Department of Society, Human Development and Health, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e27636. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027636. Epub 2011 Nov 18.
To date, research on racial discrimination and health typically has employed explicit self-report measures, despite their potentially being affected by what people are able and willing to say. We accordingly employed an Implicit Association Test (IAT) for racial discrimination, first developed and used in two recent published studies, and measured associations of the explicit and implicit discrimination measures with each other, socioeconomic and psychosocial variables, and smoking.
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Among the 504 black and 501 white US-born participants, age 35-64, randomly recruited in 2008-2010 from 4 community health centers in Boston, MA, black participants were over 1.5 times more likely (p<0.05) to be worse off economically (e.g., for poverty and low education) and have higher social desirability scores (43.8 vs. 28.2); their explicit discrimination exposure was also 2.5 to 3.7 times higher (p<0.05) depending on the measure used, with over 60% reporting exposure in 3 or more domains and within the last year. Higher IAT scores for target vs. perpetrator of discrimination occurred for the black versus white participants: for "black person vs. white person": 0.26 vs. 0.13; and for "me vs. them": 0.24 vs. 0.19. In both groups, only low non-significant correlations existed between the implicit and explicit discrimination measures; social desirability was significantly associated with the explicit but not implicit measures. Although neither the explicit nor implicit discrimination measures were associated with odds of being a current smoker, the excess risk for black participants (controlling for age and gender) rose in models that also controlled for the racial discrimination and psychosocial variables; additional control for socioeconomic position sharply reduced and rendered the association null.
Implicit and explicit measures of racial discrimination are not equivalent and both warrant use in research on racial discrimination and health, along with data on socioeconomic position and social desirability.
迄今为止,种族歧视与健康方面的研究通常采用明确的自我报告措施,尽管这些措施可能会受到人们能够和愿意表达的内容的影响。因此,我们使用了一种种族歧视内隐联想测验(IAT),这种测验最初是在两项最近发表的研究中开发和使用的,并测量了显性和隐性歧视措施之间的相互关系,以及与社会经济和心理社会变量以及吸烟的关系。
方法/主要发现:在 2008 年至 2010 年期间,从马萨诸塞州波士顿的 4 个社区健康中心随机招募了 504 名美国出生的黑人和 501 名白人参与者,年龄在 35-64 岁之间。研究结果表明,与白人参与者相比,黑人参与者在经济上(例如,贫困和教育程度低)的处境更差,社会期望得分更高(分别为 43.8 和 28.2),黑人参与者更容易受到歧视(p<0.05);他们的显性歧视暴露程度也因所使用的测量方法而不同,2.5 到 3.7 倍(p<0.05),超过 60%的人在 3 个或更多领域和过去一年中报告了暴露情况。在黑人和白人参与者中,针对歧视目标和施动者的 IAT 评分更高:针对“黑人 vs. 白人”:0.26 对 0.13;针对“我 vs. 他们”:0.24 对 0.19。在这两个群体中,显性和隐性歧视测量之间仅存在低但无统计学意义的相关性;社会期望与显性但不与隐性测量相关。尽管显性和隐性歧视测量都与当前吸烟的几率无关,但在控制年龄和性别后,黑人参与者的风险增加;在控制种族歧视和心理社会变量的模型中,进一步控制社会经济地位会显著降低并使关联无效。
显性和隐性种族歧视测量并不等同,在研究种族歧视和健康时都应使用这两种方法,同时还应使用有关社会经济地位和社会期望的数据。