PSYCH 441 Fundação Getúlio Vargas Normal Family Processes by F Walsh Ed Article Review

User Generated

rrgbeerf

Business Finance

PSYCH 441

Fundacao Getulio Vargas

PSYCH

Description

This paper has a few components.

  1. You should take notes or highlight key areas. Please be sure to submit the links or a pdf of the articles with your submissions.
  2. You will complete the article review summary in a template that will include key article details as well as some of your own critiques and observations. Note: Please submit typewritten notes and responses. You can organize using bullet points and narrative summaries, as appropriate.
  3. Please refer to the article components checklist to be sure you are considering key areas within each article. (See separate document.)
  4. Summary of Assignment: In your summaries, you can use bullet points and full narratives to report the required information. While bullet points will work for some sections, you should discuss the findings and your critiques in paragraph format. Be selective and focus on key points
    • ̈ Required Text: F. Walsh, Ed. (2015). Normal Family Processes: Growing Diversity andComplexity: Fourth Edition. The text is available in the UMB Bookstore and via the Healey Library.
    • ̈ M. A. Fine & F.D. Fincham, Eds. (2013). Handbook of Family Theories. This text will be referred to on class presentations and during discussion. The text is on e-reserve via Healey Library.
page1image3741120624

Psych 441-01: Article Summary Components

I.Title/Authors/Journal Title/Year of Publication (in APA format)

II.Key Terms

III.Introduction (Should refer to the theory or prior research guiding the study, any research hypothesis (hypotheses) and/or research questions for the study)

IV.Method (You should note how the authors describe the Participants/Sample, the Materials, Procedures, and any Measures and/or Apparatus. You can be selective, but you should specify the important instruments or measures.)

Subsections

  1. Participants/Sample
  2. Procedures
  3. Apparatus/Measures/Instruments
  4. Data Analyses (brief notes)

V .Results/Findings

VI.Discussion, Implications, Critiques This can be expanded when you complete the full literature review paper.

VII.References (refer to the depth of the references; you do not have the list these)

