Western Michigan University
ScholarWorks at WMU
Dissertations
Graduate College
6-2016
The Influence of Racial Socialization on the
Academic Achievement of Black College Students
Vanessa R. Laurent
Western Michigan University
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations
Part of the Bilingual, Multilingual, and Multicultural Education Commons, Counseling
Commons, and the Multicultural Psychology Commons
Recommended Citation
Laurent, Vanessa R., "The Influence of Racial Socialization on the Academic Achievement of Black College Students" (2016).
Dissertations. 1609.
http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/1609
This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access
by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for
inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks
at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected].
THE INFLUENCE OF RACIAL SOCIALIZATION ON THE ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
OF BLACK COLLEGE STUDENTS
by
Vanessa R. Laurent
A dissertation submitted to the Graduate College
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Counselor Education and Counseling Psychology
Western Michigan University
June 2016
Doctoral Committee:
Joseph R. Morris, Ph.D., Chair
Evelyn B. Winfield-Thomas, Ph.D.
Linwood Cousins, Ph.D.
THE INFLUENCE OF RACIAL SOCIALIZATION ON THE ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
OF BLACK COLLEGE STUDENTS
Vanessa R. Laurent, Ph.D.
Western Michigan University, 2016
Black college students continue to have difficulties reaching academic success in various
domains; however, understanding the nature of how academic success is cultivated by Black
college students is vital for counselors, educators, and university administrators. The objective
of the study was to understand how racial socialization influenced academic success. Research
suggests that racial socialization contributes to positive long-term outcomes among African
Americans and may be connected to academic achievement (Bowman & Howard, 1985; Boykin
& Tom, 1985; Davis & Stevenson, 2006; Neblett, Terzian, & Harriott, 2010; Stevenson, 1994,
1995). Participants were 349 Black college students from a predominately White institution in
the Midwest. They were administered a survey packet, which contained a demographic sheet and
measures of racial socialization and resilience. Primary analyses were one-way ANOVA and
hierarchical multiple regression.
Five hypotheses were tested with mixed results. Hypothesis 1 found that there were no
differences in racial socialization messages based on gender. Hypothesis 2 determined that there
was a statistically significant relationship between racial socialization messages transmitted by
teachers and friends and academic achievement. Hypothesis 3 suggested that there was no
statistically significant relationship between type of racial socialization message transmitted and
academic achievement. Hypothesis 4 found that Racial protection messages transmitted by
teachers were a statistically significant negative predictor of academic achievement, whereas,
racial protection messages transmitted by friends were a statistically significant positive
predictor of academic achievement. Hypothesis 5 indicated that resilience did not moderate the
relationship between racial socialization and academic achievement. Limitations of study are
discussed and implications for future research and practice are recommended.
Copyright by
Vanessa R. Laurent
2016
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
All praise and honor first goes to God, for without Him I would not have been able to
complete this journey. It is because of Him that the dreams of this immigrant child are being
fulfilled. At the age of five, I declared that I would become a doctor and today God has made
that dream a reality. I also thank Him for placing people in my life who have supported,
challenged, and loved me. I am living proof that it takes a village to raise a child.
I thank my parents, Miguel and Margareth, for their countless sacrifices and always being
a source of support. Everything that I have become is because of their love and hard work. To
my sisters, Cassandra and Kimberly, God knew what he was doing when he blessed me with the
two of you. Thank you for believing in me and always being a shoulder to cry on. To my many
aunts, uncles, and cousins, I am proud to be a reflection of the Laurent and Cassender family. I
possess a great amount of appreciation for your unfaltering love and encouragement. To Joelle,
thank you for all of your support, being my reader, editor, and best friend.
I would like to extend my appreciation to my CECP village. None of this would have
been possible if not for my doctoral advisor and dissertation chair, Dr. Joseph R. Morris. Dr.
Morris, thank you for believing in me, providing unwavering support, and guiding me through
this program. I would also like to extend my gratitude to Dr. Evelyn B. Winfield-Thomas and
Dr. Linwood Cousins for their dedication, feedback, and service on my doctoral committee. To
the late Dr. Lonnie E. Duncan, you are the main reason why I applied to the counseling
psychology program at Western Michigan University. Thank you for admitting me to the
“greatest program,” for allowing me to borrow books from your personal library, for the
ii
Acknowledgments -- Continued
countless conversations in your office, and for the sharing of “Duncan nuggets.” To Dr. Beverly
J. Vandiver, your guidance, feedback, mentorship, and statistical brilliance were instrumental in
me being able to complete my dissertation. Thank you for being the epitome of a Black
professional woman. I am grateful for you and our research team, who have contributed to the
success of my dissertation. I must also thank “the crew,” we have long stopped being friends
and became family. You have been a source of strength and support throughout this Ph.D.
journey. I would list you by name, but you already know who you are. Thank you for your
encouragement, the venting/crying sessions, rides to Grand Rapids for Jamaican food, endless
conversations about the state of Black America, and the numerous conference presentations.
I am appreciative of my support system throughout Western Michigan University and the
Kalamazoo community. To my village in the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, I am eternally
grateful for your support and belief in me. I consider myself fortunate to be able to work under
the leadership of Dr. Martha B. Warfield. Doc, words will never be enough to express how
much I love and respect you. Thank you for adopting Kimberly and I as part of your family and
opening your home to us! To my sisters of Sigma Gamma Rho Sorority, Inc., thank you for
cheering me on and always being in my corner. To my brother of blue and gold, Dr. Mark P.
Orbe, your concerns for me as a student and a person, combined with your sustained effort to
support and guide my work has been appreciated.
I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge my village in Connecticut and New York;
thank you for understanding and not holding it against me when I did not answer the phone or
the many times I disappeared. Although I am not always available, there is not a day that goes
iii
Acknowledgments -- Continued
by that I do not thank God for placing you in life and ask Him to continue to bless you. Thank
you.
Vanessa R. Laurent
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................
ii
LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................
x
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................
1
Problem Statement .........................................................................................
2
Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................
6
Research Questions ........................................................................................
7
Hypothesis......................................................................................................
7
Definition of Terms........................................................................................
8
Summary ......................................................................................................
9
II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITEREATURE .......................................................
10
Racial Socialization ......................................................................................
10
Theoretical Frameworks ................................................................................
11
Boykin and Ellison’s (1995) Model ...............................................................
11
Stevenson’s (1994, 1995, 1998) Models........................................................
12
Racial Socialization Messages .......................................................................
15
Influence of Age ............................................................................................
16
Influence of Socioeconomic ..........................................................................
16
Influence of Gender .......................................................................................
17
v
Table of Contents – continued
CHAPTER
Agents of Racial Socialization ......................................................................
17
Familial .................................................................................................
17
Non-familial ..........................................................................................
19
Measurement of Racial Socialization ...........................................................
20
Influence of Racial Socialization ...................................................................
23
Racial socialization and academic success ...........................................
23
Racial socialization and resilience .......................................................
28
Conceptual and Methodological Issues with Racial
Socialization Research ...................................................................................
32
Resilience .......................................................................................................
33
Resilience and Academic Achievement.........................................................
34
Qualitative Research .............................................................................
34
Quantitative Research ...........................................................................
36
Influences of Resilience .................................................................................
39
Summary ........................................................................................................
39
III. METHOD .........................................................................................................
41
Participants .....................................................................................................
41
Measures ........................................................................................................
43
Demographic information .....................................................................
43
Academic achievement ........................................................................
44
vi
Table of Contents – Continued
CHAPTER
Cutural and Racial Experiences of Socialization
Scale (CARES) .....................................................................................
44
Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) ...................................
46
Procedures ......................................................................................................
47
IV. RESULTS .........................................................................................................
49
Preliminary Data Analysis .............................................................................
49
Missing Values......................................................................................
49
Outliers ..................................................................................................
50
Assumptions of linear regression ..........................................................
50
Reliability Estimates ......................................................................................
51
Descriptive Statistics ......................................................................................
52
Hypothesis 1: Racial Socialization Provided by Teachers and
Friends will be Related to Academic Achievement ......................................
52
Hypothesis 2: Racial Socialization Messages of Racial
Protection and Bicultural Coping will be Related to
Academic Achievement .................................................................................
56
Hypothesis 3: Racial Socialization, Based on Specific
Type of Message and Source, will be Related to
Academic Achievement .................................................................................
56
Racial Protection ...................................................................................
57
Racial Stereotyping ...............................................................................
58
Old School Basics .................................................................................
58
Bicultural Coping ..................................................................................
60
vii
Table of Contents – Continued
CHAPTER
Cultural Insight .....................................................................................
60
Hypothesis 4: Resilience will be a Stronger Moderator
Between Racial Protection Messages and Academic
Achievement than the Other Four Types of Racial
Socialization Messages ..................................................................................
61
Racial Protection ...................................................................................
62
Racial Stereotyping ...............................................................................
62
Old School Basics .................................................................................
62
Bicultural Coping ..................................................................................
62
Cultural Insight .....................................................................................
63
V. DISCUSSION ....................................................................................................
67
Gender Differences in Racial Socialization ...................................................
67
Racial Socialization Content and Source .......................................................
68
Racial Socialization as an Indicator of Academic Achievement ...................
69
The Link Between the Interaction of Racial Socialization and
Resilience and Academic Achievement.........................................................
70
Limitations .....................................................................................................
71
Implications for Practice ................................................................................
72
Future Research .............................................................................................
74
Conclusion .....................................................................................................
76
REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................
78
viii
Table of Contents – Continued
APPENDICES
A. Human Subjects Institutional Review Board Letter of Approval .............
99
B. Demographic Questionnaire ......................................................................
101
C. Conner-Davidson Resilience Scale ...........................................................
104
D. Cultural and Racial Experiences of Socialization Scale ...........................
107
ix
LIST OF TABLES
1. Participant Characteristics ...................................................................................
42
2. Reliability Estimates (Cronbach’s α) of Scale Scores .........................................
51
3. Descriptive Statistics, Correlations, Means, and Standard Deviations ...............
53
4. Hierarchical Regression Analysis of CARES-I and GPA Variables ...................
55
5. Hierarchical Regression Analysis of CARES-F and GPA Variables ..................
57
6. Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Racial Protection Messages
by Source and GPA Variables .............................................................................
58
7. Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Racial Stereotyping Messages
by Source and GPA Variables .............................................................................
59
8. Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Old School Basics Messages
by Source and GPA Variables .............................................................................
59
9. Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Bicultural Coping Messages
by Source and GPA Variables .............................................................................
60
10. Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Cultural Insight Messages
by Source and GPA Variables .............................................................................
61
11. Hierarchical Multiple Regression Analyses Predicting GPA from
Racial Socialization, Resilience, and Their Interactions .....................................
64
x
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The social structure in the United States not only promotes, but also maintains the
oppressive status of people of African descent. One of the most profound examples of this can
be found in the educational system. The U.S. educational system was created based upon a
racial hierarchy, utilizing institutional policies, practices, or structures to facilitate and maintain
the racial superiority of Whites and inferiority of Black people. For example, prior to 1865 it
was illegal to educate Black people. Even when Blacks were allowed to be educated, overtly
racist laws and practices continued to persist throughout the U.S. public school system. Black
children were forced to attend segregated schools that received inequitable distribution of
supplies and financial resources (Pickren, 2004). As a consequence of being denied equal and
equitable access, Blacks students were forced to operate without the necessary materials to learn
and few completed their education.
A new phase in American history dawned in 1954 when the United States Supreme Court
ruled in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka that “in the field of education the doctrine of
'separate but equal’ has no place (347 US 483).” This allowed for the beginning of the
desegregation of public schools. By the 1956-57 school year, 723 southern school districts had
been desegregated. However, the desegregation process was met with extreme resistance. Two
years later, nine Black students were attacked by an angry mob on their way to Central High
School in Little Rock, Arkansas. Less than five years after the incident in Arkansas, the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 was passed, which prohibited discrimination in public places and more
specifically banned discrimination based on race or gender in educational institutions (Bowen,
Kurzwell, Tobin, & Pichler, 2005).
1
Advocates of desegregation viewed the desegregation of public schools as a step towards
bringing an end to racial disparities in education. For the first time in American history, Black
children were legally able to attend schools of their choice, which resulted in some academic
gains, social integration, and occupational attainment for many Blacks (Braddock & Eitle, 2004).
However, many of the racist ideologies (e.g., White superiority and Black inferiority) persisted.
Racial messages were just covertly transmitted through lower expectations of school faculty
towards Black students and Eurocentric curriculum (Kailin, 1999). Moreover, the desegregation
of public schools resulted in the fragmentation of the Black community and an increase in the
disruption of the Black community due to job loss and school closings (Bell, 1980). Despite the
Brown decision, racial disparity in education remained a problem (Ford, Grantham, & Whiting,
2008; Ladson-Billings, 1994). In fact, the current manifestation of the racial achievement gap is
directly linked to the U.S.’s long history of racism in conjunction with the present-day prejudice
and discrimination Black people face.
Problem Statement
Historically, there has been an academic performance gap between Black students and
other racial groups (Allen, Epps, & Haniff, 1991; Graham, 1994). Scores on both the National
Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and the “Nation’s Report Card” provides evidence
of this persistent achievement gap (Eccleston, Smyth, & Lopoo, 2010). The NAEP (2013)
reported that although scores have slightly improved, Black students continue to score lower on
mathematics, reading, and science tests in comparison to other racial groups. Furthermore, the
average twelfth-grade African-American student is reading and performing math at about the
level of the average eighth-grade White or Asian student. Additionally, the NAEP is used to
identify failing schools, that is, schools where the vast majority of students are performing below
2
grade level. These failing schools or at risk schools are of particular interest because they are
comprised of mostly students of color and constitute less than 12% of U.S. schools, yet they
house roughly 78% of the students who are struggling academically. Racial disparities in
achievement continue beyond high school. According to a report published by the National
Center for Education Statistics in 2013, 55.7% of Black high school graduates attend institutions
of higher education, compared to 71.7% of Whites. Also, the percentage of young adults who
had obtained at least a bachelor’s degree was higher for Whites (37%) than for Blacks (19%).
There has been a shift away from examining individual characteristics of students in
relation to academic achievement (Bowman & Howard, 1985; Cokley, 2000, 2002a, 2002b;
Ladson-Billings, 1994; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Neblett, Philip, Cogburn, & Sellers,
2006). This shift has led researchers to examine the role of cultural-ecological factors in
academic achievement. Although several cultural theories have emerged to explain the racial
achievement gap, Ogbu’s oppositional culture theory (1974, 1978) is most widely used when
explaining academic achievement in Black students. Oppositional culture theory consists of two
components: (a) societal and school forces and (b) community and individual-level forces. The
first factor deals with the unfair treatment members of minority groups receive. Racial minority
groups are systematically denied access to educational opportunities equal to those received by
the dominant group. Differential access to opportunities generates community forces among
minority groups, which corresponds with the second component of the oppositional culture
theory. Ogbu (1978) noted that motivation for high achievement results from the belief that
more education leads to better jobs, higher wages, higher social status, and more self-esteem.
Thus, when members of a marginalized racial group face barriers in the educational system, they
perceive it as they are receiving a lesser reward for education than the dominant group. This
3
view engenders some racial groups to define certain behaviors, such as academic achievement,
as inappropriate for them because they are unable to see the benefits and result of a good
education.
In addition to examining culture, scholars have begun to research race-based perspectives
of academic achievement. From this perceptive, race is central in the discussion of academic
performance. This perspective views Blacks as a separate group and highlights the need to
explore the within group variation and unique experiences on academic outcomes (Spencer, Noll,
Stolzfus & Harpalani, 2001). Essentially, race takes precedence over any other characteristics
and evokes attitudes and behaviors that impact an individual’s functioning (Smedley, 1999). In
terms of education, race-based perspectives highlight the significance of race in understanding
academic outcomes of Blacks because there continues to be racial bias towards Blacks and
racism within the education system (Kailin, 1999; Woolfson, 2004). The emphasis on race has
led to more of a focus on factors that promote achievement. Studies in this line of research have
focused on either internal or external aspects of race. The focus of internal aspects of race has
led researchers to examine the association between racial identity and academic achievement
(Chavous, Bemat, Schmeelk-Cone, Caldwell, Kohn-Wood, and Zimmerman, 2003; Spencer, et.
al, 2001; Witherspoon, Speight, & Thomas, 1997) while the focus on external aspects of race has
led researchers to examine the association between racial socialization and academic
achievement (Bowman & Howard, 1985; Marshall, 1995; Neblett et al., 2006).
Racial identity refers to an individual’s sense of group or collective identity based on a
shared racial heritage with a particular racial group (Helms, 1990). The research on the
relationship between racial identity and achievement is much more developed than that of racial
socialization and achievement. Previous studies have found that aspects of racial identity
4
significantly predicted academic performance as measured by GPA across the lifespan (Chavous
et al., 2003; Lockett & Harrell, 2003; Rowley, 2000; Sellers, Chavous, & Cooke 1998;
Witherspoon, K. M., Speight, S. L., & Thomas, 1997). Research suggests that Black students’
racial identity is connected to educational attainment. Chavous et al., (2003) found that having
strong Black pride and positive beliefs about society’s views of Blacks were related to positive
academic beliefs.
On the other hand, studies on the relationship between racial socialization and academic
performance suggest that there is likely a link between the two variables for young children;
however, it is unknown how racial socialization relates to academic performance for older
populations (e.g., college students). In essence, racial socialization may be a practice that
promotes academic success in academic environments based on the dominant cultural norms,
while supporting students’ connection to Black norms and way of being. However, further
research is needed in this area to be able to understand how racial socialization functions.
Overall, racial disparities in academic performance between Black students and students
of other racial groups are well documented. Yet, academic literature on the achievement of
Black students has focused primarily on barriers to education rather than investigating variables
that promote academic achievement. A race-based perspective would capture the
multidimensionality of Black student’s academic outcomes as it incorporates the interaction
between an individual and their surrounding context. The current study examined how both
familial and environmental contexts have informed individuals’ understanding of themselves as a
racial being as well as how their race influences how they interact with the education system.
Examining the effects of socialization on the academic achievement of Black college students
through a race-based perspective will offer new insight and likely lead to significant
5
contributions to the existing literature. Combining race-based perspectives and contextual
conceptualizations to the understanding of academic achievement of Black college students can
result in better informed researchers and educators. This in turn will provide them with effective
tools to intervene when working with Black college students to improve academic outcomes.
