Superwoman Schema and John Henryism among African American women: An intersectional perspective on coping with racism.

RATIONALE: John Henryism and Superwoman Schema (SWS) are dispositional characteristics adopted to overcome the challenges of chronic psychosocial stress, and have particular salience for African American women. Both show protective and harmful effects on health and share conceptual similarities and distinctions, yet there is no empirical evidence of the potential overlap resulting in uncertainty about the unique roles they may each play concerning the health of African American women. OBJECTIVE: We examined: 1) whether and to what extent John Henryism and SWS represent similar or distinct constructs relevant to the unique sociohistorical and sociopolitical position of African American women, and 2) whether the two differentially predict health outcomes. METHODS: Data are from a purposive and socioeconomically diverse sample of 208 African American women in the San Francisco Bay Area. First, we conducted a progressive series of tests to systematically examine the conceptual and empirical overlap between John Henryism and SWS: correlation analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), principal component analysis and k-modes cluster analysis. Next, we used multivariable regression to examine associations with psychological distress and hypertension. RESULTS: John Henryism and SWS were moderately correlated with one another (rs = 0.30-0.48). In both EFA and cluster analyses, John Henryism items were distinct from SWS subscale items. For SWS, feeling an obligation to present an image of strength and an obligation to help others predicted higher odds of hypertension (p < 0.05); having an intense motivation to succeed predicted lower odds (p = 0.048). John Henryism did not predict hypertension. Feeling an obligation to help others and an obligation to suppress emotions predicted lower levels of psychological distress (p < 0.05) whereas John Henryism predicted higher distress (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: We discuss the implications of these findings for the measurement of culturally specific phenomena and their role in contributing to the unequal burden of ill health among African American women.

When policy and psychology meet: Mitigating the consequences of bias in schools.

Harsh exclusionary discipline predicts major negative life outcomes, including adult incarceration and unemployment. This breeds racial inequality because Black students are disproportionately at risk for this type of discipline. Can a combination of policy and psychological interventions reduce this kind of discipline and mitigate this inequality? Two preregistered experiments (N experiment1 = 246 teachers; N experiment2 = 243 teachers) used an established paradigm to systematically test integration of two and then three policy and psychological interventions to mitigate the consequences of bias (troublemaker labeling and pattern perception) on discipline (discipline severity). Results indicate that the integrated interventions can curb teachers' troublemaker labeling and pattern prediction toward Black students who misbehave in a hypothetical paradigm. In turn, integration of the three components reduced racial inequality in teachers' discipline decisions. This research informs scientific theory, public policy, and interventions.

On the prevalence of racial discrimination in the United States.

Boutwell, Nedelec, Winegard, Shackelford, Beaver, Vaughn, Barnes, & Wright (2017) published an article in this journal that interprets data from the Add Health dataset as showing that only one-quarter of individuals in the United States experience discrimination. In Study 1, we attempted to replicate Boutwell et al.'s findings using a more direct measure of discrimination. Using data from the Pew Research Center, we examined a large sample of American respondents (N = 3,716) and explored the prevalence of discrimination experiences among various racial groups. Our findings stand in contrast to Boutwell et al.'s estimates, revealing that between 50% and 75% of Black, Hispanic, and Asian respondents (depending on the group and analytic approach) reported discriminatory treatment. In Study 2, we explored whether question framing affected how participants responded to Boutwell's question about experiencing less respect and courtesy. Regardless of question framing, non-White participants reported more experiences than White participants. Further, there was an interaction of participant race and question framing such that when participants were asked about experiences of less respect or courtesy broadly, there were no differences between non-White participants and White participants, but when they were asked about experiences that were specifically race-based, non-White participants reported more experiences than White participants. The current research provides a counterweight to the claim that discrimination is not a prevalent feature of the lives of minority groups and the serious implications this claim poses for research and public policy.