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Name ______________________________ Date____________________________ Psych 441-01_Spring 2020 Article Review Assignment: Article Notes Template Please summarize the articles relying on this format. . I. Article Title/Authors/Journal Title/Year of Publication II. Article Constructs/Key Terms/Keywords (You should also note any theory guiding the study from the overview and can note or discuss prior research as well.) III. Research Hypothesis and/or Research Questions You can comment on the variables and how these are defined and any notes on how they will be measured? (Adapt to focus on areas of inquiry and investigation if you are reviewing a qualitative study or a study that is more theoretical.) IV. Design and Method (You should select examples if there are several instruments and methods.) i. Participants/Sample Composition and Size (Any recruitment or sampling strategies or methods) ii. Procedures/Measures/Apparatus/Instruments (Examples) iii. Analyses V. Sample of the Results/Findings VI. VII. Discussion: Summary/Implications. Include your thoughts and any critiques of the article. References (Here you should note the scope, in terms of overall list of references; you do not need to list all of the references). Please add any notes or comments about the article’s relevance to your literature review paper. Anthony G. James Miami University Stephanie Irby Coard and Mark A. Fine Duane Rudy University of North Carolina at Greensboro University of Missouri The Central Roles of Race and Racism in Reframing Family Systems Theory: A Consideration of Choice and Time This article explores the central roles in family research and practice of race and racism in the reframing of family systems theory (FST) when applied to Black and/or African American families. Specifically, we discuss how current concepts of FST allow for an understanding of racial and ethnic socialization in the parent–child familial subsystem. We then theorize the potential reframing of FST to better accommodate race, ethnicity, and racism, and suggest an expansion of the theory by including the components of historical time and choice. We conclude with a brief discussion of the practical implications of our suggested expansion. The field of family science has several theories and frameworks to guide scholars and practitioners who work with families. The goal of this article is to reframe how family systems theory (FST) can be used to better understand and conduct family research and practice, with race, ethnicity, and racism as central components. More specifically, how do race, ethnicity, and Department of Family Science and Social Work, Miami University, 110B McGuffey Hall, 210 E. Spring Street, Oxford, OH, 45056 (anthony.g.james@miamioh.edu). Key Words: African American, Black families, family systems theory, race, racial socialization, racism. racism interface with FST given the theory’s existing assumptions and concepts? Our rationale for focusing on FST is threefold. First, FST emphasizes both family structure and process, which sheds light on the varied ways that families can be organized and the manner in which their members interact with one another. That diversity lends support to the long-standing plea to not view Black families as a monolithic group. Second, FST is broad enough to serve as a foundation for both research and practice, as it is relevant to both research on Black families and applied efforts with families (e.g., therapy; Kerr, 2002). Third, because of its breadth, FST has relevance across multiple disciplines (e.g., social work, family science, family psychology, family medicine; Kazak, Segal-Andrews, & Johnson, 1995; Payne, 2015). Thus, we argue that FST, strengthened by a consideration of historical time and choice, could have significant implications for the well-being and healthy functioning of Black families. A critical question that an astute reader may ask is why a universal theory such as FST needs to consider race and racism when thinking about, or engaging in practice with, families. Primarily, our rationale is that the theory focuses on processes explaining why families engage in patterns of interaction. A decontextualized FST approach would ignore the elephant in the room Journal of Family Theory & Review 10 (June 2018): 419–433 DOI:10.1111/jftr.12262 419 420 Journal of Family Theory & Review (i.e., race and racism) that often serves as a catalyst for culturally sanctioned parenting practices and parent–child interactions within Black families. The racial identity of families (level of racial consciousness of the family unit) and of its members (e.g., parents, extended family) drives the need to engage in practices to help children develop in a racialized society. Turning a blind eye to racism or how a color-blind ideology may affect some Black families would prevent scholars and practitioners from completely understanding reasons that some Black families tend to be structured the way they are and reasons they engage in certain patterns of behaviors. For instance, the acceptance of color-blind ideologies has been linked to lower cognitive performance among ethnic minorities in interracial interactions (Holoien & Shelton, 2012). These patterns are central to strengthening Black families and the processes that shape family goals (e.g., protecting the physical, psychological, and emotional health of the child) and are based clearly on inputs from the external environment (e.g., being embedded in a racialized society). Thus, if FST is to fully explain structure and process across all family ties, inclusive of racially and ethnically diverse families, we argue that it is critical to consider the concepts of historical time and choice. Doing so would allow FST to better capture the culturally relevant complexities and existing strengths of Black families often exhibited through their organizational structure and interactive processes. In this article, we provide conceptualizations of race, ethnicity, and racism and discuss how these constructs can be purposely and strategically incorporated into FST to enhance understanding of the particular area of racial and ethnic socialization (RES). We then follow this discussion with suggestions for how FST can be extended by considering two additional concepts (historical time and choice) to better inform research and practice