For the purpose of this study Black will be used to describe anyone of African ancestry. The term
Black is used in hopes of capturing the diversity among people of African descent.
Purpose of the Study
The study examined the relationship between the external race-based concepts of racial
socialization on academic achievement in Black college students. Black college students
continue to have difficulties reaching academic success in various domains. A related purpose of
this study was to contribute to the scarce body of literature that exists on racial socialization by
exploring the influence of race-related messages provided by multiple sources on academic
achievement. Additionally, the study explored whether resilience moderated the relationship
between racial socialization and academic achievement. The study also investigated whether
racial socialization messages vary based on gender. Hughes and Chen (1997) debated whether
certain demographic variables, such as age, gender, and socioeconomic status have an impact on
the type of socialization messages parents may use. Research suggest that messages do differ
based on age (Hughes &Chen, 1997; Hughes & Johnson, 2001; Hughes et al., 2006) and
socioeconomic (Caughy, O'Campo, Randolph, & Nickerson, 2002; Frabutt, Walker, &
MacKinnon-Lewis, 2002; Hughes &Chen, 1997; Phinney & Chavira, 1995) however, whether or
not specific race-related messages are delivered based on gender has not yet been clearly
defined.
6
Research Questions
The current study attempted to answer the following research questions:
1. Do specific types of racial socialization messages differ based on gender?
2. What is the nature of the relationship between the source of racial socialization (i.e.,
provided by parents, grandparents, siblings, teachers, friends, and media) and
academic achievement?
3. What is the nature of the relationship between specific types of racial socialization
messages and academic achievement?
4. What is the nature of the relationship between the specific types and sources of
racial socialization messages and academic achievement?
5. What is the nature of the relationship between specific types of racial socialization
messages and resilience to academic achievement?
Hypothesis
Based on the findings from the extant literature, the current project will test the following
hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1: Racial socialization provided by teachers and friends will be related to
academic achievement.
Hypothesis 2: Racial socialization messages of racial protection and bicultural coping
will be related to academic achievement.
Hypothesis 3: Racial socialization messages, based on specific types and sources, will be
related to academic achievement.
Hypothesis 4: Resilience will be a stronger moderator between Racial Protection
messages and academic achievement.
7
Definition of Terms
This section gives meaning to specific terms used in this paper. The terms are defined
throughout the paper, but are organized is this section for simplicity. Terms highlighted
throughout the study include Black, racial socialization, types of racial socialization messages,
and resilience.
-
For the purpose of this study, Black and African American will be used
interchangeably to describe anyone of African ancestry.
-
Racial socialization is broadly defined as the process by which individuals are taught
about their racial group, interracial interactions, and the values, norms, behaviors, and
beliefs of their race (Bowman & Howard, 1985; Boykin & Toms, 1985; D. Brown,
2008; Lesane, 2002; Peters, 1985; Rotheram & Phinney, 1987).
-
Specific types of racial socialization refers to the five categories described by
Bentley-Edwards and Stevenson (2013). A description of each type of message is
described below.
o Racial protection provides awareness of racism, racial buffering through
affirmations, and strategies to cope with racism (Bentley-Edwards & Stevenson,
2013).
o Cultural insight includes traditional information about manhood/family support,
spirituality, heritage and practical knowledge (Bentley-Edwards & Stevenson,
2013).
o Racial stereotyping includes messages that convey doubt in the intentions of
other Black people based on social class, gender and colorism stereotypes
(Bentley-Edward & Stevenson, 2013).
8
o Bicultural coping includes strategies for navigating dominant society (e.g., code
switching, multicultural worldviews, assimilation, conflict management)
(Bentley-Edwards & Stevenson, 2013).
o Old school basics include racial and cultural clichés (Bentley-Edwards &
Stevenson, 2013).
-
Resilience is the set of personal qualities enabling one to cope when facing adversity
(Connor & Davidson, 2003).
-
In this paper, academic achievement and academic success are interchangeable and
measured by grade point averages.
-
Sources of racial socialization refer to the person or entity the race-related message
has been transmitted from.
Summary
This chapter, the introduction, starts with a historical background for this research and is
followed by a statement of the problem, description of the study, and specific questions to be
answered. The remainder of this dissertation is organized in the following manner. Chapter
Two reviews relevant literature related to the study. Chapter Three describes the methodological
procedures used to conduct the study. Chapter Four presents the findings of the study. Lastly,
Chapter Five includes a summary of the study, discussion of the findings, a presentation of
limitations, implications for practice, and areas of future research.
9
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITEREATURE
In this literature review the nature of the relationship between racial socialization,
psychological resilience, and academic success of Black college students will be examined. The
review will begin with an in-depth examination of racial socialization, including the major
models of racial socialization, the influences of racial socialization, and research on racial
socialization. Subsequently, a review of resilience in relation to academic achievement will be
conducted. The literature review will end with a brief summary of this section.
Racial Socialization
Socialization has been broadly defined as the process by which the values, norms, morals,
and beliefs of the social world are transmitted from one generation to another (Arnett, 1995;
Maccoby, 1992; Sanders-Thompson, 1994). Zayas and Solari (1996) noted that most of the
research on socialization has been based on samples of middle-class European-American
families. As a result, assumptions about socialization rest upon Eurocentric worldviews. Boykin
and Toms (1985) suggest that the socialization process of Black children is different from
children of other races. They contend that Black parents socialize children to behave in manners
that are consistent with the family’s cultural values and teach them how to navigate the dominant
culture. In a study conducted with approximately 300 college students, Brown and Tylka (2010)
reported that the socialization of Black children contained many references to race and the
impact of the dominance of whiteness in U.S society. Specifically, Black parents, in comparison
to White parents, provided their children with race-related messages of socialization. Although
there is no operational definition of racial socialization, it has been broadly defined as the
process by which individuals are taught about their racial group, interracial interactions, and the
values, norms, behaviors, and beliefs of their race (Bowman & Howard, 1985; Boykin & Toms,
10
1985; D. Brown, 2008; Lesane, 2002; Peters, 1985; Rotheram & Phinney, 1987). Although there
are some disagreements about what influences the racial socialization process most, the family is
the most frequently cited agent of socialization (Boykin & Ellison, 1995; Brown, Tanner-Smith,
Lesane-Brown, & Ezell, 2007; McAdoo, 2002). Boykin and Ellison (1995) and Stevenson
(1994, 1995, 1998) provide the framework in which racial socialization can best be understood.
Theoretical Frameworks
There are two commonly used models of racial socialization: Boykin and Ellison’s
(1995) model and Stevenson’s (1994, 1995, 1998) model. Both models provide a framework to
better understand racial socialization and outline key components of the socialization process,
such as the context in which race-related socialization typically occurs and the content of the
socialization messages. Additionally, each model offers a unique definition of racial
socialization.
Boykin and Ellison’s (1995) Model
Boykin and Ellison (1995) contend that the racial socialization process for Black children
is complex and multidimensional. The authors claim that traditional models of socialization
have neglected to address the unique realities associated with the socialization of Black youth.
Thus, the purpose of their model is to capture the nuances of being Black in a society that
devalues Blackness and to address the contradictory socializations messages Black children may
receive. These contradictions may arise as a result of an individual’s realm of social
experiences, such as (a) mainstream, (b) Afrocultural, or (c) minority experiences (Boykin &
Ellison, 1995). The mainstream realm is the most pervasive of experiences and reflects the
dominant culture worldview. Next, the Afrocultural realm reflects all things bound to Africa and
11
its cultural view. The last social realm, minority experience, refers to the racial oppression of
Black people in the U.S. The three social realms underpin the Black experience in the U.S.
Boykin and Ellison (1995) theorize that racial socialization messages consist of four
themes: (a) racial pride, (b) self-development orientations, (c) racial barrier orientations, and (d)
egalitarian views. Racial pride messages consist of teachings about Black history and heritage,
instill positive feelings about being Black, and promote an Afrocentric orientation. Selfdevelopment messages promote excellence and a value for positive character traits. Racial
barrier messages emphasize an awareness of racism and racial discrimination, and provide
strategies for coping with such racial inequities. Egalitarian messages encourage interracial
equality and coexistence. The model was one of the first to examine the multidimensionality of
the racial socialization process. Boykin and Ellison have argued that racial socialization is an
individualized and dynamic process. However, little is known about the veracity of this model
because it has not been widely researched.
Stevenson’s (1994, 1995, 1998) Models
The more commonly used model of racial socialization is Stevenson’s (1994, 1995, 1998)
models. Like Boykin and Ellison (1995), he emphasized the multidimensional nature of racial
socialization. However, Stevenson (1994, 1995) went a step further by identifying themes that
are central to how individuals are socialized to understand race relations and are made aware of
themselves as a racial being in the U.S. Stevenson (1998) categorized the themes into three
models of the Black experience: (a) reactive, (b) evolutionary/creative, and (c) bicultural models.
The premise of the reactive model is that racial oppression and racism drive the motivation,
identity development, and achievement of Black individuals. The evolutionary/creative model is
treated as proactive in nature with Black culture viewed as having its own cultural integrity and
12
being independent of racial oppression. The bicultural model is a combination of the reactive
and proactive models. Stevenson (1994) suggested that racial socialization functions to buffer
the impact of racism while promoting racial pride, which means individuals, are presented with
both protective and proactive messages.
Most of the research on Stevenson’s (1994) model has focused on the impact of the
variability in the content of racial socialization messages (Hughes et al., 2006; Neblett, Smalls,
Ford, Nguyen, & Sellers, 2009), which was grouped into two categories, protective or proactive.
Protective messages are similar to Boykin and Ellison’s (1985) conception of racial barrier
orientations; they warn against racism and racial oppression while providing coping strategies.
Proactive messages, on the other hand, are analogous to Boykin and Ellison’s (1985) racial pride
and self-development orientations, where messages about Black culture and pride are delivered,
including a value for personal characteristics. To study the impact of protective messages,
Fischer and Shaw (1999) investigated the relationship between racial socialization, experiences
of racism, and mental health among African American college students. They found that
protective messages were associated with overall mental health. Caughy and colleagues (2002)
linked proactive racial socialization messages to increased parental involvement and decreased
behavioral problems for Black school-aged children. Moreover, Stevenson, McNeil, HerreroTaylor, and Davis (2005) suggest that both types of messages are necessary. For example,
Bynum, Burton, and Best (2007) found that both protective and proactive messages are related to
mental health outcomes.
Stevenson (1998) expanded his framework by also creating seven fundamental
assumptions of race-based socialization. One, racism and racial discrimination, exist in this
society despite reluctance to discuss them. Thus, a system must be put in place to protect those
13
who are discriminated against. Two, the consequences of racism are not uniform for Black
individuals. As a result, there is a wide range of racial socialization experiences, which may be
due to variability in educational and economic opportunities. Three, the collective identity of
Black individuals is based on social oppression and cultural empowerment, which Stevenson
(1998) refers to as an “extended-self identity” (p. 239). Four, this extended-self identity “is
interpersonal, reflexive, and corporate, but requires buffering and nurturance in order to mature”
(Stevenson, 1998, p. 240). Five, the primary function of racial socialization is to promote racial
self and group appreciation, not racial hatred. Six, the racial socialization process includes the
behaviors and attitudes between families and youth. And seven, racial socialization is
multidimensional, contributes to racial awareness and racial identity, and continues across the
life span.
One of the main criticisms of Stevenson’s (1994, 1995, 1998) model is that it presents the
child as passive (Hughes & Johnson, 2001). Instead Hughes and Johnson (2001) posit that a
child’s characteristics and behaviors may elicit certain socialization practices from parents. They
further add that a child’s age and gender shape parental beliefs regarding what race-related
messages are appropriate to transmit. Also, McHale et al. (2006) note that the model neglected
to address the role of parental contributions to the socialization process. For example, McHale et
al. believed that parental experiences and attitudes would influence racial socialization practices.
Despite these criticisms, Stevenson’s (1994, 1995, 1998) models provide clarity on the racial
socialization process and remains the foundation for many research studies (Adams-Bass,
Bentley-Edwards, & Stevenson, 2013; Barr & Neville, 2008; D. Brown, 2008; Bynum, Burton,
& Best, 2007). Additionally, Stevenson’s models have been the basis for many theoretical
advances on racial socialization. Most notably, Hughes and Johnson (2001) combined
14
Stevenson’s seven assumptions and his model of the Black experience to delineate different
types of racial socialization messages, which will be discussed below.
Racial Socialization Messages
Hughes and colleagues (Hughes et al., 2006; Hughes & Chen, 1997; Hughes & Johnson,
2001) advanced Stevenson’s (1994, 1995, 1998) framework by identifying four dimensions of
the racial socialization process that are believed to be commonly endorsed by parents: (a)
Cultural Socialization, (b) Preparation for Bias, (c) Racial Mistrust, and (d) Egalitarianism.
Cultural Socialization, the most used form of racial socialization, promotes Afrocentric values
and beliefs, a strong sense of ethnic pride, and knowledge of Black culture. Preparation for Bias
promotes awareness of racial discrimination and the racial hierarchy, and equips an individual to
cope in such situations. Racial Mistrust promotes a sense of suspicion. Individuals are warned
about getting involved with particular group, usually against members of the dominant society.
Lastly, Egalitarianism promotes appreciation of individual uniqueness over racial group
membership and embraces the notion of everyone as equal.
Most recently, Bentley-Edwards and Stevenson (2013) contend that racialization
messages can be divided into five main categories: (a) Racial Protection; (b) Cultural Insight; (c)
Racial Stereotyping; (d) Bicultural Coping; and (e) Old School Basics. Racial Protection
provides awareness of racism, racial buffering through affirmations, and strategies to cope with
racism. Cultural Insights includes traditional information about manhood/family support,
spirituality, heritage and practical knowledge. Racial Stereotyping expands on Cultural Mistrust
(Hughes et al, 2006), by including messages that convey doubt in the intentions of other Black
people based on social class, gender and colorism stereotypes. Bicultural Coping provides
strategies for navigating dominant society (e.g., code switching, multicultural worldviews,
15
assimilation, conflict management). Old School Basics represent racial and cultural clichés.
Additionally, Hughes and Chen (1997) have debated whether certain demographic variables,
such as age, socioeconomic status (SES), and gender have an impact on the type of socialization
messages parents transmit.
Influence of Age
Hughes and Chen (1997) suggest that a child’s age impacts the frequency and content of
racial socialization messages transmitted by parents. This finding is consistent with studies
conducted by Hughes and Johnson, (2001). In a comparison of studies based on age, Hughes et
al. (2006) found that racial socialization practices align with the recipient’s developmental stage.
For instance, they noted that studies that sampled preschoolers typically showed lower
occurrence of racial socialization, in comparison to studies involving adolescents or adults. In
addition to frequency, the content of race-related messages varied based on age. Cultural
socialization or egalitarian messages are more likely to be transmitted when children are young,
whereas discussion of more complex matters, such as discrimination, is likely to emerge when
children reach middle childhood or adolescence (Hughes et al., 2006).
Influence of Socioeconomic
Hughes and Chen (1997) reported that higher income parents typically transmit racerelated messages more than their lower income counterparts. Also, researchers contend that
certain type of racial socialization messages, cultural socialization and preparation for bias, are
more likely to be transmitted by parents with high SES (Caughy et al., 2002; Hughes & Chen,
1997). Despite the strong support for SES differences in the racial socialization of Black
children, three studies have not found any difference (Frabutt, Walker, & MacKinnon-Lewis,
2002; Phinney & Chavira, 1995). However, Hughes et al. (2006) assert that these studies
16
(Frabutt, Walker, & MacKinnon-Lewis, 2002; Phinney & Chavira, 1995) are characterized by
small samples and limited variability in SES, thus resulting in low statistical power to detect
significant effects.
Influence of Gender
Of the demographic variables mentioned, there has been much discussion about the
influence of gender on the racial socialization process. Stevenson et al. (1997) found that boys
reported significantly greater racial socialization about alertness to discrimination than did girls.
However, Hughes and Chen (1997) failed to identify differences in racial socialization messages
based on gender. A few studies (Bowman & Howard, 1985; Brown & Linver, 2009) have found
that there is a relationship between gender and racial socialization messages; however, others
(Caughy et al., 2002; Phinney & Chavira, 1995; Stevenson, Reed, Bodison, & Bishop, 1997)
have found no gender differences. Whether or not parents deliver specific racial socialization
messages to children based on gender has not been clearly defined in the literature.
Agents of Racial Socialization
Racial socialization messages, as previously mentioned, are communicated from multiple
sources (Barr & Neville, 2008; Lesane-Brown, Brown, Caldwell, & Sellers, 2005). However,
research on racial socialization has primarily focused on racial socialization messages provided
by parents (Arnett, 2007; Hemmings, 1996; Tatum, 1997). To fully understand racial
socialization, it is important to understand the unique contribution of different informants. Two
main sources of racial socialization (familial and non-familial) are reviewed below.
Familial. It has been well established that Black parents are likely to transmit racial
socialization messages to their children (Boykin & Toms, 1985; Lesane, 2002; Peters, 1985).
Black Parents’ role in socialization is understandable in that they are tasked with preparing and
17
teaching their children how to cope with the demands of a society that devalues Black heritage,
race, and culture. In 1985, Bowman and Howard reported that 68% of Black children surveyed
stated that their parents had communicated race-related messages. In 1994, Sanders-Thompson
noted that 79% of the Black college students surveyed reported discussing racial issues with their
parents. Two years later, Stevenson, Reed, and Bodison (1996) reported that 49% of Black
adolescents had race-related discussions with their parents. Thus, the findings indicate that
almost half to a majority of parents are having some form of race-related discussions with their
children.
Sanders-Thompson (1994) explored the relationship between racial socialization and
level of racial identification in 225 Black adults. Participants were given several measures,
including a qualitative measure of racial socialization and a questionnaire on racial identity
developed by the researcher. To determine how demographics (e.g., age, gender, income,
education) and variables of racial socialization (e.g., type of message, socialization impact on
behavior and beliefs, interactions with other Blacks) affect racial identity, a multiple regression
analysis was conducted. The results indicated that age and income were statistically significant
predictors of the impact of racial socialization and level of racial identification. SandersThompson noted that the socialization process is likely shaped by social and economic factors.
These findings are consistent with those found by Thornton, Chatters, Taylor and Allen (1990).
They examined the influence of demographic and environmental factors (income, marital status,
geographic region, gender, education, age, and neighborhood) on the frequency of racial
socialization message. Married parents were more likely than single parents to transmit racerelated messages. Specifically, mothers were more likely than fathers to discuss race-related
messages. Parents living in the Northeast were more likely to teach their children about race
18
than those living in other regions of the U.S. Older parents were more likely to socialize their
children about race than younger parents. Parents with higher levels of education were more
likely to engage in racial socialization than those with less education. Several other researchers
(Barr, 2010; Caughy, Nettles, O’Campo, & Lohrfink, 2006; Stevenson, McNeil, Herrero-Taylor,
& Davis, 2005) have studied the influence of sociodemographic and environmental factors on the
racial socialization process. Caughy et al. (2006) found that young children living in
predominantly Black neighborhoods were more likely to give messages that highlighted the
reality of racism, in comparison, to those living in predominately White neighborhoods. In other
words, children living in majority Black neighborhood were more likely to receive preparation
for bias and racial mistrust messages. Findings from a study by Stevenson and colleagues (2005)
indicated that Black parents, living in predominantly Black neighborhoods, were more likely to
deliver messages about cultural pride and how to cope with racial barriers. Similarly, Barr
(2010) noted that participants who lived in predominately Black neighborhoods reported
receiving more cultural pride messages from both parents and peers. However, Barr did not find
a relationship between racial composition of neighborhood and other types of racial socialization
messages (e.g., alertness to racism, internalized racism).
Non-familial. Non-familial sources of racial socialization are race-related messages
transmitted from any source outside of the family, such as peers, the media, and teachers.
Steinberg, Dornbusch, and Brown (1992) conducted a study investigating the relationship
between different peer interactions among racially diverse adolescents and academic
achievement. The racial composition of the participants is as follows: 33% White, 22% Latino,
22% Asian, and 23% Black. The researchers surveyed 15,000 high school students throughout
the U.S. about how peers influence their academic behaviors. In comparison to other racial
19
groups, Black adolescents’ daily behavior, especially as it pertains to school, was strongly
influenced by peers. Black students reported that peer interactions were connected to how much
time was spent on homework, whether they enjoyed coming to school, and how they behaved in
the classroom.
Researchers (Arnett, 2007; Barr & Neville, 2008) suggest that as individuals grow older,
familial socialization becomes less important, and messages communicated from sources outside
of the family (e.g., peers, professors, media) are more influential in the socialization process.
Arnett (2007) advanced the notion that non-familial informants become the primary contexts for
socialization during adolescence and emerging adulthood (18-25 years old) because the time
spent with non-familial sources increases while the time spent with family decreases. This
notion is consistent with findings from a study conducted by Lesane-Brown et al. (2005). In a
validation study of the Comprehensive Race Socialization Inventory (CRSI), Lesane-Brown et
al. administered the CRSI to 225 Black college students and 18 adolescents located throughout
the U.S. Lesane-Brown and colleagues (2005) reported that most respondents reported receiving
race-related messages from multiple sources. Approximately 90% of Black adolescents and 95%
of Black college-students in the study received race-related messaged from their peers. The
researchers note that despite the strong influence of peers, only a limited number of studies have
explored the influence of peer transmitted racial socialization messages and highlighted a need
for further research in this area.
Measurement of Racial Socialization
There is great variation in the conceptualization and measurement of racial socialization
(Bentley-Edwards & Stevenson, 2013; Hughes et al., 2006; Stevenson, 1994). The lack of
definition coupled with the absence of theoretical base has made measuring racial socialization
20
difficult. Additionally, it has been difficult to compare results across studies because of the
variation in measuring racial socialization. Prior to Boykin and Ellison’s (1995) and Stevenson’s
(1994, 1995, 1998) models, there was no theoretical base, so early researchers conceptualized
their own view of racial socialization and then created their own measure of race-related
socialization. As a result, there was no consensus as to what information should or should not be
included in the development of a racial socialization instrument (Stevenson, 1994). To address
