Economic hardship and adolescent behavioral outcomes: Within- and between-family associations.

Understanding how youth perceive household economic hardship and how it relates to their behavior is vital given associations between hardship and behavioral development. Yet, most studies ignore youth's own perceptions of economic hardship, instead relying solely on caregiver reports. Moreover, the literature has tended to treat economic hardship as a stable force over time, rather than a volatile one that varies month-to-month. This study addressed extant limitations by collecting monthly measures of economic hardship, specifically caregiver- and youth-reported material deprivation and youth-reported financial stress, and youth internalizing and externalizing problems from 104 youth-caregiver dyads (youth: 14-16 years, 55% female, 37% Black, 43% White) over nine months. We examined month-to-month variability of these constructs and how youth-reports of material deprivation and financial stress predicted their behavior problems, controlling for caregiver-reports of material deprivation. We found that hardship measures varied month-to-month (ICCs = 0.69-0.73), and youth-reported material deprivation positively predicted internalizing when examining both within- and between-individual variability (ß = .19-.47). Youth-reported financial stress positively predicted within-individual variation in externalizing (ß = .18), while youth reports of material deprivation predicted externalizing when looking between families (ß = .41). Caregiver-reported material deprivation was unrelated to youth behavior when accounting for youth perceptions of economic hardship.

An Ethics and Social-Justice Approach to Collecting and Using Demographic Data for Psychological Researchers.

The collection and use of demographic data in psychological sciences has the potential to aid in transforming inequities brought about by unjust social conditions toward equity. However, many current methods surrounding demographic data do not achieve this goal. Some methods function to reduce, but not eliminate, inequities, whereas others may perpetuate harmful stereotypes, invalidate minoritized identities, and exclude key groups from research participation or access to disseminated findings. In this article, we aim to (a) review key ethical and social-justice dilemmas inherent to working with demographic data in psychological research and (b) introduce a framework positioned in ethics and social justice to help psychologists and researchers in social-science fields make thoughtful decisions about the collection and use of demographic data. Although demographic data methods vary across subdisciplines and research topics, we assert that these core issues-and solutions-are relevant to all research within the psychological sciences, including basic and applied research. Our overarching aim is to support key stakeholders in psychology (e.g., researchers, funding agencies, journal editors, peer reviewers) in making ethical and socially-just decisions about the collection, analysis, reporting, interpretation, and dissemination of demographic data.

Combating the Conspiracy of Silence: Clinician Recommendations for Talking About Racism-Related Events With Youth of Color.

Graphic videos of race-based violence, including police brutality toward Black people and anti-Asian hate crimes, have exploded over the past year. While documentation of these horrific acts has brought visibility to the pervasiveness of racial discrimination, it has also resulted in youth of color being exposed to racial stressors more than ever before across numerous social media and news platforms.1-3 Beyond the significant race-related stress already experienced by youth in school contexts,4 this increased exposure to racism via media is concerning, as both direct and vicarious exposure to racial discrimination can compromise psychological well-being of youth and cause trauma-like symptoms, such as intrusive thoughts, vigilance, and depression.3,5.