with families of color, particularly Black families. Family Systems Theory and Racial and Ethnic Socialization Although FST scholars acknowledge that family systems are influenced by societal-level factors, there have been few attempts to specifically address how race, ethnicity, and racism affect the ways that FST can be used to help understand family dynamics and outcomes. In this section, we critically review research on racial and ethnic socialization (RES) in an effort to better understand families of color, although we primarily focus on African American families in this article. Conceptualizing Race, Ethnicity, and Racism Although definitions of race and ethnicity differ, our usage of these terms varies according to how they are used in the articles we cite and the context in which the term is used. In this article, we use the term race (e.g., Black) to refer to socially constructed categories that are assigned to individuals on the basis of physical characteristics, with race frequently denoted by physical skin color (Winker, 2004). We use the term ethnicity (e.g., African American) to refer to groups of individuals who have a common origin and culture. Thus, individuals of the same race (e.g., Black) may have different ethnicities (e.g., individuals born and raised in the Caribbean vs. individuals born and raised in Ethiopia). Finally, the term racism refers to acts and ideas that serve to disadvantage one group relative to another on the basis of race. Racism may occur at an institutional level (e.g., unequal access to high-quality education) or a personal level (e.g., one individual being suspicious of or avoiding another person on the basis of his or her skin color). Racism may also include acts of commission (e.g., police brutality) as well as acts of omission (e.g., failure to provide adequate medical facilities in primarily African American neighborhoods; Jones, 2000). A particular area of family research in which the study of race, ethnicity, and racism has been evident is parenting. Although parenting can be challenging for all families, Black families confront particular challenges while raising children in a racially conscious society (Coard & Sellers, 2005). RES is a specific type of socialization utilized by families of color in response to the challenges associated with the sociohistorical landscape, the persistence of racism, and living in a racialized society that has historically not valued their existence. Because of these unique challenges, socializing children to live in a racist society is perhaps the most important aspect of parenting children of color. We argue that RES is arguably the most salient family process in African American families that FST needs to understand and explain. Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory While many researchers who study parenting do not explicitly state that they are using a FST perspective to theoretically ground their work, others (e.g., McHale et al., 2006) have explicitly used an FST approach. Specifically, McHale et al. (2006) noted that RES can be a coparenting process, and one that occurs across subsystems (i.e., parental subsystem and parent–child subsystems). We argue that the study of RES and the processes that families engage in to function in a racially structured society are within the bounds of FST. We base this argument on the fact that parent–child interactions and parental socialization of children are embedded in family systems. In the following section, we provide a description of RES and a brief overview of literature relevant to the parental socialization of African American children, and we discuss how key components of FST (i.e., goals, rules, change, inputs) are present in these socialization processes in African American families. Contextualizing RES in a FST Framework RES refers to the messages parents transmit to their children about the meaning and significance of their racial or ethnic group identity, racial stratification, and inter- and intragroup relations (Hughes & Chen, 1997; Lesane-Brown, 2006; Priest et al., 2014; Reynolds & Gonzales-Backen, 2017). For example, Peters (2002) explained that “the tasks Black parents share with all parents—providing for and raising children—not only are performed within the mundane extreme environmental stress of racism but include the responsibility of raising physically and emotionally healthy children who are Black in a society in which being Black has negative connotations” (p. 59). Inherent in this process is FST’s component of family goals, in this case Black parents’ goal that their children learn strategies to live in a racist and racially structured society. Scholars examining the processes involved in RES concur that societal oppression makes this process essential for the optimal development of Black and African American children (e.g., Boykin & Toms, 1985; Coard & Sellers, 2005; Golash-Boza, 2016; Hughes et al., 2006). The early “triple quandary” work of Boykin and Toms (1985) provided the foundation for the emergence of RES research. They explained that RES involves the transmission of messages to children that will equip them with the skills 421 to successfully navigate three separate cultural experiences—mainstream, minority, and African American culture. They posited that each of these three realities requires youth to develop specific knowledge within each status to be successful as well as psychologically and emotionally healthy. The mainstream reality requires an adaptation to “White middle-class standards” (Boykin & Toms, 1985). Such standards are necessary for navigating the school context and future employment opportunities. Understanding the effects of their status requires knowledge of how African Americans are socially and historically positioned in society. Minority status considers the historical enslavement and subsequent societal oppression of African Americans. As a result, navigating this status requires unique skills for coping with societal racism and discrimination (Phenice & Griffore, 2000). For many African Americans, maintaining a sense of self-worth and dignity is an essential factor in the process of freely engaging in their own unique cultural expression. African Americans’ RES requires developmentally appropriate guidance and instruction for navigating each of these cultural experiences (e.g., cultural pride, preparation