the above-mentioned issues, Stevenson (1994) developed the Scale of Racial Socialization in
Adolescents (SORS-A), which is composed of 45-items and measures four factors of
adolescents’ perceptions of racial socialization practices: (a) Spiritual and Religious Coping, (b)
Extended Family Caring, (c) Cultural Pride Reinforcement, and (d) Racism Awareness
Teaching. The SORS-A is designed to be used with teenagers aged 13 to 19 years old. The
reliability estimates of the scores for the scales have ranged from .62 to .74. To test the structure
of the measure, Stevenson initially conducted a principal component analysis (varimax rotation),
which revealed a four-factor model and accounted for 28 % of the variance. A principal axis
factor analysis with oblique (equamax rotation) was later conducted, which the author stated
yielded similar results to the principal component analysis. The SORS-A was useful, yet limited
because it only focused on adolescents’ views on racial socialization, not their actual lived
experiences.
Stevenson and colleagues (2002) created the Teenager Experience of Racial Socialization
Scale (TERS) to rectify the main shortcoming of the SOR-A; the TERS measured adolescents’
actual racial socialization experiences. For example, the measure included questions about
frequency of racial socialization, family acts of racism, and personal acts of racism. The TERS
consists of 40 questions and measures the frequency of race-related socialization messages
21
teenagers receive from their parents across five domains. The five domains include: (a) Cultural
Coping with Antagonism, (b) Cultural Pride Reinforcement, (c) Cultural Legacy Appreciation,
(d) Cultural Alertness to Discrimination, and (e) Cultural Endorsement of the Mainstream. The
domains of the TERS are consistent with the four dimensions identified by Hughes and
colleagues (Hughes et al., 2006; Hughes & Chen, 1997; Hughes & Johnson, 2001). To test the
structure of the measure, Stevenson conducted a principal component analysis (equamax
rotation), which revealed a five-factor model and accounted for 43 % of the variance. A
principal axis factor analysis with oblique and equamax rotation was later conducted, which the
author stated yielded similar results to the principal component analysis. Similar to the SOR-A,
Stevenson et al. (2002) did not explicitly state the appropriate age range needed to administer the
TERS, however, they gave a mean age of 14.3 years. The TERS is considered an improvement
over the SOR-A, but it does not fully measure the racial socialization process. The TERS did not
include information about the source of race-related socialization messages, recency of
messages, or provide information about the most useful message transmitted (Lesane-Brown et
al., 2005; Neblett et al., 2006; White-Johnson, Ford, & Sellers, 2010).
In response to critiques, Bentley-Edwards and Stevenson (2013) created the Cultural and
Racial Experiences of Socialization (CARES) scale. The CARES builds on prior measures
(Stevenson, 1994; Stevenson et al., 2002) of racial socialization. At the time it was developed,
the CARES was one of the only measures that examined the frequency, recency, importance, and
source of racial socialization practices. The CARES consists of 35 questions across five
subscales: a) Racial Protection, (b) Cultural Insights, (c) Racial Stereotyping, (d) Bicultural
Coping, and (e) Old School Basics. Bentley-Edwards and Stevenson reported an alpha
coefficient of .89 for the CARES scores. The reliability estimates for the scores of the subscales
22
range from .64 to .82. Due to the fact that the 35-item CARES was recently developed, there is
currently no further reliability or validity information available. To test the structure of the
measure, the authors conducted a principal component analysis (oblique rotation), which
revealed a five-factor solution and accounted for 43 % of the variance. To date, there have been
a limited number of studies (Adams & Stevenson, 2013; Barr & Neville, 2008) conducted that
have explored how different sources of socialization messages affect psychological and
academic outcomes; none of those studies used the 35-item CARES.
Influence of Racial Socialization
There have been several studies that have examined the relation of children’s racial
socialization practices to several outcome variables. Researchers have suggested that racial
socialization is likely to be related to racial discrimination (Bynum et al., 2007; Fischer & Shaw,
1999; Neblett, Terzian, & Harriott, 2010; Stevenson et al.1997; Stevenson et al., 2002); racial
identity (Miller, 1999; Neblett, Smalls, Ford, Nguyen, & Sellers, 2009; Stevenson, 1995,1998;
Stevenson et al., 2002); academic achievement (Bowman & Howard, 1985; Boykin, 1986;
Caughy et al., 2002; Stevenson, 1997); and psychological well-being (D. Brown, 2008; Caughy
et al., 2002; Stevenson et al., 2002). Although there have been advances in understanding racial
socialization, there are many unknown factors, such as, the influence of different informants on
the racial socialization process and other outcome variables.
Racial socialization and academic success. Black families may use racial socialization
practices to orient their children toward success in a public education system that is based on
White, middle-class, and male norms (Bowman & Howard, 1985). In this instance, families may
socialize their children to be aware that racism exists and is harmful. Thus, racial socialization
may be a practice that Black parents use to support their children’s success in an academic
23
environment based on the dominant cultural norms while at the same time supporting their
connections to Black social norms. However, this topic has been understudied; Hughes and
colleagues (2006) identified only four studies that have examined the connection between racial
socialization and academic achievement (Hughes et al., 2006).
In a classic study, Bowman and Howard (1985) examined the relationship between racerelated socialization, motivation, and academic achievement in a sample of 377 Black students
between the ages of 14 and 24. Participants were interviewed for 80-minutes. During the
interview participants were asked to provide information about their grades, completed a fouritem motivational measure, and were asked whether their parents discussed what it means to be
Black or taught them how to get along with White people. Specifically, the questions asked
about racial socialization were:
1. When you were a child, were there things your parents, or people who raised you,
did or told you to help you know what it is to be Black? If so, what are the most
important things they taught you?
2. Are they any other things your parents, or people who raised you, taught you
about how to get along with White people? If so, what are the most important
things they taught you?
Comparisons were made between students who received race-related messages and those
who received no race-related messages. Bowman and Howard found that student who received
preparation for bias messages (i.e., how to get along with White people) received higher school
grades then those who received no race-related messages. Also, participants’ responses to the
two questions were coded into four headings: (a) racial barriers, (b) self-development, (c) ethnic
pride, and (d) egalitarianism. The researchers found that nearly 23% of students reported
24
receiving ethnic pride messages; the most widely used form of racial socialization messages
transmitted. Ethnic pride was followed in frequency by self-development (14%), racial barrier
(13%), and egalitarianism (12%). The authors concluded that racial socialization is likely to
buffer against racial inequalities and promote achievements. Bowman and Howard established a
link between racial socialization and academic achievement, but there were several areas that the
researcher neglected to address. There was no mention of how specific content and context of
socialization messages promote achievement. Also, there was no psychometric information
provided for the measures used in the study. As such, there is no way to determine if the
instruments assessed what they were intended to measure. Additionally, the authors did not
control for demographic variables, such as SES and gender, which are suggested to influence
racial socialization practices.
To address one of the criticisms of the Bowman and Howard (1985) study, Marshall
(1995) considered the role of demographic factors on racial socialization. Marshall examined the
relationship between child’s report of racial socialization and academic achievement (reading
grades), while controlling for various psychological variables (e.g., racial identity, locus of
control, perceived competence). Participants were 58 Black middle-class mothers and their nineand ten-year-old children reared in predominately White neighborhoods. Mothers were
administered a qualitative questionnaire to assess their specific racial socialization strategies.
Children, on the other hand, self-reported information about racial socialization, academic
performance, school climate and completed a series of measures: (a) Racial Identity Scale,
(RIAS; Spencer, 1990), (b) Locus of Control (Crandall, Katkovsky, Crandall, 1965), (c)
Academic Expectations (Entwisle and Hayduk, 1978) and (d) Perceived Scholastic Competence
(Harter, 1982). Marshall ran a regression of reading grades on socialization and other
25
psychological variables. The author found that all variables, with the exception locus of control,
were statistically significant predictors of achievement, specifically the model accounted for 54%
of the variance. Although racial socialization was a significant predictor of reading grades, racial
pride was inversely correlated to academic performance. In other words, lower overall grades
were associated with higher frequency of racial pride socialization (r = -.58).
Marshall’s (1995) findings were contrary to several studies that focused on the relation
between racial socialization and achievement. For example, Smith, Atkins, and Connell (2003)
examined the relation of family, school, and community factors related to children’s racial
attitudes and achievement. The sample was 98 African American fourth graders. At least one
parent and one teacher of the fourth graders were also asked to participate in the study. Parents,
teachers, and children were administered the Racial Identity Socialization Measured (PRISM),
developed by the researcher and a team of students. The PRISM had an internal consistency of
.81 for the scores of the teacher version, .74 for scores of the parent version and .42 the scores of
the child version. Additionally, a principal axis factor analysis was conducted (oblique rotation).
As a result, several of the factors were reduced to two-items. Smith and associates conducted a
path analysis and reported that racial pride messages were associated with higher achievement,
as measured by grades and standardized tests, and perceived barrier messages were associated
with low performance. The psychometric properties of the PRISM are concerning, especially for
the child version. An internal consistency of .42 the scores of the child version suggest that
items that are intended to measure the same general construct are producing different scores.
Additionally, several of the factors, on all three versions, contained only two items. This is a
violation of the general rule that a factor should be composed of at least 3-5 items. Despite the
concerns about the psychometric properties of the measures used, the findings from Smith et al.’s
26
study are consistent with other research (Caughy et al., 2002), which suggest that racial pride
messages may buffer against discrimination and daily stress.
More recently, Neblett, Philip, Cogburn, and Sellers (2006) studied the relations between
experiences of discrimination, parental race-related socialization, and achievement outcomes
(e.g., academic curiosity, academic persistence, academic performance) in a sample of 548 Black
adolescents. Participants were administered four measures: (a) the Child Socialization Scale
(Lesane-Brown, Scottham, Sellers, & Nguyên, 2005), (b) the Perceived Discrimination Scale
(Harrell, 1997), (c) a measure of behavioral engagement (Skinner & Belmont, 1993), and (d) a
measure of academic persistence (Neblett et al., 2006). Participants also self-reported grade point
average (GPA). The Child Racial Socialization Scale, developed to measure the types of racerelated messages children receive from parents, consists of six subscales: (a) Racial Pride, (b)
Racial Barrier, (c) Egalitarian, (d) Self-worth, (e) Negative, and (f) Behavior. Neblett et al.
reported that the reliability coefficients for the scores of the subscales ranged from .65
(Egalitarian subscale) to .75 (Self-worth subscale). Three ordinary least squares (OLS)
regression were conducted which showed that racial socialization predicted positive academic
achievement. In particular, self-worth messages were linked to academic curiosity and
persistence; while racial pride messages were predictive of lower academic curiosity and GPA.
The researchers recommend that further research should be conducted on how certain racial
socialization messages promote resilience and predict positive academic outcomes.
In summary, the findings of the studies reviewed suggest that there is an association
between racial socialization and academic performance for young Black children; however, it is
unknown how racial socialization relates to academic performance for Black emerging adults
(e.g., college students). Based on a search of published studies conducted in the past ten years
27
on Medline and PsycInfo databases, no studies were found that had examined the connection
between racial socialization and academic achievement in Black college students. Conducting
studies solely with children and adolescent participants is likely to result in many sources of
untapped knowledge and a narrow understanding of how race-related messages influence
academic performance globally. It is unknown whether the results of these studies can be
generalized to college students. Additionally, there is a lack of definitive evidence on the role of
multiple sources of racial socialization messages on academic achievement. As previously
stated, there have only been four studies that have examined the influence of multiple informants
on the racial socialization process (Adams & Stevenson, 2013; Barr & Neville, 2008; LesaneBrown et al., 2005), none of which focused on academic outcomes. Because multiple racial
socialization messages tend to be transmitted simultaneously, there is a need for future research
to examine whether the interaction between different types of race-related messages influence
achievement (Neblett et al., 2006). Lastly, there is limited information on what variables
influence the relationship between racial socialization and academic performance. Neblett et al.
(2006) indicated that understanding the variables that contribute to this relationship will help to
elucidate the protective properties of racial socialization.
Racial socialization and resilience. A number of studies have focused on the
association between racial socialization and negative outcomes (i.e., discrimination, race-related
stress, substance use), but there has been less of a focus on the influence of racial socialization
on positive outcomes (e.g., racial identity, resilience, self-esteem; Neville, Heppner, Ji & Thye,
2004; Prelow, Mosher, & Bowman, 2006). Several studies that have attempted to link racial
socialization to positive outcomes have mostly focused on racial identity (Cokley & Chapman,
2008; Demo & Hughes, 1990; Fatimilehin, 1999; Miller, 1999; Neblett et al., 2009; Stevenson,
28
1994, 1995; White-Johnson, Ford, & Sellers, 2010). Over the past decade, psychology practice
has incorporated the positive psychology model that builds on positive qualities such as wellbeing and perseverance, while shifting away from the focus on suffering and disease. This new
focus on the positive aspects of the human condition allows for the prevention of negative
outcomes and gives insight into how these strengths can be fostered in others (Richardson,
2002). Resilience, a positive psychological outcome, can further the understanding of how a
number of Black students have been able to overcome adversity and how to help others foster a
similar sense of perseverance. Numerous definitions have been offered to capture the essence of
resilience. Luthar, Cicchetti, and Becker (2000) posit, "Resilience refers to a dynamic process
encompassing positive adaptation within the context of significant adversity" (p. 543). In other
words, resiliency is a positive adaptation despite negative environmental influences (Miller &
Macintosh, 1999). Since racial socialization experiences are thought to impact racial identity
(Demo & Hughes, 1990; Fatimilehin, 1999; Miller, 1999; Neblett et al., 2009; Stevenson, 1994,
1995; White-Johnson, Ford, & Sellers, 2010), it is likely that racial socialization can also
influence other positive outcomes, such as resilience.
Miller and Macintosh (1999) conducted one of the first studies that linked racial
socialization to resilience by assessing the relationships between educational involvement, racial
socialization, racial identity, discrimination, normative stress and urban hassles in 131 Black
adolescents. Initially, the researchers were interested in the extent to which protective factors
moderated the effect of stress (e.g., discrimination, normative stress, urban hassles) on academic
achievement. Participants were given several measures, including the SORS-A (Stevenson,
1994) and the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM; Phinney, 1992). The results of the
study suggest that a positive racial identity and the protective qualities of racial socialization are
29
able to buffer Black adolescents against stress. Although the study did not directly measure
resilience, the results indicate a possible positive correlation between racial socialization and
resilience. Miller and Macintosh concluded that resilience in this population is influenced by
culturally relevant protective factors, such as racial socialization.
D. Brown expanded the literature on resilience by using the newly developed Connor
Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC; Connor & Davidson, 2003) to assess the relation between
racial identity, social support, racial socialization, and resilience. The study also sought to
expand on previous research investigating racial socialization by sampling young adults, who
self-identified as Black (45 males; 108 females) instead of children or adolescents. The purpose
of study was to understand the impact of social support and racial socialization on level of
resilience. Specifically, D. Brown examined the impact of the various types of racial
socialization messages and forms of support (e.g., family, friends) on resilience. Participants
were administered the TERS (Stevenson et al., 2002) to assess racial socialization and the
Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MPSS; Zimet, Dahlem, Zimet, & Farley,
1988), as a measure of social support and the CD-RISC. Findings from the study implied there
was a positive association between resiliency and racial socialization (r =.22). In particular,
participants who scored high in resilience received higher levels of coping with antagonism and
cultural pride messages. Racial socialization and, in particular, messages about cultural pride
and coping with antagonism, predicted resilience beyond any other variables (e.g., social
support, age, gender, income). This finding supports the idea that racial socialization predicts
resilience. However, the author stressed a need for the relationship between racial socialization
and resilience (i.e., potential mediating or moderating effects) to be studied further.
30
Brown and Tylka (2010) attempted to explicate the complexity of the relationship
between racial socialization and resilience by studying how racial socialization would alter the
association between racial discrimination and resilience. They predicted that racial socialization
would moderate the relationship between racial discrimination and resilience. Additionally, they
explored specific types of racial socialization messages to determine which type of message
better buffered against discrimination. The sample consisted of 290 Black college students (223
females and 67 males), who were either in an introductory psychology course or belonged to
multicultural student organizations. Participants were asked to complete four instruments: (a)
Schedule of Racist Events (SRE; Landrine & Klonoff, 1996), (b) TERS (Stevenson et al., 2002),
(c) CD-RISC (Connor & Davidson, 2003), and (d) the Balanced Inventory of Desirable
Responding (BIDR; Paulhus, 1988). The SRE measured the frequency of racial discrimination.
The TERS (Stevenson et al., 2002) measured the frequency of racial socialization messages. The
CD-RISC (Connor & Davidson, 2003) measured level of resilience. The BIDR measured the
tendency to deliberately give favorable responses. As predicted, overall racial socialization, as
well as messages of cultural legacy, moderated the link between racial discrimination and
resilience. Contrary to previous research (D. Brown, 2008; Caughy et al., 2002; Smith, Atkins,
& Connell, 2003), messages of cultural pride and coping with antagonism were not found to
serve as buffers. One limitation of this study is that the measures were presented in the same
order to all participants. By not counterbalancing the order of the measures, sequence effects
may be a potential confounding influence on the results. Furthermore, the results may not
generalize to the larger Black community due to the fact that the participants were either
introductory psychology students or members of multicultural student organizations. There may
31
be important differences in the characteristics of those who hold membership in a multicultural
student organization that is not reflected in the general population.
These studies provide further evidence that there is a link between racial socialization and
resilience. In spite of this, further exploration is needed in order to understand the intricacy of
the relationship between racial socialization and resilience. For instance, the studies reviewed
above have produced conflicting results on whether different types of racial socialization
messages promote resilience. Thus, it remains unknown whether specific types of race-related
socialization messages are more important than others in promoting resilience. Also, Utsey,
Bolden, Lanier, & Williams (2007) note that while prior research has examined some of the
potential benefits of resilience in Black emerging adults, further research is still needed to
understand the predictors of resilience for the Black college student population.
Conceptual and Methodological Issues with Racial Socialization Research
Due to the complex nature of racial socialization there is no commonly accepted
definition (Lesane-Brown, 2002). Instead, multiple definitions exist (Stevenson, 2004). Hughes
et al., (2006) contend that some studies have defined racial socialization as the communication of
the values, norms, behaviors, and beliefs of an individual’s race and racial group membership
(O’Connor, Brooks-Gunn, & Graber, 2000; Stevenson et al., 2002). On the other hand, others
have focused on racial socialization protective factors and define racial socialization as the
process of fostering a sense of racial pride and enhancing an individual’s ability to cope in
negative race-related experiences (Bowman & Howard, 1985; Demo & Hughes, 1990;
Stevenson, 1994, 1995). The inconsistency of the operationalization of racial socialization
makes it difficult to integrate findings across studies. Fatimilehin (1999) wrote, “The lack of
agreement in terms of the boundaries of the definition is reflected in the diversity of ways in
32
which it has been measured. This makes it difficult to compare the few studies that have been
published” (p. 307). Therefore, many of the early studies (Bowman & Howard, 1985; Hughes &
Chen, 1997; Marshall, 1995; Peters, 1985; Thornton et al., 1990) of racial socialization were
qualitative in nature. Although informative, using qualitative approaches to analyze racial
socialization messages can result in wide variability (Barr, 2010). Hence, there being a need for
quantitative measures of racial socialization. A review of such measures shows that some
measures assess parent (or adolescent) attitudes and values (Stevenson, 1994, 1995), while other
measures assess parents’ behaviors and practices (Hughes & Chen, 1997).
Beyond measurement issues, the majority of racial socialization studies have been
conducted with participants during childhood and adolescence; very few studies have examined
racial socialization across the lifespan. Since race-related messages are also dependent on the
recipient’s age (Hughes & Johnson, 2001; Lesane-Brown, 2006; Stevenson & Renard, 1993),
young adults are expected to receive different messages than younger children. Arnett (2007)
contended that the goals of racial socialization in emerging adulthood involve the acquisition of
cultural norms, beliefs, and values from various agents. There is a limited understanding of how
the unique experiences of emerging adults in college contribute to the relationship between racial
socialization several outcome variables (e.g., academic achievement, resilience).
Resilience
A growing body of literature supports the idea that resilience is a critical aspect of
promoting academic achievement (Gayles, 2005; Masten & Coatsworth, 1995; McClendon,
Nettles, & Wigfield, 2000; Toldson, 2008). Nettles et al. (2000) described resilience in relation
to education as a student’s ability to overcome academic setbacks, discrimination, stress, and
pressure associated with school. Masten and Coatsworth (1995) defined resilience as the ability
33
to achieve and develop in the face of significant challenges. Essentially, resilience provides the
basis for academic success despite adverse conditions, such as poverty, homelessness, or abuse.
Reis, Colbert, and Herbert (2005) postulate that it is important to study resilience because it may
be used to explain why some students excel academically, even though they encounter many
environmental or psychological barriers. There is a dearth of literature on the influence of
resilience on academic achievement of college students. Most studies on academic-related
resilience sampled either elementary students (kindergarten through eighth grade) or high school
students and focus on the factors associated with promoting academic resilience. For instance,
social support (including support from parents, teachers and peers) is the most cited factor that
fosters resilience as it relates to academic achievement (Condly, 2006; Crosnoe & Elder, 2004;
McClendon et al., 2000; McGill, 1997; Reis et al., 2005). Also, no studies that sampled college
students were found in a review of PsycInfo databases and Google search. For these reasons, this
section will include a review of seminal studies and often cited studies that examine resilience in
relation to achievement in kindergarten through 12th grade. Because many of the studies are
similar in nature, only those published in the past fifteen years and make a significant
contribution to the understanding of the relationship between resilience and achievement of
college students will be reviewed.
Resilience and Academic Achievement
Qualitative Research. Most of the research in this area has focused on comparing
resilient and nonresilient students; one such study was conducted by Reis et al. (2005). The
researchers used qualitative methods to better understand the factors that contribute to the
