. R., & Bowman, M. A. (2005).
A preliminary investigation of the validity and reliability of the BriefSymptom Inventory-18 in economically disadvantaged Latina American
mothers. Journal of Community Psychology, 33, 139 –155. doi:10.1002/
jcop.20041
393
Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for
research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement,
1, 385– 401. doi:10.1177/014662167700100306
Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological Methodology, 25, 111–163. doi:10.2307/271063
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Schmitt, M. T., & Branscombe, N. R. (2002). The internal and external
causal loci of attributions to prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 620 – 628. doi:10.1177/0146167202288006
Scott, L. D., Jr. (2003). The relation of racial identity and racial socialization to coping with discrimination among African American adolescents.
Journal of Black Studies, 33, 520 –538. doi:10.1177/0021934702250035
Sidanius, J. (1993). The psychology of group conflict and the dynamics of
oppression: A social dominance perspective. In S. Iyengar & W. J.
McGuire (Eds.), Explorations in political psychology (pp. 183–219).
Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory
of social hierarchy and oppression. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139175043
Soto, J. A., Dawson-Andoh, N. A., & BeLue, R. (2011). The relationship
between perceived racial discrimination and generalized anxiety disorder among African Americans, Afro Caribbeans, and non-Hispanic
Whites. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 25, 258 –265. doi:10.1016/j
.janxdis.2010.09.011
Sternthal, M. J., Slopen, N., & Williams, D. R. (2011). Racial disparities:
How much does stress really matter? Du Bois Review: Social Science
Research on Race, 8, 95–113. doi:10.1017/S1742058X11000087
Swim, J. K., Cohen, L. L., & Hyers, L. L. (1998). Experiencing everyday
prejudice and discrimination. In J. K. Swim & C. Stangor (Eds.),
Prejudice: The target’s perspective (pp. 37– 60). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Swim, J. K., Hyers, L. L., Cohen, L. L., Fitzgerald, D. C., & Bylsma, W. H.
(2003). African American college students’ experiences with everyday
racism: Characteristics of and responses to these incidents. Journal of
Black Psychology, 29, 38 – 67. doi:10.1177/0095798402239228
Tillman, K., & Weiss, U. (2009). Nativity status and depressive symptoms
among Hispanic young adults: The role of stress exposure. Social
Science Quarterly, 90, 1228 –1250. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2009
.00655.x
Todorova, I. L., Falcón, L. M., Lincoln, A. K., & Price, L. (2010).
Perceived discrimination, psychological distress and health. Sociology of Health & Illness, 32, 843– 861. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2010
.01257.x
Torres, A., & Velázquez, J. E. (Eds.). (1998). The Puerto Rican movement:
Voices from the diaspora. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University
Press.
Torres, L. (2010). Predicting levels of Latino depression: Acculturation,
acculturative stress, and coping. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority
Psychology, 16, 256 –263. doi:10.1037/a0017357
Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S.
(1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory.
Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2011). Overview of race and Hispanic origin: 2010.
Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02
.pdf
Utsey, S. O., Ponterotto, J. G., Reynolds, A. L., & Cancelli, A. A. (2000).
Racial discrimination, coping, life satisfaction, and self-esteem among
African Americans. Journal of Counseling & Development, 78, 72– 80.
doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.2000.tb02562.x
Wei, M., Heppner, P. P., Ku, T.-Y., & Liao, K. Y.-H. (2010). Racial
discrimination stress, coping, and depressive symptoms among Asian
Americans: A moderation analysis. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 1, 136 –150. doi:10.1037/a0020157
394
SOTO ET AL.
Wei, M., Ku, T.-Y., Russell, D. W., Mallinckrodt, B., & Liao, K. Y.-H.
(2008). Moderating effects of three coping strategies and self-esteem on
perceived discrimination and depressive symptoms: A minority stress
model for Asian international students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55, 451– 462. doi:10.1037/a0012511
Williams, D. R., & Mohammed, S. A. (2009). Discrimination and racial
disparities in health, evidence and needed research. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 32, 20 – 47. doi:10.1007/s10865-008-9185-0
Williams, D. R., Yu, Y., Jackson, J. S., & Anderson, N. B. (1997). Racial
differences in physical and mental health: Socio-economic status, stress
and discrimination. Journal of Health Psychology, 2, 335–351. doi:
10.1177/135910539700200305
Yoo, H. C., & Lee, R. M. (2005). Ethnic identity and approach-type coping
as moderators of the racial discrimination/well-being relation in Asian
Americans. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 497–506. doi:
10.1037/0022-0167.52.4.497