for bias; Coard & Sellers, 2005). Tenets of racial socialization. Although more recent RES research has addressed how these processes unfold in other ethnic-racial minority families (e.g., Native American, European American, immigrant Latino; Hughes & Chen, 1997; Hughes, Witherspoon, Rivas-Drake, & West-bey, 2009; Tynes, 2007), how these processes work in African American families has been studied more extensively (Boykin & Toms, 1985; Edwards & Few-Demo, 2016; Lesane-Brown, 2006). The tenets described here are based on the preponderance of RES research focused on African American youth and families. In a review of racial socialization research, Hughes et al. (2006) identified the four most frequently utilized tenets of RES as “cultural socialization, preparation for bias, promotion of mistrust, and egalitarianism” (p. 748). The authors asserted that although scholars adapt different terms to describe these processes, they generally identify similar tenets to explain racial socialization. Furthermore, these scholars acknowledged that there is overlap between the racial socialization literature, which focuses 422 primarily on African American family processes, and the ethnic socialization literature, which emphasizes the family processes characteristic of ethnic immigrants (e.g., Latino families) as well as African Americans. These RES processes align with the FST components of family rules and change. The notion of family rules is present not in the sense of intrasystem interactions but in the sense that it involves parents engaging in the process of socializing their children to rules in the external world that result from the presence of racist ideologies and structures (Golash-Boza, 2016). Further, because race and racism are dynamic concepts, RES involves parents needing to continually monitor changes in the ways that racism manifests itself to alter their socialization practices. As an example of how changing laws and social norms need to be continually monitored by parents, despite the fact that interracial relationships are typically legal, there still remains a range of subtle and not-so-subtle ways in which such relationships are frowned on and discriminated against in America. As a result, despite legal changes, parents must still prepare their children for entering into such relationships and attempt to protect them from their potentially negative effects; Tillman & Miller, 2017). Change in these socialization practices enables parents to continually, and effectively, equip their children with the ability to successfully navigate continually modified racial barriers. Cultural socialization. Cultural socialization has been identified as the most frequently used method of RES, and it is often referred to as racial pride (Hughes et al., 2006). For families of color, socializing their children to understand, and be proud of, their ethnic minority culture is a family goal, and family goals, whether implicitly or explicitly stated, are considered in FST to influence both family processes and structures (Whitchurch & Constantine, 2009). The primary goal of cultural socialization is for African American parents to provide positive representations of African American culture and teaching children about their cultural and racial “heritage, history, customs and traditions” (Hughes et al., 2006, p. 749). Families engage in the process of cultural socialization through daily interactions, discussions, and practices that provide positive representations of African American culture. This includes talking about significant contributions African Journal of Family Theory & Review Americans have made, enjoying ethnic foods, and exposing youth to “culturally relevant books, artifacts, music, and stories” (Hughes et al., 2006, p. 749). According to Boykin and Toms (1985), this method of racial socialization is geared toward preparing African American youth to navigate African American culture. Preparation for bias. The preparation-for-bias tenet is characterized by parental transmission of messages that prepare youth for their minority status (Hughes et al., 2006). Such messages communicate an understanding of societal perceptions of African Americans. From an FST perspective, this process is essential for African American families because parents realize there are rules that place their children of color in harm’s way. More specifically, the rules exist because of the ubiquitous racism in society (Golash-Boza, 2016). Parents engaging in preparation for bias may tell their children that they have to be twice as good as their European American peers to be considered equal to them (Coard, Wallace, Stevenson, & Brotman, 2004). In addition, this tenet also prepares youth for the inequitable treatment they will receive. For example, parents of an African American male may prepare him for police racial profiling through a process by which they equip him with knowledge of how to ensure that he is not perceived as hostile. This preparation is done to protect youth from oppressive societal consequences such as being detained by law enforcement or worse (e.g., death, murder). Promotion of mistrust. The promotion-ofmistrust tenet is described as messages that encourage Black youth to be cautious in White contexts and in interactions with White people (Hughes et al., 2006) and a socialization method through which families “emphasize the need for wariness and distrust in interracial interactions” (Hughes et al., 2006, p. 757). This strategy is used primarily by parents who have experienced adverse interracial interactions, which they try to prevent their children from experiencing. Similarly, it is also another goal-oriented process to help protect children from experiencing potentially fatal interactions with racist individuals. An example of how this process can be found is in the children’s book Ruth and the Green Book (Ramsey & Strauss, 2010). Ruth detailed her African American family’s travels and how when they needed a food or restroom Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory break, there were hidden rules that regulated where they could eat or relieve themselves. Her mother shared with her a “green book” that explained these rules to help protect families like Ruth’s. Although the story is fictional, the “green book” itself is an actual text (Green, 1936) that many African American families routinely used to