resilience of academically talented students who achieve in school as compared to those of
similar ability who do not achieve. Participants were 35 first and second year high school
34
students, who were identified by their guidance counselor as high ability students. For three
years, the researchers collected data on the participants. At the conclusion of the study, roughly
half of the participants (N=17) had become underachievers; 18 of the participants had developed
resilience and continued to excel academically. Thematic analysis of the data collected indicated
that the following protective factors were linked to academic achievement: (a) belief in self, (b)
personal characteristics (i.e., appreciation of cultural diversity), (c) support systems (i.e. high
achieving students, family support), (d) participation in special programs, and (e) challenging
advanced classes. On the other hand, the underachieving students experienced several risk
factors that may have contributed to their low performance in school, such as: (a) inappropriate
early curricular experiences (i.e., classes being boring or not matching learning style), (b)
absence of opportunities to develop appropriate school work habits, (c) negative interactions
with teachers, and (d) difficulty establishing positive peer relationships. In sum, the students
who were successful demonstrated resilience, they were able to tap into protective factors and
thrive in the presence of stress and challenging circumstances (Reis et al., 2005).
Another major line of research in this area has focused on what prompts individuals to
demonstrate academic resilience. Gayles (2005) examined academic achievement perceptions of
three high achieving Black men living in a low SES neighborhood. Specifically, Gayles was
interested in the meaning the participants attached to academic achievement. Data was collected
over a 12-month period and deduced into two sources of academic resilience: distant and
diminished achievement and utilitarian achievement. Distant and diminished achievement refers
to the ability to downplay academic success; the participants stated that they diminished their
achievement in order to meet the expectations of their cultural environment (i.e. acting White
phenomenon). However, their belief in utilitarian value of achievement fostered a sense that
35
education was needed to succeed and was related to future life expectations (Gayles, 2005). The
researcher contends that the participants displayed resilience by excelling academically despite
the fact that academic success stood in opposition to commonly held expectations of their peer
group and community factors. The participants’ academic resilience was reflected by their
academic persistence and high achievement in the face of obstacles.
The studies described above illustrate the growing body of research on resilience and
academic achievement. The two studies provide a better understanding of the relationship
between resilience and academic achievement. It appears that resilience not only serves as a
buffer against negative academic-related experiences, but can also promote positive educational
outcomes, such as academic achievement. However, further research is needed in order to
determine the relationship between resilience and academic achievement. As with most
qualitative research, the aforementioned studies provide a context and narrative for
understanding resilience as it relates to academic success, but does not describe the nature of the
relationship between the two variables. Another concern common to qualitative methodology, is
the lack of generalizability of the findings. It is unknown whether the samples of the two studies
(35 & 3, respectively) represent the experiences of the majority of Black students.
Quantitative Research. Nettles et al. (2000) sought to understand academic resilience
by examining the role of social support in buffering Black students from the negative effects of
exposure to violence on their achievement. The participants were 35 students in Grade 4 and 39
students in Grade 5. The participants were asked to complete four measures: (a) Social Support
Appraisal Scale–Revised (Dubow & Ullman, 1989), (b) Life Events and Circumstances Scale
(Pryor-Brown & Cowen, 1989), (c) Exposure subscale of the Perceptions of Environmental
Violence Scale (Hill, 1991), and (d) Stanford Achievement Test Series (Stanford 9).
36
Correlations were computed for all study variables and showed that perceived exposure to
violence was negatively related to reading and math scores. A regression analysis was
conducted to assess the contribution of stressful life events, social support and exposure to
violence on academic performance. Exposure to violence had a statistically significant negative
influence on math and reading scores and social support was positively correlated to math scores
only. Nettles and colleagues concluded that social support is an important social resource that
can benefit students regardless of risk factors and levels of stress. The authors cited their results
as evidence for an increase in the social support available to the students and their families. The
study’s findings are consistent with several studies that examined the relationship between
resilience, achievement, and other social correlates (Borman & Overman, 2004; Hawkins,
Royster & Braddock, 1992; Toldson, 2008).
Although the study does add to the growing body of literature on resilience and
achievement and extend on previous literature, there are several limitations to the study. First,
the study included only 74 participants. A small sample size may not be representative of the
population and result in little statistical power. Additionally, the authors’ conclusions do not
match the results of the research study. As noted above the authors concluded that their results
indicated that social support is likely to buffer against life stressors and predict math
achievement. However, the relationship between social support and math scores was not
statistically significant. It is possible that if the sample size was larger, a statistically significant
relationship could have been found; yet as the study stands the authors’ conclusions were not
supported by the data.
Cunningham and Swanson (2010) explored the influence of several social correlates on
the association between academic resilience and achievement in 206 Black high school students.
37
Participants were given the following measures: (a) Stressful Events Scale (Coddington, 1972),
(b) Children's Hassles Scale (Kanner, Feldman, Weinberg &, Ford,1987), (c) HARE Self-Esteem
Scale (Hare, 1977), (d) questions on social support, (e) Future Expectation Scale (Spencer,
1989), and (f) self-reported GPAs. To determine the factors associated with academic resilience,
several correlations were computed. Cunningham and Swanson (2010) found that resilient
students tended to have high self-esteem, strong familial relationships, a high degree of parental
monitoring, and positive future life expectations. Unlike previously studies, the researchers did
not find a statistically significant relationship between social support and resilience. However,
the researchers acknowledge that this may be due to the instrument used to assess social support.
The measure of social support only asked questions about school support, advice and guidance
given by teachers, school administrators, and extracurricular activity coaches.
The study highlights an important relationship between academic-related resilience and
several key factors; however, there were several limitations to the study. One limitation to the
study was that there was limited variation in the sample. Roughly 80% of the participants stated
that they intended pursuing degrees of higher education. Also, the study consisted of nearly
twice as many females than males. Considering that males and females are likely to experience
school differently (Slaughter-Defoe & Rubin, 2001), there is a need for a more representative
sample.
These studies are representative of scholarly inquiry into the relationship between
resilience and achievement in students in kindergarten through 12th grade. More importantly,
they advance the study of resilience by focusing specifically on the strengths and not the “risks”
of academic achieving Black students. On the other hand, many of these studies portray urban
communities as sites of pathologies that compromise the academic potential of Black students.
38
These studies would benefit from gaining a holistic conceptualization of resilience that views
resilience as a product of the interactions between individuals, families, communities and schools
(Boyden & Mann, 2005; Lerner & Benson, 2003; Luthar, 2003; Rutter, 2005). Moreover, most
of the current research on resilience and academic achievement has focused predominantly on
students of color from low-income families and have primarily examined the role resilience
plays in promoting academic achievement while buffering against sociological factors (e.g., SES,
exposure to violence). To date, there has been no inquiry into whether resilience is able to
promote achievement while buffering against psychological factors, racial discrimination, and
other factors that impact achievement for Black students.
Influences of Resilience
Theoretical and conceptual work in the area of resilience has hypothesized that there are
factors that can be altered to facilitate resilience among students. Masten (1994), for example,
described four strategies for fostering resilience, including reducing vulnerability and risk,
reducing stressors, increasing available resources, and mobilizing protective processes. Utsey et
al. (2007) asserted that further research is needed to understand the predictors of resilience for
the Black college student and this could be remedied by examining factors that promote
academic resilience. A potentially important precursor of academic resilience is racial
socialization. As previously noted, research (D. Brown, 2008; Brown & Tylka, 2010; Miller &
Macintosh, 1999) suggests that there is a link between racial socialization and resilience.
Summary
Research on racial disparities in academic performance is plentiful. However, there is a
dearth of literature that examines variables that may reduce barriers and promote academic
achievement. Racial socialization, for example, can buffer against negative outcomes (Demo &
39
Hughes, 1990; Fischer & Shaw, 1999; Neblett, Terzian & Harriott, 2010) and promote positive
outcomes (Miller, 1999; Prelow Mosher & Bowman, 2006)). There is a considerable amount of
support that racial socialization is linked to academic achievement (Bowman & Howard, 1995;
Marshall, 1995; Neblett et al., 2006) and promotes resilience (D. Brown, 2008; Brown & Tylka,
2010; Miller & Macintosh, 1999). Therefore, it is important for researchers to understand the
factors that direct those relationships in order to recognize and remove barriers in achievement.
Put differently, further research is needed on the factors that positively impact the academic
performance of Black college students. The proposed study aligns well with this logic and will
examine factors that contribute to the association between racial socialization and academic
achievement. An exhaustive review of the literature did not reveal any quantitative studies that
examined the possible relationships between racial socialization, resilience, and achievement.
Therefore, racial socialization, resilience, and academic achievement should be studied
simultaneously to gain greater insight regarding the academic experiences and outcomes of
Black emerging adults.
40
CHAPTER III
METHOD
Participants
Participants initially consisted of 426 college students attending a large,
predominately White university in the Midwest. However, 77 individuals were removed from
the sample for the following reasons: (a) took over an hour to complete the measures, (b) did not
reside in the United States for at least five years, (c) asked several questions during the
administration, (d) did not give the researcher permission to obtain their official GPAs, and (e)
more than 40% missing data. The Results section contains further information about the removal
of cases due to missing data. The final sample size was 349 students. Participant characteristic
frequencies are detailed in Table 1.
Of the 349 participants, 228 (65%) identified as female, 112 identified as male (32%),
and 9 (2 %) did not denote their gender. The majority of participants identified as Black/African
American (n = 311; 89%), followed by Multiracial (n = 22; 6%), African (n = 7; 2%), West
Indian (n = 3; 1%), Hispanic Black (n = 3; 1%), and Other (n = 2; > 1%). Participants’ age
ranged from 17 to 48 (M = 20.41 and SD = 2.81). The majority indicated that they were U.S.
citizens (n = 345; 99%), while the other 1% indicated their status as U.S. permanent residents.
Regarding their academic status, participants were in the following academic levels: (a)
Freshman (n = 86; 25%); (b) Sophomore (n = 80; 23%); (c) Junior (n = 87; 25%); (d) Senior (n =
60; 17%); (e) Fifth Year (n = 33; 9%), and (f) Other (n = 2; >1%). The majority of the
participants identified as Christian (n = 296; 85%); 15 (4%) identified as either Agnostic,
Atheist, or denoted “None/No religion”; 1 (>1%) identified as Muslim, 1 (>1%) identified as
Buddhist, 8 (2%) identified as “Other,” and 28 (8%) participants did not answer the question.
Most participants reported their family socioeconomic status (SES) as middle class (n = 159;
46%), 118 (34%) indicated working class, 38 (11%) upper middle class, 32 (9%) poor, and 2
41
(>1%) did not answer. Participants primarily identified living in majority Black communities
(170; 49%), followed by racially mixed (92; 26%) and mostly White (79; 23%) areas; however,
7 participants (2%) described their community composition as other. The majority of
participants (180; 52%) attended high schools with a majority Black population. Conversely, 91
(26%) participants attended racially mixed high schools, 71 (20%) attended majority White
schools, 4 (1%) described their high school racial composition as other, and 3 (>1%) did not
respond to the question.
Table 1
Participant Characteristics
Category
Frequency
Percentage
228
112
65%
32%
311
22
7
3
3
2
89%
6%
2%
1%
1%
>1%
5
77
60
62
56
51
15
11
12
1%
22%
17%
18%
16%
15%
4%
3%
4%
345
4
99%
1%
Gender
Female
Male
Race/Ethnicity
Black/African American
Multiracial
African
West Indian
Hispanic Black
Other
Age
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25 and above
Citizenship
U.S. citizens
U.S. permanent residents
42
Table 1 – Continued
Category
Academic Status
Freshman
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
Fifth Year
Other
Frequency
Percentage
86
80
87
60
33
2
25%
23%
25%
17%
9%
>1%
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Agnostic/Atheist/None
Muslim
Buddhist
Other
No response
296
15
1
1
8
28
85%
4%
>1%
>1%
2.3%
8%
Social Economic Status
Poor
Working Class
Middle Class
Upper Middle
Wealthy
No response
32
118
159
38
0
2
9%
34%
46%
11%
0
>1%
Racial Makeup of Community
Mostly Black
Racially Mixed
Mostly White
Other
170
92
79
7
49%
26%
23%
2%
180
91
71
4
3
52%
26%
20%
1%
>1%
Racial Makeup of High School
Mostly Black
Racially Mixed
Mostly White
Other
No response
Note. N = 349
Measures
Demographic information. Participants were asked to indicate their gender, age, grade
level, current GPA, socioeconomic status, parents’ educational level and religious affiliation.
Participants were also asked to provide information about their race/ethnicity. If participants
were not born in the U.S., information about their country of birth and the number of years lived
in the U.S. was requested.
43
Academic Achievement. Participant's official grade point average (GPA) was used as
the indicator of academic success. GPAs were calculated on a 4.0 scale and range from 0.0
(failing) to 4.0 (outstanding) and are based on letters grades (A, BA, B, CB, C, DC, D, and E).
Specifically, letter grades are categorized as the following: (a) A (4.0), (b) BA (3.5), (c) B (3.0),
(d) CB (2.5), (e) C (2.0), (f) DC (1.5), (g) D (1.0), and (h) E (0.0).
Cultural and Racial Experiences of Socialization Scale (CARES). The CARES,
developed by Bentley-Edwards and Stevenson (2013), consists of revisions of previous measures
of racial socialization developed by Stevenson (Stevenson, 1994; Stevenson, 2002). The scale is
one of the few measures of racial socialization that examines the frequency of specific racerelated messages transmitted and the source of those messages. Another unique feature of the
CARES is that it includes negative socialization messages (e.g. racial stereotyping). The
CARES consists of two instruments: the CARES-Frequency (CARES-F), which is administered
to adolescents and college students to gauge their socialization experience, and the optional
CARES-Informant (CARES-I). The CARES consists of 35-items and five-factors.
For the purpose of this study, both the CARES-F and CARES-I was used to explore the breadth
and depth of racial socialization experiences and measure the frequency, content, and source of
race-related socialization messages.
Participants first rated on a 3-point scale how often they received certain race-related
messages (not at all, sometimes, or all of the time) as well as the source of the message (Mother,
Father, Grandparent, Teacher/Professor, Sibling, Other Adult, Peers, Media, or No One Told
Me This). The overall CARES yielded several scores. The scores were added together for each
source for both a composite source-specific score (e.g. Mother-CARES, Father-CARES,
Grandparent-CARES). Factor-specific source score (e.g. Mother-Racial Protection, Mother-
44
Racial Stereotyping, Mother-Cultural Insights, Mother-Old School Basics and Mother-Bicultural
Coping) can also be calculated. To determine frequency of racial socialization, all of the items
are added together to create an overall frequency score. For each subscale, scores of all
corresponding items were added to create a total subscale score. Items were keyed in a positive
direction; thus a high global score on the CARES indicated a high frequency of racial
socialization in the respective area.
The five scales of the CARES-F correspond to different types of racial socialization
messages and capture unique aspects of the racial socialization process. Racial Protection
messages (10 items; α = .82) focus on promoting an awareness of racism, coping strategies, and
racial affirmations. Cultural Insights messages (4 items; α = .64) focus on providing information
about family support, spirituality, heritage and practical knowledge. Racial Stereotyping
messages (10 items; α = .79) focus on conveying negative perceptions about Black people.
Bicultural Coping messages (5 items; α = .66) focuses on providing strategies for interacting
with the dominant society (e.g. code switching, assimilation). Old School Basics messages (6
items; α = .68) focus on promoting racial clichés and post-racial view of 1960’s.
Bentley-Edwards and Stevenson (2013) report that the CARES-F has a high composite
reliability for its scores (α = .89). As noted above, the reliability estimates for the scores of the
subscales range from .64 to .82. Due to the fact that the 35-item CARES was recently
developed, there is currently no further reliability or validity information available. BentleyEdwards and Stevenson (2013) stated that the measure has been disseminated to adolescents and
college students and results from a validation study of 373 college students are pending.
However, the authors conducted a principal component analysis using an oblimin rotation, which
45
was found to support a five solution model and account for 43% of the variance (BentleyEdwards & Stevenson, 2013).
Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). The CD-RISC was selected due to its
ability to measure resilience in nonclinical populations, highlight the skills necessary for
effective problem solving, and pinpoint the strength that can arise from a stressful situation (e.g.,
school; Brown & Tylka, 2011). The measure was developed by Connor and Davidson (2003)
and is used to measure the presence of internal protective factors, resilience, defined as "the
personal qualities that enable one to thrive in the face of adversity" (p. 76). The measure
contains 25-items and item responses range from 0 (rarely true) to 4 (nearly true all the time).
The total scale score ranges from 0 to 100. A high score indicates a greater level of resilience.
The CD-RISC contains the following five factors: (a) competence, high standards, and tenacity
(8 items); (b) trust in one's instincts and tolerance of negative emotion (7 items); (c) positive
acceptance of change, including the ability to maintain secure relationships (5 items); (d) control
over one's life (3 items); and (e) sense of spirituality (2 items).
Recently, the factor structure of the CD-RISC has been called into question. CampbellSills and Stein (2007) conducted an exploratory factor analysis and failed to identify the factor
structure of the 25-item CD-RISC in two undergraduate samples (n = 500). However, Ahern,
Kiehl, Sole, and Byers (2006) conducted an exploratory factor analysis and found support for the
structure of the CD-RISC. Despite the need to further validate the factor structure of CD-RISC;
Campbell-Sills and Stein note that as a whole the scale has demonstrated good psychometric
properties based on the high reliability and validity of the CD-RISC scores. Researchers (Ahern,
Kiehl, Sole, & Byers, 2006; Brown, 2008; Steinhardt, Mamerow, Brown, & Jolly, 2009)
recommend using the total score, which range from 0 to 100, as opposed to the subscale scores.
46
Connor and Davidson (2003) reported an internal reliability coefficient of .89 for the
scores. Brown and Tylka (2011) reported test-retest reliability .87 for the scores, which was
obtained after two consecutive clinical visits. The authors did not note the time period between
the samples. As a measure of convergent validity, the CD-RISC has been positively correlated
with Kobasa's (1979) hardiness measure (r = .83) and Rosenberg's (1965) self-esteem measure (r
= .88). Additionally, Campbell-Sills, Cohan, and Stein (2007) noted that the CD-RISC has been
positively correlated with the NEO Five Factor Inventory subscales of extroversion (r = .19),
openness (r = .39), agreeableness (r = .35), consciousness (r = .20), and negatively correlated
with neuroticism (r = -.16).
The CD-RISC was originally developed with a predominantly White sample, but Brown
and Tylka noted that the measure has been found to have sound psychometric properties with
African American samples, with a coefficient alpha of .92 for the scores in a sample of African
American college students. To date, the psychometric properties of the CD-RISC have not been
validated among African Americans.
Procedures
This study was part of a larger study examining the link between social attitudes,
socialization, and academic success in African American college students. The study was
conducted during the Fall 2014 semester. Once approval was granted from the Human Subjects
Institutional Review Board to proceed with the study, participants were recruited from the
population of Black/African American matriculated students. In order to be included in the
study, students had to meet the following criteria: (a) identify as being of Black/African descent,
(b) be classified by the University as an undergraduate student, and (c) have lived in the United
States for a minimum of five years. Students who did not meet the above mentioned criteria
47
were excluded from the study. The achievement gap in education and academic success has
been a long-standing concern for African American undergraduate students. Thus, the study
focused solely on this population because neither a global nor a comparative approach would
allow for a better understanding of the academic issues Black undergraduate students experience.
Participants were recruited through multiple means, which included: (a) distributing flyers and
handbills; (b) soliciting participation from registered student organizations (RSO) with a
majority of Black membership (e.g. fraternities/sororities, Black Student Union); and (d) sending
emails to African American students and asking them to forward it to other African American
undergraduates (snowball effect).
Prior to beginning the survey, participants were given an overview and purpose of the
study, reminded that participation is voluntary, asked to read and sign the informed consent, and
that the information they provided would be kept confidential. Students were also asked to give
the researcher permission to access their official GPA. Once all consents were signed, students
were asked to complete several paper-pencil questionnaires, which included: (a) demographics,
(b) the Cultural and Racial Experiences of Socialization Scale, and (c) the Connor-David
Resilience Scale. The questionnaires were administered in random order to minimize sequence
effect. On average, the total survey time ranged from 30 to 60 minutes. As an incentive,
participants were compensated $10 for their participation in the study.
48
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
Preliminary Data Analysis
To ensure the accuracy of the data, several steps were conducted prior to testing the
hypotheses. The data was first checked to ensure that all values were within the expected range
and then double-checked to identify potential data entry errors and ensure integrity. To complete
this task, a random sampling of 25% of the data was extracted and compared to the data entered
into SPSS. There were some discrepancies identified, particularly in the CARES, so all 426
completed CARES were rechecked. All categorical variables were dummy coded to be able to
run regression analyses. In addition, the data was then assessed for missing values, outliers, and
assumptions of linear regression (e.g., normality, linearity, homoscedasticity, multicollinearity)
were tested. Reliability estimates of scores and bivariate correlations were then examined.
Missing Values. An analysis of missing data was conducted on the CARES-F and the
CD-RISC. For all items, less than 1% of data points were missing and there was no identifiable
trend in the missing data. The Little’s Missing Completely At Random (MCAR) test was
conducted to determine if missing values were randomly missing. The Little's MCAR test was
not statistically significant, (χ2 (5742, N = 360) = 5506.61, p >.05), indicating that the data are
likely missing at random. For each missing data point, cases were analyzed by gender, race, and
SES and no statistically significant difference were found based on the demographic variables
listed above. Ultimately, cases with more than 20 % missing data were removed from the
sample (n = 11) and missing data were imputed using the expectation maximum algorithm.
Once there was no missing data, the data was examined for extreme values by testing for
outliers.
49
Outliers. Outliers were checked at the univariate level (for the CD-RISC) and at the
multivariate level (for the CARES). One case with a z-score equal to or greater than ǀ3.3ǀ (p =
.001) was deleted from the CD-RISC. Using the Mahalanobis distance test (Tabachnick &
Fidell, 1996), 16 multivariate outliers were identified and deleted from the CARES. Thus,
resulting in a final sample size of 332.
Assumptions of Linear Regression. Linearity tests whether the relationship between
the predictor and outcome variables is linear. Violations of linearity can lead to incorrect
predictions about the regression coefficients. Homoscedasticity describes occurrences in which
the random error is the same across all values of the predictor variables. Violations of
homoscedasticity can lead to standard errors that are biased and lead to incorrect conclusions
about the significance of the regression coefficients. Normality requires that all variables are
multivariate normal. Violations of normality can lead to problems determining whether
regression coefficients are statistically significant different from zero and calculating confidence
intervals. Multicollinearity explores whether the predictor variables are independent of each
other. Violation of multicollinearity can increase the variance of the coefficient estimates and
make the estimates sensitive to minor changes in the model (Keith, 2006).
Linearity and homoscedasticity assumptions of scores of the CARES and CD-RISC were
tested visual inspection of scatterplots. The skewness and kurtosis of each variable was
examined. Scores with values greater than 2 were considered skewed and score with values
greater than 7 were considered kurtotic (Fabrigar, Wegener, MacCallum, & Strahan, 1999). The
skewness and kurtosis of scores fell within the normal to moderate range for the CD-RISC and
CARES. Multicollinearity assumption was assessed by examining the correlation matrix to
ensure that Pearson's Bivariate Correlation of items on the same subscale were less than 1. The
50
highest intercorrelation was .416 between Items 1 and 3 on the CARES Racial Protection
subscales. The variance inflation factor (VIF) values were also checked. No variable had a VIF
greater than 10.
Reliability Estimates
The reliability estimates of the scores for all measures are listed in Table 2. Scores for
the CARES-I and CD-RISC met the standard cutoff criteria of .70 (Nunnally, 1978; McAllister
& Bigley, 2002). However, the reliability estimate of scores for the CARES-F Old School
Basics, Bicultural Coping, and Cultural Insight were less than .70. Low reliability (Cronbach’s
alpha below .70) is a characteristic of CARES scores; in the creation of the original measure
Bentley-Edwards and Stevenson (2013) noted that the reliability of the scores of the CARES-F
Old School Basics, Bicultural Coping, and Cultural Insight were .68, .66, and .64, respectively.
Thus, the analysis using the CARES-F Old School Basics, Bicultural Coping, and Cultural
Insight subscales should be interpreted with caution.
Table 2
Reliability Estimates (Cronbach’s α) of Scale Scores
Scale
Cronbach’s α
Cultural and Racial Experiences of Socialization Scale-Frequency (CARES-F)
Racial Protection
.75
Racial Stereotyping
.78
Old School Basics
.48
Bicultural Coping
.60
Cultural Insight
.56
Cultural and Racial Experiences of Socialization Scale- Informant (CARES-I)
Parents
.88
Grandparent
.89
Sibling
.87
Teacher
.85
Friends
.88
Media
.89
Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC)
.90
Note. N = 330. Reliability estimates in bold did not meet standard cutoff criteria of .70.
51
Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics, including means, standard deviations and bivariate correlations,
were computed for all of the study variables and are presented in Table 3. In terms of practical
significance (r > .32) on the CARES-F, all five factors (Racial Protection, Racial Stereotyping,
Old School Basics, Bicultural Coping, & Cultural Insight) had a positive relation to each other.
On the CARES-I, Parents was positively correlated with Grandparent, Sibling, Teacher, and
Friends. Grandparents had a positive relation with Sibling and Teacher. Sibling was correlated
positively with Teacher, Friend, and Media. Teacher was positively correlated with Friend and
Media. Friend had a positive relation with Media.
A one-way ANOVA was used to compare differences among participants using the
demographic variables of gender and family socioeconomic status, to determine if either variable
led to significant differences in racial socialization. Results of the one-way ANOVA on gender
indicated that there was no significant difference between gender and overall racial socialization,
F(1, 338) = .379 p > .05.
Hypothesis 1: Racial socialization provided by teachers and friends will be related to
academic achievement.
A hierarchical multiple regression analysis was used to test if there was a statistically
significant relationship between overall racial socialization messages provided by various
sources (e.g., parents, grandparent, sibling, teacher, friend & media) and GPA. Table 4 provides
the results of the multiple regression analysis where source of racial socialization messages was
entered as the predictor variables. Demographic variables (i.e., age, gender,
52
Table 3
Descriptive Statistics, Correlations, Means, and Standard Deviations
1
Variables
GPA
1
-
2
2
Gender
.04
-
3
Age
.08
4
Family SES
-.02
-.12*
.05
5
Resilience
6
Racial Protection
-.11*
.00
7
Racial Stereotyping
8
Old School Basics
9
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
-
53
-.08
-.23**
-.05
.03
-
-.03
.11*
-.06
.06
-.02
.18**
-.08
.13*
-.07
.55**
-
.05
.01
.13*
-.08
.05
.61**
.52**
-
Bicultural Coping
.06
-.02
-.07
-.07
.51**
.64**
.49**
-
10
Cultural Insight
-.06
-.09
.16**
.01
.05
**
**
**
11
Parent_RACPROT
-.07
.03
12
Parent_RACST
-.03
-.14*
-.03
13
Parent_OLDSCB
-.03
14
Parent_BICULT
15
Parent_CULTRL
16
Grandparent_RACPROT
17
Grandparent_RACST
-.14*
-.03
18
Grandparent_OLDSCB
19
Grandparent_BICULT
20
Grandparent_CULTRLIN
-
.17
.53
.34
.50**
.43**
-
.13*
-.07
.60**
.26**
.33**
.29**
.38**
-
.03
.16**
-.05
**
.40
**
.49
**
.32
**
.50
.29**
.47**
-
-.07
-.03
.11
.05
.36**
.19**
.51**
.27**
.34**
.61**
.43**
-
.00
-.04
.04
.03
-.09
.36**
.36**
.28**
.58**
.31**
.46**
.57**
.44**
-
-.07
-.13*
-.07
.04
.15**
.11*
.34**
.19**
.32**
.65**
.65**
.37**
.57**
.41**
-
-.09
.12*
.25**
.37**
.54**
.29**
.36**
.31**
.42**
-
.00
.11*
-.07
.44**
-.03
.15**
-.06
.27**
.11
.30**
.19**
.31**
.60**
.27**
.41**
.27**
.51**
-
.00
-.08
.09
.06
.27**
.38**
.32**
.10
.27**
-.11*
.33**
.10
.29**
.38**
.24**
.54**
.28**
.36**
.71**
.44**
-
-.11*
-.09
-.04
-.03
.02
-.03
.30**
.23**
.20**
.44**
.32**
.35**
.44**
.31**
.63**
.29**
.49**
.58**
.40**
-
-.09
-.08
.11*
.23**
.19**
.58**
.41**
.32**
.37**
.34**
.61**
.67**
.44**
.56**
.39**
-
21
Sibling_RACPROT
.03
-.11
.03
.14**
-.02
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
22
Sibling_RACST
-.01
.00
.03
-.09
23
Sibling_OLDSCB
.02
.02
-.01
-.04
.06
.25
.21
.29
.19
.12
.22
.27
.35
.18
.17
24
Sibling_BICULT
.04
-.02
.08
-.05
-.02
.26**
.30**
.27**
.39**
.17**
.25**
.37**
.32**
.41**
25
Sibling_CULTRLIN
.00
-.10
.08
-.01
.00
.26**
.19**
.29**
.21**
.33**
.29**
.18**
.32**
26
Teacher_RACPROT
-.06
-.07
.00
.07
.45**
.24**
.20**
.17**
.25**
.34**
.26**
27
Teacher_RACST
-.10
-.12*
-.02
-.01
-.02
-.04
.26**
.38**
.19**
.33**
.16**
.24**
28
Teacher_OLDSCB
-.03
.02
-.05
-.04
.01
.24**
.23**
.35**
.23**
.21**
29
Teacher_BICULT
-.02
.06
-.04
.04
-.01
.25**
.37**
.28**
.53**
30
Teacher_CULTRLIN
-.13*
.04
.00
.08
.25**
.17**
.19**
31
Friend_RACPROT
.16**
-.14*
-.07
-.04
-.02
.49**
.35**
32
Friend_RACST
*
.13
.00
.14*
.08
.01
*
**
33
Friend_OLDSCB
.13*
-.06
.14*
-.02
-.12
.00
**
34
Friend_BICULT
*
**
.16
-.06
-.05
.29
.41
.35
.57
.23
.17
.34
.21
.34
35
Friend_CULTRLIN
.13
.06
-.08
-.10
.27**
.19**
.31**
.25**
.11
.04
-.07
.32**
.29**
.18**
.19**
.36**
.02
.20**
Media_RACPROT
-.11*
.07
-.01
36
.15**
.02
.12*
.07
.18**
.04
.14*
-.01
37
Media_RACST
.01
.11*
.00
-.10
.36**
.74**
.39**
.45**
.16**
.08
Media_OLDSCB
-.02
.11*
-.09
-.05
.27**
.36**
.41**
.25**
.14*
.14*
.09
.28**
38
.15**
.10
.12*
39
Media_BICULT
.09
-.01
-.10
-.05
.35**
.57**
.39**
.71**
.23**
40
Media_CULTRLIN
.06
-.02
.16**
.04
.35**
7.32
.22**
.07
1.96
.15** .29**
.00 .38**
-.03 .27**
**
**
.24
.28
.22
.23
.45
.30
.35
.19
.30
.29
.26
.20
.21**
.21**
-
.44**
.26**
.39**
.14**
.27**
.55**
.31**
.36**
.20**
.19**
.41**
.20**
.33**
.54**
-
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
.63**
.54**
.18
.22
.14
.20**
.16
.11
.16**
.11
.25**
.15**
.26**
.11*
.46**
.52**
.17**
.43**
.18**
.18**
.17**
.17**
.26**
.63**
.33**
.22**
.12*
.19**
.32**
.26**
.19**
.24**
.19**
.40**
.33**
.49**
.28**
.38**
.18**
.21**
.42**
.19**
.34**
.17**
.28**
.42**
.22**
.25**
.37**
.26**
.20**
.22**
.27**
.32**
.27**
.11*
.37**
.40**
.21**
.19**
.41**
.31**
.38**
.14*
.14*
.31**
.21**
.42**
.15**
.30**
.39**
.19**
.33**
.19**
.15**
.16**
.11*
.22**
.19**
.19**
.15**
.20**
.20**
.28**
.22**
.34**
.33**
.24**
.35**
.21**
.27**
.18**
.22**
.27**
.19**
.18**
.18**
.45**
.29**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
.14*
.10
**
.26
.46**
.00
.35**
.27**
.09
**
.29
.41**
.33**
.15**
.24**
.21**
.28
.59
.33
.38
.28**
.30**
.41**
.25**
**
**
**
**
M
2.71
-
20.41 -
.23** .24** .23** .24**
79.37 23.13 19.58 11.65 7.30
SD
.65
-
2.81
11.94 3.74
-.01
-
.02
2.24
2.31
1.98
*
.15
.08
**
.20
.36
.21
.22**
.19**
.25**
**
**
**
.25
.08
**
.16
.10
**
*
.14
.06
.23
.09
**
.16
.09
.18
.03
**
.15
.08
.20
.10
.28**
.01
.11*
.09
.13*
.06
.08
.20
.08
.01
.02
.15**
-.07
.08
.02
.09
.00
.18**
.31**
.05
.00
.17**
.04
-.01
.08
.20**
.06
.02
.02
-.03
.21**
.23**
.35**
.05
.20**
.02
.27**
.06
.23**
.01
.03
.27**
.30**
-.01
-.06
.19**
.04
.09
.02
8.23
2.55
2.98
.86
.13*
2.03
.19**
.01
4.08
1.12
1.71
.36
1.15
.21**
1.90
.13*
.97
4.79
2.98
2.16
1.39
1.94
2.95
1.61
1.38
.68
1.16
2.19
1.51
.15**
Table 3 – Continued
Variables
GPA
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Gender
Age
Family SES
Res ilience
Racial Protection
Racial Stereotyping
Old School Bas ics
Bicultural Coping
Cultural Ins ight
Parent_RACPROT
Parent_RACST
Parent_OLDSCB
Parent_BICULT
Parent_CULTRL
Grandparent_RACPROT
Grandparent_RACST
Grandparent_OLDSCB
54
Grandparent_BICULT
Grandparent_CULTRLIN
Sibling_RACPROT
Sibling_RACST
Sibling_OLDSCB
-
Sibling_BICULT
.36**
-
Sibling_CULTRLIN
.48**
.33**
-
Teacher_RACPROT
.28**
.13*
.21**
-
Teacher_RACST
.25**
.30**
.24**
.43**
-
**
**
**
Teacher_OLDSCB
.45
.29
.36
.56**
.47**
-
Teacher_BICULT
.27**
.38**
.26**
.27**
.43**
.37**
-
**
**
**
Teacher_CULTRLIN
.20
.11
.33
.60
.35
.53**
.22**
-
Friend_RACPROT
.35**
.31**
.34**
.50**
.23**
.36**
.27**
.31**
-
Friend_RACST
.26**
.33**
.20**
.34**
.37**
.33**
.34**
.26**
.59**
-
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
*
Friend_OLDSCB
.42
.27
.30
.33
.26
.42
.25
.31
.64**
.51**
-
Friend_BICULT
.30**
.44**
.23**
.20**
.22**
.24**
.36**
.17**
.52**
.51**
.42**
-
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
Friend_CULTRLIN
.21
Media_RACPROT
Media_RACST
.48
.08
.29
.19**
.23
.09
.15**
.25**
.10
**
**
.39
.59
.35
.50**
.37**
-
.20**
.21
.08
.17**
.45**
.25**
.28**
.25**
.25**
-
.21**
.29**
.20**
.38**
.49**
.32**
.35**
.20**
.54**
-
**
**
**
**
**
**
.35
.39**
.19
.06
.30**
.27**
Media_OLDSCB
.24
.16
.19
.29
.13
.31
.13
.26
.44
.32
.46
.31
.36
.63**
.61**
-
Media_BICULT
.18**
.32**
.24**
.22**
.30**
.28**
.46**
.18**
.38**
.39**
.34**
.47**
.31**
.40**
.58**
.47**
-
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
Media_CULTRLIN
**
**
*
*
**
*
.19
.19
.21
.29
.29
3.21
.12
.65
.30
.97
.16
.42
.35
.54
.31
3.88
.20
3.54
.27
1.31
.29
.69
.41
.55
.47
4.18
.39
4.57
.57**
1.89
.35**
.97
-
M
.16
.62
SD
.92
.48
.63
2.44
1.12
1.15
.71
.74
2.72
2.47
1.36
.94
.84
2.61
2.69
1.44
1.15
.98
.82
family socioeconomic status) were entered into Step 1. The eight sources of racial socialization
were entered into Step 2 to determine if racial socialization contributes unique variance not
accounted for by the demographic variables. The results indicated that Step 1 (demographic
variables) of the multiple regression equation was not statistically significant, F(3, 264) = .36, p
= .78, R2 = .004. Step 2 contributed to a statistically significant increase in GPA, F(9, 258) =
1.94, p = .04, R2 = .063. Beta weights and semipartial correlations for the CARES- I indicated
that Teacher (β = -.25 p = .02) and Friend (β = .24, p = .002) made the greatest contributions and
had the higher semipartial correlations (Teacher sr = -.14, Friend sr = -.19) compared to the other
CARES- I subscales.
Table 4
Hierarchical Regression Analysis of CARES-I and GPA Variables
Variable
B
SE B
β
sr
Step 1
R2
.004
Gender
.02
.08
.02
.01
Age
.01
.01
.07
.06
Family SES
.03
.08
.02
.02
Gender
.01
.08
.01
.01
Age
.00
.01
.01
.01
Family SES
.03
.08
.02
.02
Parents
.00
.01
.00
.00
Step 2
Grandparent
-.01
.01
-.09
-.07
Sibling
.00
.01
-.02
-.01
Teacher
-.02
.01
-.19*
-.14
.02
.01
.26**
.19
Friend
Media
.063
.00
.01
.03
.03
Note. N = 268. . CARES-I = Cultural and Racial Experiences of
Socialization Scale- Informant; B = unstandardized regression coefficient;
SE B = standard error; β = beta or standardized regression coefficient; sr =
semipartial or partial correlation; and R2 = coefficient of determination.
**p < .01, *p < .05
55
Hypothesis 2: Racial socialization messages of racial protection and bicultural coping will
be related to academic achievement.
A hierarchical multiple regression analysis was used to test if there was a statistically
significant relationship between racial socialization messages (Racial Protection, Racial
Stereotyping, Old School Basics, Bicultural Coping, & Cultural Insight) and GPA. Table 5
provides the results of the multiple regression analysis where type of racial socialization
messages was entered as the predictor variables. Demographic variables (i.e., age, gender,
family socioeconomic status) were entered into Step 1. The five types of racial socialization
were entered into Step 2 to determine if specific types of racial socialization messages contribute
unique variance not accounted for by the demographic variables. The results indicated that Step
1 (demographic variables) of the multiple regression equation was not statistically significant,
F(3, 317) = .31, p = .82, R2 = .003. Step 2 (racial socialization messages by type) was not
statistically significant, F(8, 312) = .66, p = .73, R2 = .017, no further interpretations were made.
Hypothesis 3: Racial socialization, based on specific type of message and source, will be
related to academic achievement.
Five hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted to test whether the
relationship between specific types of racial socialization messages transmitted by particular
sources were a statistically significant indicators of GPA. Demographic variables (i.e., age,
gender, family socioeconomic status) were entered into Step 1. The five types of racial
socialization and the six sources (e.g., Parent-Racial Protection, Grandparent- Racial Protection,
Sibling-Racial Socialization, Teacher- Racial Protection, Friends- Racial Protection, MediaRacial Protection) were entered into Step 2 as predictor variables to determine if racial
56
socialization based on specific types and sources contributes unique variance not accounted for
by the demographic variables.
Table 5
Hierarchical Regression Analysis of CARES-F and GPA Variables
Variable
B
SE B
β
Sr
-.05
.07
.01
-.05
.06
.01
Step 1
Gender
Age
Family SES
-.07
.02
.00
.08
.01
.05
R2
.003
Step 2
.017
Family SES
.02
.05
.02
.02
Gender
-.05
.08
-.04
-.04
Age
.01
.01
.04
.04
Racial Protection
-.01
.01
-.04
-.03
Racial Stereotyping
.01
.01
.04
.03
Old School Basics
.03
.02
.12
.08
Bicultural Coping
.01
.02
.04
.03
Cultural Insight
-.05
.02
-.14
-.11
Note. N = 321. CARES-F = Cultural and Racial Experiences of
Socialization Scale- Frequency, B = unstandardized regression coefficient;
SE= standard error; β = beta or standardized regression coefficient; sr =
semipartial or partial correlation; and R2 = coefficient of determination.
Racial Protection. Table 6 provides the results of the hierarchical regression analyses
where the predictor variables Racial Protection messages and various sources was entered as the
predictor variables. The results indicated that Step 1 (demographic variables) of the multiple
regression equation was not significant, F (3, 290) = .29, p = .84, R2 = .003. Step 2 contributed
to a statistically significant increase in GPA, F (9, 284) = 2.27, p = .02, R2 = .067. Beta weights
and semipartial correlations for the CARES indicated that Teacher-Racial Protection (β = -.05, p
= .02) and Friend- Racial Protection (β = .05, p = .003) made the greatest contributions and had
the higher semipartial correlations (Teacher -Racial Protection sr = -.14, Friend-Racial
Protection sr = .18) compared to the other subscales.
57
Table 6
Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Racial Protection Messages by Source and GPA Variables
Variable
B
SE B
.01
.01
.01
.08
.01
.08
β
sr
.00
.06
.01
.00
.05
.01
Steps 1
Gender
Age
Family SES
R2
.003
Steps 2
.067
Gender
-.02
.08
-.02
-.02
Age
.00
.01
.01
.01
Family SES
.05
.08
.04
.04
Parents
-.01
.01
-.07
-.06
Grandparent
-.02
.02
-.11
-.09
Sibling
.01
.02
.05
.04
Teacher
-.05
.02
-.18*
-.14
Friend
.05
.02
.22**
.18
Media
.01
.02
.05
.05
Note. N = 294. B = unstandardized regression coefficient; SE = standard error; β
= beta or standardized regression coefficient; sr = semipartial or partial
correlation; R2 = coefficient of determination.
**p < .01, *p < .05.
Racial Stereotyping. Table 7 provides the results of the hierarchical regression analyses
where the predictor variables Racial Stereotyping messages and various sources was entered as
the predictor variables. The results indicated that Step 1 (demographic variables) of the multiple
regression equation was not statistically significant, F(3, 305) = .67, p = .38, R2 = .004. Step 2
was not statistically significant, F(9, 299) = 1.74, p = .08, R2 = .050, no further interpretations
were made.
Old School Basics. Table 8 provides the results of the hierarchical regression analyses
where the predictor variables Old School Basics messages and various sources was entered as the
predictor variables. The results indicated that Step 1 (demographic variables) of the multiple
regression equation was not statistically significant, F(3, 300) = .49, p = .69, R2 = .004. Step 2
was not statistically significant, F(9, 294) = 1.11, p = .35 R2 = .033, no further interpretations
were made.
58
Table 7
Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Racial Stereotyping Messages by Source and GPA
Variables
Variable
B
β
SE B
R2
Sr
Steps 1
.004
Gender
.02
.08
.01
.01
Age
.01
.01
.06
.06
Family SES
.02
.08
.02
.02
Steps 2
.050
Gender
.02
.08
.01
.01
Age
.01
.01
.04
.04
Family SES
.00
.07
.00
.00
-.01
.02
-.05
-.03
.04
.03
.10
.08
Sibling
-.04
.03
-.10
-.08
Teacher
-.09
.04
-.15
-.12
.04
.02
.16
.13
Parents
Grandparent
Friend
Media
.02
.02
.09
.08
Note. N = 308. B = unstandardized regression coefficient; SE = standard
error; β = beta or standardized regression coefficient; sr = semipartial or
partial correlation; R2 = coefficient of determination.
Table 8
Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Old School Basics Messages by Source and GPA Variables
Variable
B
SE B
β
sr
Gender
Age
Family SES
.06
.01
.01
.08
.01
.08
.05
.06
.01
.05
.06
.01
Steps 1
Steps 2
R2
.004
.033
Gender
.07
.08
.05
.06
Age
.01
.01
.03
.03
Family SES
.01
.08
.01
.01
Parents
.01
.02
.05
.04
Grandparent
-.04
.03
-.09
-.08
Sibling
.02
.05
.03
.03
Teacher
-.06
.04
-.11
-.09
Friend
.04
.03
.10
.08
Media
.03
.03
.07
.06
Note. N = 304. B = unstandardized regression coefficient; SE =
standard error; β = beta or standardized regression coefficient; sr =
semipartial or partial correlation; R2 = coefficient of determination.
59
Bicultural Coping. Table 9 provides the results of the hierarchical regression analyses
where the predictor variables Bicultural Coping messages and various sources was entered as the
predictor variables. The results indicated that Step 1 (demographic variables) of the multiple
regression equation was not statistically significant, F(3, 312) = .33, p = .81, R2 = .003. Step 2
was not statistically significant, F(9, 306) = .91, p = .52, R2 = .026, no further interpretations
were made.
Cultural Insight. Table 10 provides the results of the hierarchical regression analyses
where the predictor variables Cultural Insight messages and various sources was entered as the
predictor variables. The results indicated that Step 1 (demographic variables) of the multiple
regression equation was not statistically significant, F(3, 315) = .32, p = .81, R2 = .003. Step 2
was not statistically significant indicator of GPA, F(9, 309) = 1.13, p = .34, R2 = .032.
Table 9
Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Bicultural Coping Messages by Source and GPA Variables
Variable
B
SE B
β
sr
Gender
Age
Family SES
.04
.01
.02
.08
.01
.07
.03
.05
.01
.03
.05
.01
Steps 1
Steps 2
R2
.003
.026
Gender
.06
.08
.04
.04
Age
.01
.01
.03
.03
Family SES
.02
.07
.02
.02
Parents
.01
.03
.02
.01
Grandparent
-.09
.07
-.10
-.07
Sibling
-.02
.09
-.02
-.01
Teacher
-.04
.07
-.04
-.03
Friend
.10
.05
.14
.11
Media
.01
.04
.02
.01
Note. N = 316. B = unstandardized regression coefficient; SE = standard error;
β = beta or standardized regression coefficient; sr = semipartial or partial
correlation; R2 = coefficient of determination.
60
Table 10
Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Cultural Insight Messages by Source and GPA Variables
Variable
B
SE B
β
sr
Gender
Age
Family SES
.03
.01
.00
.08
.01
.07
.03
.05
.00
.03
.05
.00
Steps 1
R2
.003
Steps 2
.032
Gender
.01
.08
.01
.01
Age
.01
.01
.05
.05
Family SES
.02
.08
.02
.02
Parents
-.01
.03
-.04
-.03
Grandparent
-.02
.04
-.04
-.03
Sibling
.03
.07
.03
.02
Teacher
-.13
.05
-.16
-.14
Friend
.05
.05
.07
.06
Media
.06
.04
.09
.08
Note. N = 319. B = unstandardized regression coefficient; SE = standard error;
β = beta or standardized regression coefficient; sr = semipartial or partial
correlation; R2 = coefficient of determination.
Hypothesis 4: Resilience will be a stronger moderator between Racial Protection messages
and academic achievement than the other four types of racial socialization messages.
To test the hypothesis that resilience would moderate the relationship between racial
socialization and GPA, multiple regression analyses were conducted. Frazier, Tix and Baron
(2004) identified moderated regression as the preferred method for detecting the presence or
absence of moderators. As recommended by Frazier et al. (2004), scale scores for the predictor
and moderator variables were centered in order to reduce multicollinearity between the main
effect and interaction terms. Demographic variables (i.e., age, gender, family SES) were entered
into Step 1. The predictor variable (racist socialization) and moderator variable (resilience) were
entered at Step 2. In Step 3, the interaction term (racial socialization x resilience) was entered.
Evidence for a moderator effect is noted at Step 3 by a statistically significant increase in R2 (i.e.,
Δ R2) and beta weight. Additionally, moderator effects typically account for only 1% to 3% of
61
unique variance in the predictor, thus Δ R2 values of .02 or above signify unique and meaningful
contributions to the predictor (Cohen, 1992; Frazier et al., 2004; McClelland & Judd, 1993). The
results of the five moderated regression analyses are reported in Table 11.
Racial Protection. Step 1 (demographic variables) of all five HMR was not statistically
significant, F(3, 317) = .36, p = .78, R2 = .006. In Step 2 of first HMR where the interaction
between Racial Protection and resilience was entered as predictors was not statistically
significant, the change in variance accounted for by Racial Protection (ΔR2 = .011) was not a
statistically significant increase in variance already accounted for in Step 1. In the final step of
the regression analysis, an interaction term between Racial Protection and resilience was created,
which did not account for a significant proportion of the variance in GPA (ΔR2 = .000).
Racial Stereotyping. In the second HMR where the interaction between Racial
Stereotyping and resilience was entered as predictors, the addition of Racial Stereotyping in Step
2 did not account for statistically significant change in variance (ΔR2 = .011). In the final step of
the regression analysis, an interaction term between Racial Stereotyping and resilience was
created, which did not account for a significant proportion of the variance in GPA (ΔR2 = .001).
Old School Basics. In the third HMR where the interaction between Old School Basics
and resilience was entered as predictors, the addition of Old School Basics in Step 2 did not
account for statistically significant change in variance (ΔR2 = .017). In the final step of the
regression analysis, an interaction term between Old School Basics and resilience was created,
which did not account for a significant proportion of the variance in GPA (ΔR2 = .000).
Bicultural Coping. In the fourth HMR where the interaction between Bicultural Coping
and resilience was entered as predictors, the addition of Bicultural Coping in Step 2 did not
account for statistically significant change in variance (ΔR2 = .010). In the final step of the
62
regression analysis, an interaction term between of Bicultural Coping and resilience was created,
which did not account for a significant proportion of the variance in GPA (ΔR2 = .000).
Cultural Insight. In the fifth HMR where the interaction between Cultural Insight and
resilience was entered as predictors, the addition of Cultural Insight in Step 2 did not account for
statistically significant change in variance (ΔR2 = .010). In the final step of the regression
analysis, an interaction term between of Cultural Insight and resilience was created, which did
not account for a significant proportion of the variance in GPA (ΔR2 = .005).
63
Table 11
Hierarchical Multiple Regression Analyses Predicting GPA from Racial Socialization, Resilience, and Their Interactions
64
Step
Predictor
B
SE B
β
Analysis predicting GPA from Racial Protection messages and Resilience
1
Gender
-.033
.076
-.024
Age
.013
.013
.056
Family SES
.019
.046
.023
2
Gender
-.023
.076
-.017
Age
.010
.013
.046
Family SES
.023
.046
.029
Racial Protection
.002
.003
.039
Resilience
-.006
.003
-.102
3
Gender
-.023
.076
-.017
Age
.010
.013
.047
Family SES
.023
.046
.029
Racial Protection
.002
.003
.039
Resilience
-.006
.003
-.102
Racial Protection x Resilience
.000
.000
.001
Analysis predicting GPA from Racial Stereotyping messages and Resilience
1
Gender
-.033
.076
-.024
Age
.013
.013
.056
Family SES
.019
.046
.023
2
Gender
-.023
.076
-.017
Age
.011
.013
.048
Family SES
.024
.046
.030
Racial Stereotyping
-.005
.003
-.098
Resilience
.004
.009
.028
3
Gender
-.019
.077
-.014
Age
.010
.013
.047
Family SES
.023
.046
.029
Racial Stereotyping
-.005
.003
-.097
Resilience
.005
.009
.031
Racial Stereotyping x Resilience
.000
.001
-.031
R2
Adjusted R2
ΔR2
t(320)
.003
-.006
.003
.015
-.001
.011
.015
-.004
.000
-.434
.974
.403
-.302
.794
.506
.686
-1.813
-.302
.793
.504
.684
-1.809
.021
.003
-.006
.003
.014
-.002
.011
.015
-.004
.001
-.434
.974
.403
-.300
.814
.517
-1.741
.497
-.250
.799
.506
-1.723
.537
-.556
Table 11 – Continued
65
Step Predictor
B
SE B
β
Analysis predicting GPA from Old School Basics messages and Resilience
1
Gender
-.033
.076 -.024
Age
.013 .013 .056
Family SES
.019 .046 .023
2
Gender
-.018
.076 -.013
Age
.009 .013 .040
Family SES
.023 .046 .029
Old School Basics
-.006
.003 -.108
Resilience
.024 .016 .088
3
Gender
-.018
.076 -.013
Age
.009 .013 .039
Family SES
.023 .046 .029
Old School Basics
-.006
.003 -.109
Resilience
.025 .016 .089
Old School Basics x Resilience
.000 .001 -.011
Analysis predicting GPA from Bicultural Coping messages and Resilience
1
Gender
-.033
.076 -.024
Age
.013 .013 .056
Family SES
.019 .046 .023
2
Gender
-.023
.076 -.017
Age
.011 .013 .049
Family SES
.023 .046 .028
Bicultural Coping
-.005
.003 -.099
Resilience
.008 .019 .025
3
Gender
-.022
.076 -.017
Age
.011 .013 .049
Family SES
.023 .046 .028
Bicultural Coping
-.005
.003 -.099
Resilience
.008 .019 .025
Bicultural Coping x Resilience
.000 .001 -.002
R2
Adjusted R2
ΔR2
.003
-.006
.003
.021
.005
.017
.021
.002
.000
.003
-.006
.003
.014
-.002
.010
.014
-.005
.000
t(320)
-.434
.974
.403
-.239
.685
.506
-1.915
1.551
-.239
.662
.508
-1.922
1.559
-.189
-.434
.974
.403
-.296
.831
.492
-1.754
.441
-.294
.829
.492
-1.742
.438
-.028
Table 11 – Continued
66
Step Predictor
B
SE B
β
Analysis predicting GPA from Cultural Insight messages and Resilience
1
Gender
-.033
.076 -.024
Age
.013 .013 .056
Family SES
.019 .046 .023
2
Gender
-.020
.076 -.015
Age
.012 .013 .053
Family SES
.024 .046 .030
Cultural Insight