assist them in making travel decisions that kept (keep) them safe, and alive. Egalitarianism. Egalitarianism refers to messages that encourage youth to value individualized qualities and equality (Thornton, Chatters, Taylor, & Allen, 1990). Hughes et al. (2006) described the egalitarian method of racial socialization as a process through which African American parents foster the skills that African American students need to develop to excel in mainstream society. This process happens in families via parents communicating to their children the importance of “hard work, virtue, self-acceptance, and equality” (Hughes et al., 2006, p. 757), which they then use outside the family in their various life pursuits. It stresses the fact that African American students are equal to other racial groups and encourages peaceful coexistence (Coard et al., 2004). The process reflects the FST concept of output, or what families provide to the external world. Research indicates that African American families engage in racial socialization strategies that either combine methods or use them in isolation (Hughes et al., 2006). The process of racial socialization among African American families is important to understand for several reasons. First, empirical studies document its influential role in determining psychological, educational, behavioral, and social outcomes for African American youth (Banerjee, Harrell, & Johnson, 2011; Bennett, 2006), such as positive identity development (Barr & Neville, 2008), increased self-esteem (Neblett et al., 2008), better academic adjustment (Banerjee et al., 2011), and a buffer against harmful effects of racism (Brown & Tylka, 2011) and racial discrimination (Neblett et al., 2008). Second, racial socialization influences youths’ beliefs and attitudes about the way the world works and informs their perceptions of self and helps to shape their strategies and skills for coping with racism and navigating race-related social interactions (Coard & Sellers, 2005). In short, as is consistent with FST, the family is a primary context for youth 423 identity, socialization, and discrimination experiences. Youth explore, construct, display, and reconstruct their ethnic and racial identities within family settings (Awokoya, 2012). They receive a multitude of RES messages from family members and through family practices, such as family communication about racial discrimination (Hughes et al., 2006; Juang & Syed, 2014). This ongoing dynamic systemic interplay between the external environmental systems and internal family responses via RES processes that equip youth with the ability to comfortably and competently move between the multiple cultural milieus they have to navigate (otherwise known as code switching; Morton, 2014) evidences automata within the family that are centered by race and racism. Ecological characteristics of RES. The ecological characteristics of RES reflect the FST concepts of inputs and feedback loops. The external environment transmits information to the family that serves as a warning signal to parents regarding how much or how little RES is needed to help promote the healthy development of their children and youth. Thus, parents receive feedback from their children and their environments to determine whether to continue socializing their children as they have been or whether some change is necessary, a reflection of automatic family and environment dynamics that directly relate to Black and African American families’ being embedded in a racialized society. The parent–child relationship literature, particularly that related to the RES of children, is a prime example of how FST can be used to center the analysis of how race and racism in family life have an impact on family processes. Specifically, when considering the FST concepts of family rules, goals, change, and outputs or inputs, FST can accommodate how racial and ethnic minority families adapt to rearing children in a racist environment that does not always value them or their contributions to society. However, the current construction of FST is limited in its ability to explain why families engage in certain patterns of interaction or organize in the way they do. Extensions to FST: Historical Time and Choice In the spirit of Golash-Boza’s (2016) statement that “theoretical knowledge undergirds empirical work and it helps us to know which questions to ask and how to interpret our findings” 424 Journal of Family Theory & Review (p. 130), we propose revising FST to include two concepts that better inform research on, and the understanding of, the effects that race and racism have on family systems. Historical time and choice push against the current boundaries of FST, yet they universally have an impact on family systems and are strongly influenced by race and racism. We extend FST by discussing how these concepts are central to both the structure and process of family life. Historical Time Current components of FST are not completely absent of the notion of time. One component of FST in which temporality is central, albeit implicitly, is feedback loops. Time is central because time must pass for the cycles of feedback loops, which result in family change, to occur. A family system puts out information (i.e., outputs), it receives some sort of feedback (positive or negative) in return, and the family adjusts to that feedback, which leads to subsequent outputs. This dynamic system of feedback loops is continuous and must include temporal time. However, the notion of time experienced in dynamic systems feedback loops is different from the notion of historical time and how that affects family systems. We refer to time in a historical or temporal sense, specifically in that systems are historically contextualized in both the broader system in which they are embedded and the history of the system itself and its subcomponent history (Riegel, 1975). From this perspective, temporal change in a system is embedded not only in its own historical experiences but also in the broader societal structures in which the family is situated. Additionally, because systems have some level of agency, they can adapt in ways that change the process or organization of the system (Ford & Lerner, 1992). This type of change is what Lerner (1984) referred to as plasticity. Although he was referring to the human organism in a relationally systemic way, the same