-.005
.003 -.098
Resilience
-.006
.019 -.018
3
Gender
-.027
.076 -.020
Age
.012 .013 .054
Family SES
.018 .046 .023
Cultural Insight
-.005
.003 -.093
Resilience
-.008
.019 -.024
Cultural Insight x Resilience
.002 .002 .071
R2
Adjusted R2
ΔR2
.003
-.006
.003
.014
-.002
.010
.019
.000
.005
t(320)
-.434
.974
.403
-.269
.915
.524
-1.727
-.310
-.349
.925
.390
-1.643
-.415
1.260
CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION
The overarching purpose of the study was to examine the predictive nature of racial
socialization, as measured by the CARES (Bentley-Edwards & Stevenson, 2013), on academic
achievement. A secondary purpose of the study was to test whether the relationship between
racial socialization and academic achievement varied based on who transmitted the race-related
messages and explore whether resilience moderated the relationship between racial socialization
and academic achievement. Ultimately, five hypotheses were tested, and the findings provided
mixed support. One hypothesis was fully supported, two hypotheses were partially supported,
and two hypotheses were not supported. Specifically, Hypothesis 1, which examined gender
difference in racial socialization was supported, racial socialization did not vary based on gender.
Hypothesis 2, which tested whether racial socialization provided by teachers and friends was be
related to academic achievement was partially supported. Hypothesis 3, which examined the
relationship between racial socialization messages of racial protection and bicultural coping and
academic achievement was not supported. Hypothesis 4, which explored whether racial
socialization, based on specific type of message and source, was related to academic
achievement was partially supported. Hypothesis 5, which tested whether resilience moderated
the relationship between racial socialization and academic achievement was not supported. A
discussion of the findings, limitations, implications for practice, and future research will follow.
Gender Differences in Racial Socialization
The findings indicated no significant difference between gender differences in racial
socialization. Although past research suggested that females reported receiving more Racial
Pride and Cultural Insight messages (i.e., African American History, Celebrating African
American Heritage, and Promotion of Ethnic Pride), while males reported receiving more Racial
67
Protection messages, (i.e., Racial Barrier Awareness and Coping with Racism and
Discrimination; Bowman & Howard, 1985; Stevenson et al., 2002; Thomas & Speight, 1999),
the findings of the study were consistent with Hughes and Chen (1997), who failed to identify
gender differences in racial socialization. The mixed findings suggest that more research is
needed to better understand how gender operates. One potential explanation for the lack of
gender differences may be that research on racial socialization has primarily focused on racial
socialization messages provided by parents and does not account for other sources. Also,
Hughes and Chen (1997) suggest that the changes in gender roles and move towards gender
equality has decreased the differences in racial socialization practices.
Racial Socialization Content and Source
The content of racial socialization examined in this study (Racial Protection; Cultural
Insight; Racial Stereotyping; Bicultural Coping; & Old School Basics) builds on previous
literature. Similar to past research (Hughes et al., 2006; Hughes & Chen, 1997; Stevenson, 1997;
Thomas & Speight, 1999) Preparation for Bias (labeled Racial Protection in this study), which
provides awareness of racism, racial, buffering through affirmations, and strategies to cope with
racism, is the mostly frequently transmitted type of racial socialization. Secondary to Racial
Protection, participants reported receiving Racial Stereotyping messages, which is an expansion
of Cultural Mistrust (Hughes et al, 2006) and Internalized Racism (Barr & Neville, 2008).
Racial Stereotyping included negative messages about Black people and conveyed a sense of
racial mistrust. Racial Stereotyping was followed by Old School Basics, Bicultural Coping, and
Cultural Insight, however, results should be interpreted with caution because the reliability
estimates of the score of the Old School Basics, Bicultural Coping, and Cultural Insight, factors
were below the .70 (Nunnally, 1978; McAllister & Bigley, 2002).
68
In addition to broadening the understanding of the content of racial socialization, the
current study provides further information on the socialization that included the frequency of
racial socialization provided by various sources. To date, no study has included information
about the various sources in which race-related messages are transmitted. Students cited
receiving the majority of their racial socialization from parents (M = 16.61, SD = 10.53),
followed by media (M = 12.60, SD = 7.13), friends (M = 10.12, SD = 6.78), grandparents (M =
8.45, SD = 6.43), teacher (M = 5.78, SD = 4.82), and siblings (M = 3.93, SD = 4.65).
Interestingly, participants reported that parents, grandparents, teachers, siblings, and friends were
more likely to transmit Racial Protection messages, while the media transmitted Racial
Stereotyping messages. Overall, Black college students received racial socialization messages
consistent with what researchers believe to be adaptive (Boykin & Toms, 1985). Messages that
raised awareness of racial discrimination occurred most frequently in five out of the six sources
measured.
Racial Socialization as an Indicator of Academic Achievement
Overall racial socialization was not a statistical predictor of academic achievement.
However, Racial Protection transmitted by friends was a statistical predictor of academic
achievement, while Racial Protection transmitted by teachers was a statistical inverse predictor
of academic achievement. These findings are partially consistent with Marshall (1995) and
Caughy et al. (2002) who found that parental racial socialization was not correlated with
academic achievement, nor were any specific type of racial socialization messages a statistically
significant predictor of academic achievement. There has been very little research which has
explored the connection between racial socialization and friend group choices in college
students. However, the findings aligned with a study conducted by Steinberg, Dornbusch, and
69
Brown (1992), which suggested that Black students, more than any other ethnic group, reported
that peers influenced their daily classroom behavior, the amount of time spent on homework, and
whether they enjoyed coming to school. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that student academic
performance was influenced by the Racial Protection messages they received from friends.
Contrary to what was expected, Racial Protection messages provided by teachers was a negative
indicator of GPA. The departure of these findings from expected results may possibly be
attributed to how Black students perceive their teacher. Research has shown that Black students
are more likely to experience lower expectations from teachers (Wang & Eccles, 2012) and less
positive feedback from teachers (Noguera, 2008), which is likely to lead to them developing a
sense of educational mistrust and not benefiting from the protective properties of Racial
Protection messages.
The Link between the Interaction of Racial Socialization and Resilience and Academic
Achievement
There was no statistically significant relationship between the interaction of racial
socialization, which was analyzed by examining specific types of messages, and resilience and
academic achievement. The results were contrary to what was expected; the interaction between
resilience and racial socialization was expected to buffer against negative academic-related
experiences and promote positive academic achievement. There are a number of possibilities as
to why this was the case. The discrepancy can be attributed to the participants’ limited
experience with discrimination in the academic setting. Neblett et al., (2006) found that racial
socialization and resilience only serve as a protective factor when students report experiencing
high level of racial discrimination. The current study did not include a measure of perceived
academic discrimination. According to Miller and Macintosh (1999), another possible
70
suggestion for this contrary finding is that through racial socialization Black students become
more aware of stressors in their environment, specifically those caused by racial events. This
causes them to academically feel helpless in an environment that does not support them,
resulting in lower academic performance.
Limitations
As with any research, this study contained a number of limitations. One limitation of the
current study is the use of a convenience sample. In this study, a convenience sample may have
led to the under-representation or over-representation of particular groups within the sample.
Participants within the sample were from the same university and mostly reared in the Midwest.
Barr and Neville (2008) suggest that ecological factors influence the racial socialization process,
thus it is likely that findings of this study may not be generalizable to individuals living in other
geographical areas in the United States. Also, the sample was mostly Black Americans and did
not account for the experiences of the Black race in general (i.e. Black individuals in other parts
of the world) or other ethnic groups (i.e., West Indians, Latinos, African immigrants). Therefore,
the results may not be generalizable to non-Black Americans.
Another limitation pertains to the self-report nature in which the data was collected. As
with any study utilizing self-reported measures, this study was susceptible to the following
problems: a) bias due to participant’s desire to answer items in a socially desirable manner, b) a
reflection of anticipated behavior versus actual attitudes and behaviors, and c) interpretation of
the items on the measures differently than was originally intended by the authors. The
controversial measure of the study (examining racial practices) increases the likelihood of social
desirability affecting the results.
71
Moreover, the CARES (Bentley-Edwards & Stevenson, 2013) measure posed its own
unique set of limitations. The initial sample consisted of 426 participants, however, only 291
(68%) participants completed both sections of the CARES. The CARES was selected because it
is the only quantitative measure of racial socialization that explains not only the content of racial
socialization messages, but also the source of those messages. The measure consisted of 35
items, each requiring participants to indicate if they had been told a race-related message and
who transmitted the message. During the administration of the CARES, many participants had
questions and required further instructions on how to complete the measure. It is possible that
participants may have been overwhelmed or confused. Thus, the researcher surmises that some
participants may have filled out items on the CARES randomly.
Implications for Practice
Despite the limitations discussed above, the findings of the current study have
implications for individuals who work with Black college students. For starters, individuals
working with Black college students must be aware of the messages they transmit about race and
the influence that racial socialization may have on the academic performance of Black students.
Effectively using the students’ racial identities and supporting the racial dispositions brought to
school may be the key to successfully improving the performance of Black students. With the
correct opportunities for staff development and the guidance and support of effective
administrative leaders, teachers can progress in their understanding of teaching those of African
descent. Additionally, the findings of this study demonstrate a need to create more
comprehensive intervention and/or prevention programs within the university environment.
These programs may serve as a vehicle to discuss race with Black college students, providing
them with opportunities to hear more positive messages about their history, in addition to
72
alerting them to future discrimination, which have been demonstrated to be protective
communications, and may lead to better performance.
Moreover, to challenge racial inequity and provide positive classroom spaces for Black
students, it is essential that racism, internalized racism, and teacher education are explored.
Specifically, reforming the curriculum of the teacher education program is essential for preparing
teacher to work with culturally diverse students. The curricula of most teacher education
programs are additive; ethnic heroes and cultural values are inserted into curricula without
properly examining the meaning of these materials (Brown & Brown, 2011). As a result, many
programs fail to challenge and help prospective teachers self-examine their own beliefs about
race. Another problem is the dominant cultural habit of avoiding discussion of race and racism in
the classroom. Educators must be trained to facilitate personal introspection and critical
reflection of race and racism.
The results of the study also have implications for educational policy. The legislative
passing of Barack Obama’s Race to the Top initiatives (2009) established a monetary reward
system, which gives points to states for meeting certain goals set forth for improving education
and educational opportunities. Race to the Top uses an index where schools and students are still
judged by test scores, but teachers are judged more comprehensively on their ability to teach
students the standards via a new teacher assessment tool. The initiative acknowledges that
standard educational practices lack effectiveness with racial minority students.
Once again, if teachers are not taught how to recognize the impact of race in the classroom, little
will change as a result of Race to the Top.
Although resilience did not moderate the relationship between racial socialization and
academic performance, resilience was positively correlated to academic achievement. Thus
73
fostering resilience in Black college students is likely to lead to better educational outcomes. To
promote resilience in the Black student population it will be important for practitioners to be
aware of the Black experience on college campuses. It has been well established that Black
students face challenges on college campuses. According to Kessler, Mickelson, and Williams
(2009) roughly 70% of Black students attending predominately White universities reported
experiencing racial discrimination. Given these challenges it is important to focus on how to
build strengths in students. Brown and Tylka (2008) suggest that one way for practitioners to
build on these strengths (resilience) is to have an understanding of the race-related messages
communicated to the individual and to continue to relay those messages. Ultimately, building
resilience can help Black students to manage and navigate outcomes that may be challenging due
to discrimination they may face and can help them to successfully matriculate.
Future Research
While the findings reported above contribute to the body of research of understanding
what variables impact academic achievement as measured by grade point average, many
questions remain unanswered regarding the role of racial socialization. The current findings
provide directions and suggestions for future research. To increase validity, the current study
should be replicated. As mentioned above, no previous studies have explored the influence of
racial socialization provided by various sources. Thus, further information is needed prior to
drawing conclusion on the impact of racial socialization messages provided by non-familial
sources.
It is recommended that research further explore the content, frequency, and source of
race-related messages. Because 88% of respondents ascribed to an organized religion, future
research should explore the content and frequency of racial socialization messages provided by
74
religious leaders, as well as other influential individuals in the life of college students. Further
research is also needed to gain a better understanding of the contextual correlates of racial
socialization. Although the study’s findings suggest that there is no statistically significant
relationship between gender and racial socialization, it is unknown if contextual factors, such as
the racial composition of student’s neighborhood or social group influences the racial
socialization process. Additionally, it might be helpful to gain a better understanding of the
salience of race in the life of todays’ college students. Are race and race-related issues no longer
deemed important or is racial discourse still a problem in the United States, thus less racial
socialization takes place? Providing clarity to these questions will assist researchers in gaining a
better understanding of racial socialization, in general, and also how the process function in the
everyday life of individuals.
Future research should also explore the relationship between racial socialization and
other academic outcome measures. The current study used official GPA to measure students’
academic performance. Student grades are influenced not only by students’ knowledge of the
subject matter, but are also reflective of students’ successful navigation of the demands of the
school context. However, GPA only represents one domain of academic competence. Other
academic outcome measures may be more closely linked to racial socialization that help students
successfully navigate the education system.
Theoretical and conceptual work in the area of resilience has hypothesized that there are
factors that can be altered to facilitate resilience among students. Further research is still needed
to understand the predictors of resilience for the African American college student population,
especially because resilience is positively correlated to academic achievement. Previous
research (DeGruy, Kjellstrand, Briggs, & Brennan, 2011) has suggested that internal race-based
75
concepts, such as racial identity, is a predictor of resilience; yet it remains unknown the extent to
which the external race-based concepts, racial socialization, influence resilience. Research
should also replicate the variables of this study with a different focus, possibly analyzing racial
socialization as a moderating variable.
Conclusion
Overall, the findings of this study add to the breadth of knowledge regarding racial
socialization in college students. No differences were found between the content and frequency
of race-related messages based on gender. Although the type of racial socialization message was
not a statistically significant predictor of achievement, the source in which the message was
transmitted was statistically significant. Students who reported receiving Racial Protection
messages from teachers had lower GPAs, whereas, those who reported receiving Racial
Protection messages from friends performed better academically. Similar to previous work, this
study supports the notion that as individuals enter adulthood, friends become the primary agent
of socialization. Although resilience did not moderate the relationship between racial
socialization and academic achievement, it was positively related to achievement. Ultimately,
there is a wealth of knowledge to obtain about gaining a better understanding of the cultural and
ecological factors that influence academic achievement in Black college students. The current
study demonstrates that race can be an influential factor when examining the educational
outcomes of Black college students. This study also suggests that the racial socialization process
for Black students is not limited to parents, Black college students receive race-related messages
from several sources and require not only messages of Cultural Pride, but also Racial Protection
messages to be able to combat the negative connotations associated with being Black in the
education system. Findings from this research can contribute not only to academic knowledge,
76
but also have applied implications. Racial socialization can be employed to help Black college
students develop academic and social competencies.
77
REFERENCES
Achenbach, T. M., & Edelbrock, C. S. (1981). Behavioral problems and competencies reported
by parents of nor-mal and disturbed children aged four through sixteen. Monographs of
the Society for Research in Child Development, 46, 82-100. doi:10.2307/1165983
Adams, V. N., & Stevenson, H. (2012). Media socialization, Black media images and Black
adolescent identity. In D. T. Slaughter-Defoe (Ed.), Racial stereotyping and child
development contributions to human development. New York: Karger.
Adams-Bass, V. N., Bentley-Edwards, K. L., & Stevenson, H. C. (2014). That’s Not Me I See
On TV: African American youth interpret media images Of Black females. Women,
Gender and Families of Color, 2(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.5406/womgenfamcol.2.1.0079
Ahern, N. R., Kiehl, E. M., Sole, M. L., & Byers, J. (2006). A review of instruments measuring
resilience. Issues in Comprehensive Pediatric Nursing, 29, 103-125.
doi:10.1080/01460860600677643
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting
interactions. Newbury Park: Sage.
Ainsworth-Darnell, J. W., & Downey, D. B. (1998). Assessing the oppositional culture
explanation for racial/ethnic differences in school performance. American Sociological
Review, 63, 536–553. doi:10.1177/000312240507000403
Allen, W. R., & Strong, B. M. (1996). National study of Black college students. In R. Jones
(Ed.), Handbook of tests and measurements for Black populations (pp. 327-349).
Berkeley, CA: Cobb & Henry
Arnett, J. J. (1995). Broad and narrow socialization: The family in the context of a cultural
theory. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 617-628. doi:10.2307/353917
78
Arnett, J. J. (2007). Socialization in emerging adulthood: From the family to the wider world,
from socialization to self-socialization. In J. E. Grusec & P. D. Hastings (Eds.),
Handbook of socialization: Theory and research (pp. 208-230). New York, NY: The
Guilford Press.
Awad, G. (2007). The role of racial identity, academic self-concept, and self-esteem in the
prediction of academic outcomes for African American students. Journal of Black
Psychology, 33, 188–207. doi:10.1177/0095798407299513
Barbarin, O. A. (1993). Coping and resilience: Exploring the inner lives of African American
children. Journal of Black Psychology, 19, 478-492. doi:10.1177/00957984930194007
Barber, B. K., & Olsen, J. (1997). Socialization in context: Connection, regulation, and
autonomy in the family, school, and neighborhood and with peers. Journal of Adolescent
Research, 12, 287-315. doi:10.1177/0743554897122008
Barr, S., & Neville, H. A. (2008). Examination of the link between parental racial socialization
messages and racial ideology among Black college students. Journal of Black
Psychology, 34, 131-155. doi:10.1177/0095798408314138
Barr, S. C. (2010). Ecological examination of the development of color-blind racial beliefs in
Black college students. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations
and Theses. (UMI No. 3430847)
Bell, D. A. (1980). Shades of Brown: New perspectives on school desegregation, New York:
Teachers College Press.
Bentley-Edwards, K. L., & Stevenson, H. C. (2013). Evolving with the Times: Recasting
racial/ethnic socialization measurement to account for multidimensional processes.
Submitted for Publication.
79
Borman, G., & Overman, L. (2004). Academic resilience in mathematics among poor and
minority students. Elementary School Journal, 104, 177-195. doi:10.1086/499748
Bowen, W. G., Kurzweil, M. A., Tobin, E. M., & Pichler, S. C. (2005). Equity and excellence in
American higher education. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.
Bowman, P. J., & Howard, C. (1985). Race-related socialization, motivation, and academic
achievement: A study of Black youths in three-generation families. Journal of the
American Academy of Child Psychiatry, 24, 134-141. doi:10.1016/S00027138(09)604386
Boykin, A. W. (1986). The triple quandary and the schooling of Afro-American children. In U.
Neisser (Ed.), The school achievement of minority children: New perspectives (pp. 5792). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Boykin, A. W., & Ellison, C. (1995). Multiple ecologies of Black youth socialization: An
Afrographic analysis. In R. Taylor (Ed.), African American youth: Their social and
economic status in the United States (pp. 83-128). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Boykin, A. W., & Toms, F .D. (1985). Black child socialization: A conceptual framework. In H.
P. McAdoo & J. L. McAdoo (Eds.), Black children: Social, educational, and parental
environments (pp. 33-51). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Braddock, J. H., II, & Eitle, T. M. (2004). The effects of school desegregation. In J. A. Banks &
C. A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed.,
pp. 828-846). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Brown, D. L. (2008). African American resiliency: Examining racial socialization and
social support as protective factors. Journal of Black Psychology, 34, 32-48.
doi:10.1177/0095798407310538
80
Brown, D. L., & Tylka, T. L. (2011). Racial discrimination and resilience in African American
young adults: Examining racial socialization as a moderator. Journal of Black
Psychology, 37, 259-285. doi:10.1177/0095798410390689
Brown, K. D., & Brown, A. L. (2011). Teaching K-8 Students about Race: African Americans,
Racism, and the Struggle for Social Justice in the U.S. Multicultural Education, 19, 9-13.
Brown, T. L., & Linver, M. R. (2009). The role of gender in the racial and ethnic socialization of
African American adolescents. Youth & Society, 38, 214-239.
doi:10.1177/0044118X09333665
Brown, T. N., Tanner-Smith, E. E., Lesane-Brown, C. L., & Ezell, M. E. (2007). Child, parent,
and situational correlates of race socialization: Findings from the 1998-99 ECLS-K.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 14-25. doi:http://10.1111/j.17413737.2006.00340.x
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
Bynum, M. S., Burton, T., & Best, C. (2007). Racism experiences and psychological functioning
in African American college freshmen: Is racial socialization a buffer? Cultural
Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13, 64-71. doi:0.1037/1099-9809.13.1.64
Campbell-Sills, L., Cohan, S. L., & Stein, M. B. (2006). Relationship of resilience to personality,
coping, and psychiatric symptoms in young adults. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44,
585–599. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2005.05.001
Campbell-Sills, L., & Stein M. B. (2007). Psychometric analysis and refinement of the Connor–
Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC): Validation of a 10-item measure of resilience.
Journal of Traumatic Stress, 20, 1019–1028. doi:10.1002/jts.20271
81
Caughy, M. O., Nettles, S. M., O’Campo, P. J., & Lohrfink, K. F. (2006). Neighborhood
matters: Racial socialization of African American children. Child Development, 77,
1220-1236. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00930.x
Caughy, M. O., O’Campo, P. J., Randolph, S. M., & Nickerson, K. (2002). The influence of
racial socialization practices on the cognitive and behavioral competence of African
American Preschoolers. Child Development, 73, 1611-1625.
doi:10.1177/0095798402028001003
Chavous, T. M., Hilkene-Bernat, D., Schmeelk-Cone, K., Caldwell, C. H., Kohn-Wood, L., &
Zimmerman, M. A. (2003). Racial identity and academic attainment among African
American adolescents. Child Development, 74, 1076-1090. doi:10.1111/14678624.00593
Coddington, R. D. (1972). The significance of life events as etiologic factors in the diseases of
children: I. A survey of professional workers. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 16, 718. doi:10.1016/0022-3999(72)90018-9
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159. doi:10.1037/00332909.112.1.155
Cokley, K. (2000a). An investigation of academic self-concept and its relationship to academic
achievement in African American students. Journal of Black Psychology, 26, 148-164.
doi:l0.1177/0095798400026002002
Cokley, K. (2000b). Perceived faculty encouragement and its influence on college students.
Journal of College Student Development, 41, 348–352.
Cokley, K. (2002a). The impact of college racial composition on African American students’
82
academic self-concept: A replication and extension. Journal of Negro Education, 71,
288–296. doi:10.2307/3211181
Cokley, K. (2002b). Ethnicity, gender, and academic self-concept: A preliminary examination of
academic disidentification and implications for psychologists. Cultural Diversity and
Ethnic Minority Psychology, 8, 378–388. doi:10.1037/1099-9809.8.4.379
Cokley, K., & Chapman, C. (2008). The roles of ethnic identity, anti-white attitudes, and
academic self-concept in African American student achievement. Social Psychology
Education, 11, 349-365. doi:10.1007/sl 1218-008-9060-4
Cokley, K., Komarraju, M., King, A., Cunningham, D., & Muhammad, G. (2003). Ethnic
differences in the measurement of academic self-concept in a sample of African
American and European American college students. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 63, 707-722. doi:10.1177/0012164402251055
Cokley, K., Komarraju, M., Rosales, R., Shen, F., Picket, R., & Patel, N. (2006). A New scale
for assessing the quality of student–professor interactions. Journal of the Professoriate, 2,
53–67.
Coll, C., Lamberty, G., Jenkins, R., McAdoo, H. P., Crnic, K., Wasik, B. H., & Garcia, H.V.
(1996). An integrative model for the study of developmental competencies in minority
children. Child Development, 67, 1891-1914. doi:10.2307/1131600
Condly, S. J. (2006). Resilience in children: A review of literature with implications for
education. Urban Education, 41(3), 211-236. doi:10.1177/0042085906287902
Conner, K. M., & Davidson, J. R. (2003). Development of a new resilience scale: The ConnerDavidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Depression and Anxiety, 18, 76-82.
doi:10.1002/da.10113
83
Crandall, V.C., Crandall, V.J., & Katkovsky, W. (1965). A children’s social desirability
questionnaire. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 29, 27–36. doi:10.1037/h0020966
Crosnoe, R., & Elder, G. H., Jr. (2004). Family dynamics, supportive relationships, and
educational resilience during adolescence. Journal of Family Issues, 25, 571-602.
doi:10.1177/0192513X03258307
Cunningham, M., & Swanson, D. P. (2010). Educational resilience in African American
adolescents. Journal of Negro Education, 79, 473–487.
Demo, D. H., & Hughes, M. (1990). Socialization and racial identity among Black Americans.
Social Psychology Quarterly, 53, 364–374. doi:10.2307/2786741
DeGruy, J., Kjellstrand, J., Briggs, H., & Brennan, E.(2011). Racial respect and racial
socialization as protective factors for African American youth. Journal of Black
Psychology, 38, 395–420. doi: 10.1177/0095798411429744
Dubow, E. F., & Ullman, D. G. (1989). Assessing social support in elementary school children:
The survey of children’s social support. Journal of Child Clinical Psychology, 18, 52–64.
doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp1801_7
Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J., & Midgley, C.
(1983). Expectancies, values, and achievement behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.),
Achievement and achievement motives (pp. 75-146). San Francisco: Freeman.
Eccleston, C. P., Smyth, J. M., & Lopoo, L. M. (2010). Unraveling the race paradox of
achievement and self-views. Social Psychology of Education, 13, 1–18.
doi:10.1007/s11218-009-9106-2
Entwisle, D., and L. A. Hayduk. 1978. Too great expectations: The academic outlook of young
children. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
84
Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C. & Strahan, E J. (1999). Evaluating the use of
exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272299. doi:1082-989X/99/S3.00
Fatimilehin, I. A. (1999). Of jewel heritage: Racial socialization and racial identity attitudes
amongst adolescents of mixed African-Caribbean/White parentage. Journal of
Adolescence, 22, 303–318. doi:10.1006/jado.1999.0223
Fischer, A. R., & Shaw, C. M. (1999). African Americans’ mental health and perceptions of
racist discrimination: The moderating effects of racial socialization experiences and selfesteem. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46, 395–407. doi:10.1037/00220167.46.3.395
Ford, D. Y., Grantham, T. C., & Whiting, G. W. (2008). Another look at the achievement gap:
Learning from the experiences of gifted Black students. Urban Education, 43, 216–239.
doi:10.1177/0042085907312344
Ford, D. Y., & Harris, J. J., III. (1996). Perceptions and attitudes of Black students toward
school, achievement, and other educational variables. Child Development, 67, 1141–
1152. doi:10.2307/1131884
Frabutt, J. A., Walker, A. M., & MacKinnon-Lewis, C. (2002). Racial socialization messages
and the quality of mother/child interactions in African American families. Journal of
Early Adolescence, 22, 200–217. doi:0.1177/0272431602022002004
Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P., & Barron, K. E. (2004). Testing moderator and mediator effects in
counseling psychology research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 115-134.
doi:10.1037/0022-0167.51.1.115
85
Gayles, J. (2005). Playing the game and paying the price: Academic resilience among three highachieving African American males. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 36(3), 250–
264. doi:10.1525/aeq.2005.36.3.250
Hare, B. R. (1977). Racial and socioeconomic variations in preadolescence area specific and
general self esteem. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 1, 31–51.
doi:10.1016/0147-1767(77)90018-9
Harrell, S. (1997, May). Development and initial validation of scales to measure racism-related
stress. Poster presented at the 6th Biennial Conference on Community Research and
Action, Society for Community Research and Action, Columbia, SC.
Harris, A. L., & Robinson, K. (2007). Schooling behaviors or prior skills? A cautionary tale of
omitted variable bias within oppositional culture theory. Sociology of Education, 80,
139–157. doi:10.1177/003804070708000203
Harter, S. (1982). The perceived competence scale for children. Child Development, 53, 87-97.
doi:10.1037/t05704-000
Hawkins, R., Royster, D.A., & Braddock, J.H. (1992). Athletic Investment and Academic
Resilience among African American Females and Males in the Middle Grades. Research
Report #3. Urban Child Research Center, Cleveland State University, OH. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED361450.)
Helms, J. (1990). Applying the interaction model to social dyads. In J. Helms (Ed.), Black and
White racial identity: Theory research and practice (pp. 177–186). Westport, CT:
Praegar.
Hemmings, A. (1996). Conflicting images? Being Black and a model high school student.
Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 27, 20-50. doi:10.1525/aeq.1996.27.1.04x0640p
86
Herrnstein, R. J., & Murray, C. (1994). The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in
American life. New York: Free Press.
Hill, H. (1991). Perceptions of environmental violence scale. Unpublished manuscript, Howard .
University, Washington, DC.
Hughes, D. (2003). Correlates of African American and Latino parents' messages to children
about ethnicity and race: comparative study of racial socialization. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 31, 15-34. doi:10.1023/A3A1023066418688
Hughes, D., & Chen, L. (1997). When and what parents tell children about race: An examination
of race-related socialization among African American families. Applied Developmental
Science, 1, 200-214. doi:10.1207/s1532480xads0104_4
Hughes, D., & Johnson, D. (2001). Correlates in children’s experiences of parents’ racial
socialization behaviors. Journal of Marriage & Family, 63, 981-995. doi:10.1111/j.17413737.2001.00981.x
Hughes, D., Rodriguez, J., Smith, E. P., Johnson, D. J., Stevenson, H. C., & Spicer, P. (2006).
Parents' ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of research and directions for
future study. Developmental Psychology, 42, 747-770. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.747
Kailin, J. (1999). How White teachers perceive the problem of racism in their schools: A case
study in “liberal” Lakeview. Teachers College Record, 100, 724-750. doi:10.1111/01614681.00014
Kanner, A. D., Feldman, S. S., Weinberger, D. A., & Ford, M. E. (1987). Uplifts, hassles, and
adaptational outcomes in early adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 7, 371-394.
doi:10.1177/0272431687074002
87
Kaufman, A. S., & Applegate, B. (1988). Short forms of the K-ABC Mental Processing and
Achievement Scales at ages 4 to 12 ½ for clinical and screening purposes. Journal of
Clinical Child Psychology, 17, 359-369. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp1704_10
Keith, T. (2006). Multiple regression and beyond. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon
Kessler, R. C., Mickelson, K. D., & Williams, D. R. (1999. The prevalence, distribution, and
mental health correlates of perceived discrimination in the United States. Journal of
Health and Social Behavior, 40, 208–230. doi:10.2307/2676349
Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American
children. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education. Teachers
College Record, 97, 47-68.
Landrine, H., & Klonoff, E. A. (1996). The Schedule of Racist Events: A measure of racial
discrimination and a study of its negative physical and mental health consequences.
Journal of Black Psychology, 22, 144–168. doi:10.1177/00957984960222002
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Gore, P. A. (1997). Discriminant and predictive validity of
academic self-concept, academic self-efficacy, and mathematics-specific self-efficacy.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44, 307-315. doi:10.103 7/0022-0167.44.3.307
Lesane-Brown, C. L., Brown, T. N., Caldwell, C. H., & Sellers, R. M. (2005). The
comprehensive race socialization inventory. Journal of Black Studies, 36, 163-190.
doi:10.1177/0021934704273457
Lesane-Brown, C. L., Scottham, K. M., Nguyen, H. X., & Sellers, R. M. (2009). The Child
Racial Socialization Scale: A new measure for use with African American adolescents.
Manuscript submitted for publication.
88
LoBiondo-Wood, G., & Haber, J. (2010). Nursing research: Methods, critical appraisal, and
utilization. St. Louis, MO: Mosby.
Lockett, C. T., & Harrell, J. P. (2003). Racial identity, self-esteem, and academic achievement:
Too much interpretation, too little supporting data. Journal of Black Psychology, 325336. doi:10.1177/0095798403254216
Maccoby, E.E. (1992). The role of parents in the socialization of children: An historical
overview. Developmental Psychology, 28, 1006-1017. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.28.6.1006
Major, B., Spencer, S., Schmader, T., Wolfe, C., & Crocker, J. (1998). Coping with negative
stereotypes about intellectual performance: The role of psychological disengagement.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 34–50. doi:10.1177/0146167298241003
Mariner, C. L., Zaslow, M. J., Floryan, J. A., & Botsko, C. (1998). Creating the Survey
Measures Of Mother-Child Relations for Middle Childhood (Methods Working Paper
#98.9). Washington, DC: Child Trends.
Marshall, S. (1995). Ethnic socialization of African American children: Implications for
parenting, identity development and academic achievement. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 24, 377-396. doi:10.1007/BF01537187
Masten, A. S., & Coatsworth, J. D. (1995). Competence, resilience, and psychopathology. In D.
Cicchetti & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology: Vol. 2. Risk, disorder,
and adaptation (Vol. 2, pp. 715-752). New York: Wiley.
McAdoo, H. P. (2002). The Village Talks: Racial socialization of our children. In H. P. McAdoo
(Ed.), Black children: Social, educational, and parental environments (pp. 47-55).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
McAllister, D. J., & Bigley, G. A. (2002). Work context and the definition of self: How
89
organizational care influences organization-based self-esteem. Academy of Management
Journal, 45, 894-904. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2014.12.001
McClelland, G. H., & Judd, C. M. (1993). Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and
moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 376–390. doi:10.1037/00332909.114.2.376
McClendon, C., Nettles, S. M.,& Wigfield, A. (2000). Fostering resilience in high school
classrooms: A Study of the PASS program (Promoting Achievement in School Through
Sport). In M. Sanders (Ed.), Schooling students placed at risk: Research, policy, and
practice in the education of poor and minority students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc.
McGill, D.E. (1997) Blueprints for Violence Prevention: Big Brothers Big Sisters of America. C
& M, Denver.
McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., Kim, J. Y., Burton, L. M., Davis, K. D., Dotterer, A. M., &
Swanson, D. P. (2006). Mothers’ and fathers’ racial socialization in African American
families: Implications for youth. Child Development, 77, 1387-1402. doi:10.1111/j.14678624.2006.00942.x
Mickelson, R. A. (1990). The attitude-achievement paradox among Black adolescents. Sociology
of Education, 63, 44–61. doi:10.2307/2112896
http://search.proquest.com/docview/618095275?accountid=15099
Miller, D. B. (1999). Racial socialization and racial identity: Can they promote resiliency for
African American adolescents? Adolescence, 34, 493-501. doi:10.1093/swr/23.3.159
90
Miller, D. B., & Macintosh, R. (1999). Promoting resilience in urban African-American
adolescents: Racial socialization and identity as protective factors. Social Worker
Research, 23, 159-169. doi:10.1093/swr/23.3.159
NAEP 2013- – Assessment results – Individual State Results: Race/ethnicity. (2012). Retrieved
January 10, 2015, from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/states
Neblett, E. W., Jr., Philip, C. L., Cogburn, C. D., & Sellers, R. M. (2006). African American
adolescents' discrimination experiences and academic achievement: Racial socialization
as a cultural compensatory and protective factor. The Journal of Black Psychology, 32,
199-218. doi:10.1177/0095798406287072
Neblett, E. W., Jr., Smalls, C. P., Ford, K. R., Nguyen, H. X., & Sellers, R. M. (2009). Racial
socialization and racial identity: African American parents' messages about race as
precursors to identity. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38, 189-203.
doi:10.1007/s10964-008-9359-7
Neblett, E. W., Jr., Terzian, M., & Harriott, V. (2010). From racial discrimination to substance
use: The buffering effects of racial socialization. Child Development Perspectives, 4,
131-137. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2010.00131.x
Neville, H, A., Heppner, P, P., Ji, P., & Thye, R. (2004). General and race-related stressors and
psychoeducational adjustment in Black students attending predominately White
institutions. Journal of Black Studies, 34, 599-618. doi:10.1177/0021934703259168
Noguera, P. (2008). The trouble with Black boys and other reflections on race, equity, and the
future of public education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
91
O’Connor, L. A., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Graber, J. (2000). Black and White girls’ racial preference
in media and peer choices and the role of socialization for Black girls. Journal of Family
Psychology, 14, 510-521. doi:10.1037//0893-3200.14.3.510
Ogbu, J. U. (1974). The next generation: An ethnography of education in an urban
neighborhood. New York: Academic Press.
Ogbu, J. U. (1978). Minority education and caste: The American system in cross-cultural
perspective. New York: Academic Press.
Ogbu, J. (1982). Cultural discontinuities and schooling. Anthropology and Education Quarterly,
13(4), 290–307. doi:10.1525/aeq.1982.13.4.05x1505w
Ogbu, J. (1991). Minority coping responses and school experience. Journal of Psychohistory,
18(4), 433–456. doi:10.1080/1467598042000313403
Paulhus, D. L. (1998). Manual for the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR-7).
Toronto/Buffalo: Multi-Health Systems .
Peters, M. F. (1985). Racial socialization of young Black children. In H. P. McAdoo & J. L.
McAdoo (Eds.), Black children (pp. 90-128). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Phinney, J.S. (1992). The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure: A new scale for use with
adolescents and young adults from diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7,
156-176. doi:10.1177/074355489272003
Phinney, J. S., & Chavira, V. (1995). Parental ethnic socialization and adolescent coping with
problems related to ethnicity. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 5, 31-53.
doi:10.1207/s15327795jra0501_2
92
Pickren, W. E. (2004). Between the cup of principle and the lip of practice: Ethnic minorities and
American psychology, 1966–1980. History of Psychology, 7, 45–64. doi:10.1037/10934510.7.1.45
Prelow, H, M., Mosher, C, E., & Bowman, M, A. (2006). Perceived racial discrimination, social
support, and psychological adjustment among African American college students.
Journal of Black Psychology, 32, 442-454. doi:10.1177/0095798406292677
Pryor-Brown, L., & Cowen, E. L. (1989). Stressful life events, support, and children’s school
adjustment. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 18, 214–230.
doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp1803_3
Reis, S. Colbert, R., & Hebert, T. (2005). Understanding resilience in diverse, talented students
in urban high school. Roeper Review, 27, 110-120. doi:/10.1080/02783190509554299
Reynolds, W. M. (1988). Measurement of academic self-concept in college students. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 52, 223-240. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa5202_4
Reynolds, W. M., Ramirez, M. P., Magrina, A., & Allen, J. E. (1980). Initial development and
validation of the academic self-concept scale. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 40, 1013-1016. doi:10.1177/001316448004000428
Richardson, G. E. (2002). The metatheory of resilience and resiliency. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 58, 307-321. doi:10.1002/jclp.10020
Rotheram, M. J., & Phinney, J. S. (1987). Definitions and perspectives in the study of children’s
ethnic socialization. In J. S. Phinney and M. J. Rotheram (Eds.), Children’s ethnic
socialization: Pluralism and development (pp. 10-28). Newbury Park: Sage.
93
Rowley, S. J. (2000). Profiles of African American college students’ educational utility and
performance: A cluster analysis. Journal of Black Psychology, 26, 3-26.
doi:10.1177/0095798400026001001
Sanders-Thompson, V. L. (1994). Socialization to race and its relationship to racial identification
among African American. Journal of Black Psychology, 20, 175-188.
doi:10.1177/00957984940202006
Sellers, R. M., Chavous, T. M., & Cooke, D. Y. (1998). Racial ideology and racial centrality as
predictors of African American college students’ academic performance. Journal of
Black Psychology, 24, 8-27. doi:10.1177/00957984980241002
Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of
teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 85(4), 571-581. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.571
Slaughter-Defoe, D., Nakagawa, K., Takanishi, R. & Johnson, D. (1990). Toward
cultural/ecological perspectives on schooling and academic achievement in African- and
Asian-American children. Child Development, 61, 363-383. doi:10.2307/1131098
Smedley, A. (1999). Race in North America, Origin and Evolution o f a Worldview, 2nd Ed.
Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Smith, E. P., Atkins, J., & Connell, C. M. (2003). Family, school, and community factors and
relationships to racial-ethnic attitudes and academic achievement. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 32, 159-173. doi:10.1023/A:1025663311100
Spencer, M. B. (1989). Patterns of developmental transitions for economically disadvantaged
Black male adolescent. Chicago: Spencer Foundation.
Spencer, M. B. (1990). Parental values transmission: Implications for the development of
94
African-American children. In H. E. Cheatham & J. B. Stewart (Eds.), Black families:
Inter- disciplinary perspectives (pp. 111-130). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Spencer, M. B., Noll, E., Stolzfus, J., & Harpalani, V. (2001). Identity and school adjustment:
Revisiting the “acting white” assumption. Educational Psychologist, 21-30.
doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3601_3
Steinberg, L., Dornbusch, S. M., & Brown, B. B. (1992). Ethnic differences in adolescent
achievement. An ecological perspective. American Psychologist, 47, 723-729.
doi:10.1037/0003-066X.47.6.723
Stevenson, H. C. (1994). Validation of the scale of Racial Socialization for African American
Adolescents: Steps toward multidimensionality. Journal of Black Psychology, 20, 445468. doi:10.1177/00957984940204005
Stevenson, H. C. (1995). Relationship of adolescent perceptions of racial socialization to racial
identity. Journal of Black Psychology. 21, 49-70. doi:10.1177/00957984950211005
Stevenson, H. C. (1998). Theoretical consideration in measuring racial identity and socialization:
Extending the self further. In R. Jones (Ed.), African American identity development (pp.
217-254). Hampton, VA: Cobb & Henry.
Stevenson, H. (1999). Parents experience of racial socialization. Unpublished measure.
University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education, Philadelphia.
Stevenson, H. C., Cameron, R., Herrero-Taylor, T., & Davis, G. Y. (2002). Development of the
Teenager Experience of Racial Socialization Scale: Correlates of race-related
socialization frequency from the perspective of black youth. Journal of Black
Psychology, 28, 84-106. doi:10.1177/0095798402028002002
Stevenson, H. C., McNeil, J. D., Herrero-Taylor, T., & Davis, G. Y. (2005). Influence of
95
perceived neighborhood diversity and racism experience on the racial socialization of
black youth. Journal of Black Psychology, 31, 273-290. doi:10.1177/0095798405278453
Stevenson, H. C., Reed, J., & Bodison, P. (1996). Kinship social support and adolescent racial
socialization beliefs: Extending the self to family. Journal of Black Psychology, 22, 498–
508. doi:10.1177/00957984960224006
Stevenson, H. C., Reed, J., Bodison, P., & Bishop, A. (1997). Racism stress management: Racial
socialization beliefs and the experience of depression and anger for African-American
adolescents. Youth and Society, 29, 197-222. doi:10.1177/0044118X97029002003
Stevenson, H. C., & Renard, G. (1993). Trusting ole' wise owls: Therapeutic use of cultural
strengths in African American families. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice,
24, 433-442. doi:10.1037//0735-7028.24.4.433
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). New York:
Harper Collins.
Tatum, B. D. (1997). Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the cafeteria? New York,
N.Y: Basic Books.
Thorton, M. C., Chatters, L. M., Taylor, R. J., & Allen, W. R. (1990). Sociodemographic and
environmental correlates of racial socialization by Black parents. Child Development, 61,
401-409. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1990.tb02786.x
Toldson, I.A. (2008). Breaking Barriers: Plotting the Path to Academic Success for School-age
African-American Males. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Black Caucus Foundation,
Inc.
U.S. Department of Education. (2009). Race to the Top executive summary. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/executive-summary.pdf
96
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). Table 322.20:
Bachelor's degrees conferred by postsecondary institutions, by race/ethnicity and sex of
student: Selected years, 1976-77 through 2011-12. In U.S. Department of Education,
National Center for Education Statistics (Ed.), Digest of Education Statistics (2013 ed.).
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_322.20.asp
Utsey, S. O., Bolden, M. A., Lanier,Y., & Williams, O. (2007). Examining the role of culture
specific coping as a predictor of resilient outcomes in African Americans from high- risk
urban communities. Journal of Black Psychology, 33, 75-93.
doi:10.1177/0095798406295094
Utsey, S. O., Hook, J. N., Fischer, N., Belvet, B. (2008). Cultural orientation, ego resilience, and
optimism as predictors of subjective well-being in African Americans. The Journal of
Positive Psychology, 3, 202-210. doi:10.1080/17439760801999610
Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R, Briere, N. M., Senécal, C., & Vallieres, E. F.
(1992). The academic motivation scale: a measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation
in education. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 1003-1017.
doi:10.1177/0013164492052004025
Vandiver, B. J., Cross, W. R., Worrell, F. C., & Fhagen-Smith, P. E. (2002). Validating
the Cross Racial Identity Scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 49, 71-85.
doi:10.1037/0022-0167.49.1.71
Wang, M. T., & Eccles, J. S. (2012). Adolescent behavioral, emotional, and cognitive
engagement trajectories in school and their differential relations to educational success.
Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22, 31–39. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2011.00753.x
White-Johnson, R. L., Ford, K. R., & Sellers, R. M. (2010). Parental racial socialization profiles:
97
Association with demographic factors, racial discrimination, childhood socialization, and
racial identity. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16, 237–247.
doi:10.1037/a0016111
Witherspoon, K. M., Speight, S. L., & Thomas, A. J. (1997). Racial identity attitudes, school
achievement, and academic self-efficacy among African American high school students.
Journal of Black Psychology, 23, 344-357. doi:10.1177/00957984970234003
Woolfson, R. C., Marker, M. E., & Lowe, D. A. (2004). Racism in schools- no room for
complacency. Educational & Child Psychology, 21, 16-30.
Zayas, L. H., & Solari, F. (1994). Early childhood socialization practices in Hispanic families:
Context, culture, and practical implications. Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice, 25, 200–206. doi:10.1037//0735-7028.25.3.2
Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G. & Farley, G. K. (1988). The Multidimensional Scale
of Perceived Social Support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52, 30-41.
doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2
Zorich, S., & Reynolds, W. M. (1988). Convergent and discriminant validation of a measure of
social self-concept. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52, 441-453.
doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa520
98
Appendix A
Human Subjects Institutional Review Board Letter of Approval
99
Appendix A: Human Subjects Institutional Review Board Letter of Approval
100
Appendix B
Demographic Questionnaire
101
Appendix B: Demographic Questionnaire
Section I
Gender (specify)__________________
How old are you? Fill in the bubbles, using the first column as the first digit of your age and the second column for the
second digit of your age. The age 19 would be bubbling in 1 in the first column and bubbling in 9 in the second column.
0
 