concept holds for viewing family systems regarding how history (e.g., personal, cultural) affects factors such as family organization (structure) or patterns of interaction (process), both among members and with external entities. Additional support for the inclusion of historical time as a concept in FST pertains to the fact that the structures of race and racism also change over time. As explained earlier, the structures typically change to fit the needs and interests of those in power across historical periods (Golash-Boza, 2016; Marx & Engels, 1970). Thus, our theories must be able to adapt to these changing ideologies, especially in how they directly influence family systems. Historical time allows for FST to conceptually incorporate empirical data regarding how race and racism have an impact on the social locations of family systems in contemporary times. We suggest that policy decisions over the course of history, rooted in the structures of race and racism, affect contemporary family life. In these examples, the structures of race and racism influence the structure and patterns of interactions of contemporary families. Family structure and race. Including historical time into FST can also explain contemporary structures of African American families and how those structures have shifted as a result of their being embedded in a racialized society. For instance, near the end of the 19th century, 80% of African American families were headed by two-parent families. This figure dropped to 64% by 1970, and today it is less than 40% (Pew Research Center, 2015). The same Pew study found that African American families have the lowest percentage of two-parent family households when compared across ethnoracial groups. What explains this difference? Several decades ago, Billingsley (1968) suggested that economic factors were the main drivers of this change in family life among African American families. He hones in on economic decisions in the mid-20th century that provided vast economic opportunities for European American families while simultaneously stripping away those opportunities for working members of African American families (e.g., providing government contracts to European American families and businesses while restricting the same contracts from African American families and businesses; Feagin, 2014). Although economic policies may not necessarily explicitly favor one ethnic or racial group over another, when the policies are carried out in practice (e.g., usually by European American program administrators), they have overwhelmingly favored European American families and disadvantaged African American families (Katznelson, 2005). Although Katznelson (2005) focused primarily on federal New Deal programs and policy, economic policies Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory at the local level also favored the majority group while disadvantaging African American families (e.g., Lipman, 2013; Mayorga-Gallo, 2014; Saito, 2009; Zhang, 2011). When considering that having stable work and income are two critical determinants of whether people enter into marriages and whether their marriages remain intact (Edin & Kefalas, 2011; Gibson-Davis, Edin, & McLanahan, 2005; Smock, Manning, & Porter, 2005), such racist economic policy decisions shift opportunity to those at the top of the racial hierarchy and partially explain historically drastic changes in the structure of families (i.e., a nearly 50% shift from two-parent to single-parent families over the course of 100 years). Such changes in structure are certain to affect processes and interactions within the family system. Another policy-based historical factor that has been linked to the contemporary structure of African American families is mass incarceration. The current relatively high number of single-parent families (typically single mothers) and the increase in grandparent-headed families (Baker, Silverstein, & Putney, 2008; Turney, 2014) have been fueled by mass incarceration policies. Scholars have found that the disproportionate rate of mass incarceration of Black men and women has affected the structure of African American families (e.g., distorted marriage markets, removed working men from the home; Alexander, 2012; Raley, 1996; Western & Pettit, 2010). Specifically, law enforcement policies (e.g., drug sentencing guidelines, stop-and-frisk policing, law-and-order movement, government-supported prison-industrial complex) over the past 50 years have undergirded the exponential growth in the prison population, which consists of a disproportionate number of African American men and women. We are not arguing that each of those single-parent families desires a nuclear two-parent structure; rather, we are arguing that the trend that saw the emergence of a majority single-parent structure (from a historical majority of a two-parent structure) among African American families is traceable to historical policy changes. Part of the value of FST is its ability to explain how dynamic systems emerge, are structured, or make alterations to adjust for perturbations (Dent & Umpleby, 1998). However, FST has not typically considered historical markers as key determinants of emergence and/or organization. 425 We propose using historical context as a key factor for explaining change in family structures. Specifically, we argue that social and economic policies have direct implications for how African American families are currently organized and the emergence of a different majority structure (e.g., primarily two parent to primarily single parent). Marital subsystems and parent–child subsystems. Our discussion of how history influences family interactions, when FST centers race, focuses on two areas of family systems: the marital subsystem and the parent–child subsystem(s). Although these two particular areas of family systems are not exhaustive of all systems across African American families, they have received substantial scholarly attention and provide opportunities to discuss limitations of FST for understanding African American family systems when centering race (Boyd-Franklin, 2013; Cabrera, Fagan, Wight, & Schadler, 2011; Kelly, Maynigo, Wesley, & Durham, 2013). With respect to the marital subsystem, families of color have external experiences that spillover into their family life. Specifically, for African American couples, their personal histories of