1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
 
7
 
8
 
9
 
3. Indicate your ethnic background by choosing the option that best applies to you. Choose only one category.
African
African-American
Black
West Indian/Caribbean Black

4. Citizenship: United States citizen 
Hispanic Black
Multi-Racial
Other (specify): ______________________
Permanent Resident of the US 
Other  _________________
If you were not born in the United States, please answer questions 5- 9.
5.
Country of Birth:_________________________
6. Country of Citizenship________________________
7.
Native Language:_________________________
8. How long have you been in the United States?
9.
Indicate how well you speak English:
Cannot speak English 
Speak a little bit 
Speak well with a little trouble 
Speak & understand very well 
10. What was the racial composition of your high school?
Mostly Black 
Mixed 
Mostly White Other ______________________________
11. What is your current classification? Freshman

Sophomore

12. What is your current grade point average?
.
.
.
.
.
0
1
2
3
4
Junior

Senior

5th Year +

13. What is your major? ________________________________
14. If you are employed, what is your current occupation? ________________________
15. If you do work, wow many hours do you work per week? 5-10  11-20 
21-30 
16. What is your religious affiliation? ____________________________________
102
40+
Other___________

Seldom 
17. How often do you attend religious services?
Not Important 
18. How important is your religion to you?
Sometimes 
Often 
Somewhat Important 
Very Important 
19. What is the best estimate of your annual income and your family’s annual income before taxes?
You

Less than $10,000
 Between $10,000 and $20,000
 Between $20,000 and $30,000
 Between $30,000 and $40,000
Family




You
Family
 Between $40,000 and $60,000

 Between $60,000 and $80,000

 Between $80,000 and $100,000


More than $100,000

20. How would you describe the primary community in which you were raised?
Rural 
Suburban 
Urban 
Other ____________________
21. What is the racial composition of the community listed above?
Mostly Black 
Mixed 
Mostly White Other ____________________
22. How many ethnic organizations do you belong to?
1

2

3

4

5

>5

23. What is the highest education level obtained by your mother (or female guardian) and father (or male guardian)?
Mother





Elementary school
Some high school
High school diploma/equivalent
Business or trade school
Some college
Father





Mother

Associate or two-year degree

Bachelor’s or four-year degree

Some graduate/professional school

Graduate or professional degree
Father




24. How would you describe your family’s socioeconomic status?
Poor 
Working Class 
Middle Class 
Upper Middle 
Wealthy 
25. How would you describe your current physical health?
Very Poor 
Poor 
Fair 
Good 
Very Good 
Fair 
Good 
Very Good 
26. How would you describe your current mental health?
Very Poor 
Poor 
27. How often do you study for classes?
Seldom 
Sometimes 
Often 
28. How often do you study with a group?
Seldom 
Sometimes 
Often 
29. Who do you often study with?
Mostly Black 
Mixed 
Mostly White  Other 
30. How often do you study on campus?
Seldom 
Sometimes 
Often 
31. How often do you attend faculty office hours?
Seldom 
Sometimes 
Often 
32. How often do you seek additional support?
Seldom 
Sometimes 
Often 
103
Appendix C
Conner-Davidson Resilience Scale
104
Appendix C: Conner-Davidson Resilience Scale
Conner-Davidson Scale
Instructions: Read each item and indicate to what degree it reflects your own thoughts and feelings, using the 5-point scale below.
There are no right or wrong answers. Base your responses on your opinion at the present time. To ensure that your answers can be
used, please respond to the statements as written, and indicate your response by bubbling in the circle under your choice.
0
1
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
2
Somewhat
Disagree
Neither
Agree nor
3
Somewhat
Agree
4
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Disagree
0
1
2
3
4
1.
I am able to adapt to change.

2.
I have close and secure relationships.

3.
Sometimes fate or God can help.

4.
I can deal with whatever comes.

5.
My past successes give me confidence for new challenges.

6.
I see the humorous side of things.

7.
Coping with stress strengthens me.

8.
I tend to bounce back after illness or hardship.

9.
Things happen for a reason.

10.
I give my best effort no matter what.

11.
I can achieve my goals.

12.
When things look hopeless, I don 't give up.

13.
I know where to turn for help.

14.
Under pressure, I can focus and think clearly.

15.
I prefer to take the lead in problem solving.

16.
I am not easily discouraged by failure.

17.
I think of myself as a strong person.

18.
I can make unpopular or difficult decisions.

19.
I can handle unpleasant feelings.

20.
I have to act on a hunch.

105
21.
I have a strong sense of purpose.

22.
I am in control of my life.

23.
I like challenges.

24.
I work to attain my goals.

25.
I take pride in my achievements.

106
Appendix D
Cultural and Racial Experiences of Socialization Scale
107
Appendix D: Cultural and Racial Experiences of Socialization Scale
Grandparent
Sibling
Teacher/
Professor
Other Adult
Friend/Peer
Media (TV,
Movies, Internet,
Books)
1
You should be proud to be Black.












2
Schools should be required to teach all children about Black history.












3
It’s important to remember the experience of Black slavery.












4
Living in an all Black neighborhood is no way to show that you are successful.












5
African and Caribbean people think they are better than Black Americans.












6
You really can’t trust most White people.












7
Poor Black people are always looking for a hand out.












8
Fitting into school or work means swallowing your anger when you see racism.












9
Spiritual battles that people fight are more important than the physical battles.












10
Whites make it hard for people to get ahead in this world.












11
























13
Life is easier for light-skinned Black people than it is for dark-skinned Black
people.
Since the world has become so multicultural, it’s wrong to only focus on Black
issues.
Black children should be taught early that God can protect them from racial hatred.












14
Sports are the only way for Black kids to get out of the hood.












15
Black men just want sex.












16
Black women keep the family strong.












17
Africans and Caribbean people get along with Black Americans.












12
No one told me
Mother/Guardia
n
Father/Guardian
108
Lots of Times
Where did you hear this?
(Circle all that apply)
A Few Times
How often?
Never
Have your parents/relatives, friends/peers, teachers/professors, other
adults or the media said to you any of the following statements
throughout your lifetime?
Fill in the circle. Do not use an X, checkmark, or slash.












19
You can’t trust Black people who act too friendly with White people.












20
"Don't forget who your people are because you may need them someday."












A Few Times
Lots of Times
Mother/Guardia
n
Father/Guardian
Grandparent
Sibling
Teacher/
Professor
Other Adult
Friend/Peer
Media (TV,
Movies, Internet,
Books)
21












22
You should learn more about Black history so that you can prevent people from
treating you unfairly.
Black children will learn more if they go to a mostly White school.












23
You have to work twice as hard as Whites in order to get ahead in this world.












24
Knowing your African heritage is important for the survival of Black people.












25












26
Sometimes you have to correct White people when they make racist statements
about Black people.
You can learn a lot from being around important White people.












27
Racism is not as bad today as it used to be.












28
"Train up a child in the way he should go, and he will not turn away from it."












29
Black people have to work together in order to get ahead












30
More jobs would be open to African Americans if employers were not racist.












31












32
Sometimes you have to make yourself less threatening to make White people
around you comfortable.
Light skinned Blacks think they are better than dark-skinned Black people.












33
Racism is real, and you have to understand it or it will hurt you.












34
Good Black men are the backbone of a strong family.












35
Black women just want money.












No one told me
When Black people make money, they try to forget they are Black.
Never
109
18