ethnoracial discrimination are linked to lower marital satisfaction (Lincoln & Chae, 2010; Murry, Brown, Brody, Cutrona, & Simons, 2001; Taylor, 1990). Murry et al. (2001) found that increased incidences of discrimination were linked to higher levels of psychological distress for married African American women, which resulted in poor-quality intimate relations with their spouses. Lincoln and Chae (2010) found that personal histories of discrimination had negative spillover effects on psychosocial health and marital satisfaction for both members of the couple. These personal discriminatory experiences produce stressors that may exceed the coping resources of the relationship, contribute to the higher divorce rate among African American families, and partially explain the comparably lower divorce rate among European Americans, especially when considering that they are in the more privileged ethnoracial group (James & Fine, 2013). Most couples experience tensions and strains in their intimate relationships; however, we argue that discriminatory race-based experience becomes a key compounding effect for ethnic minority couples by adding to the already-distressing experiences that commonly occur in intimate relationships. Racism can have 426 a debilitating effect on relationships (Williams, 1999), particularly when there is a lack of ethnic pride or internalized racism (Taylor, 1990; Trail, Goff, Bradbury, & Karney, 2012) or simply a lack of tools to buffer the negative effects of discriminatory experiences. Considering that marital satisfaction can also be a protective factor against discriminatory experiences for ethnic minority couples (Lincoln & Chae, 2010; Trail et al., 2012), how partners interact with each other as a result of these race-based experiences can be either a protective or debilitating factor that contributes to processes that may strengthen or weaken the foundation of the relationship. With respect to the parent–child subsystem, personal histories have an important place in influencing parenting (and RES) in African American families. Parents’ personal history with racist experiences and continual racist inputs from the external environment impel them to engage in the RES of their own children. For example, their personal histories with racism may influence a desire to protect or shield their children or prepare them from those same experiences (Hughes et al., 2006) by engaging in a process of preparing for bias and building racial pride. For instance, racial pride can help children internalize value for their culture because they are likely to have experiences in their world that discount or dehumanize that culture or skin color. As such, parents often engage in practices to help build up the confidence or self-esteem of their ethnic minority children well before the children have direct experiences with racism of their own, or at least before children are able to understand the experience of racism. Thus, the process of engaging in RES is based on the history of the parents, who have developed in a racialized milieu. Without the incorporation of history as a component of FST, the theory is limited to explanations of the behavior without context, which places limits on the ability to acquire a complete understanding of the particular parenting processes. Policy and family systems. The second way that historical time influences family systems is through policy. The history of redlining directly affects the current racial wealth disparities, which indicate that the average European American family has 13 times the wealth of the average African American family (Pew Research Center, 2016; Williams & Collins, Journal of Family Theory & Review 2001). Squires (1992) defined redlining as “a process by which goods or services are made unavailable, or are available only on less than favorable terms, to people because of where they live regardless of their relevant objective characteristics” (p. 2). When the U.S. Federal Housing Authority shifted its policies to allow more Americans to secure loans to purchase homes, decisions regarding provision of a loan and/or its terms were made by banks and loan officers on the basis of an evaluation of the property. In the first half of the 20th century, homes and properties sought by African American families were “redlined” such that loans were denied or provided on substandard terms (e.g., high interest rates), whereas homes and land sought by many European American families were “greenlined” (i.e., favorable evaluations that resulted in provision of loans and favorable loan terms; Woods, 2012). To be sure, the color-coding system had other categories that further segmented groups subsumed by the European American moniker, based primarily on their perceived desirability. For instance, Protestant English, Scottish, and German Americans were coded as “green” or “most desirable,” but Jewish, Irish, and Italian Americans were coded as “less desirable” or “blue,” with a “yellow” or “undesirable” classification that intersected class and race and was constructed mostly of working class European American families (see Hoyt, 1933, for the full coding structure). This process enabled many European American families to secure houses and build equity (i.e., wealth) over time. Thus, future generations were able to secure inheritances that gave them a start to life that was far better than families who were not able to bequeath such gifts to future generations (Conley, 1999). Further, when considering that wealth provides security against life experiences that negatively affect well-being, material wealth also provides families with economic flexibility to engage in activities that positively affect the well-being of family members (Eid & Larsen, 2008; Oliver & Shapiro, 2006). We argue that as it is currently constructed, FST does not allow for a component of history to be considered in how families are structured or their contemporary patterns of interaction. However, race serves as a regulator of opportunity for families, particularly in how they have organized themselves over time. Specifically, African American families have traditionally Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory had less access to resources and opportunities. This access to resources provides vastly different opportunities in family process (e.g., ability to take regular family vacations, weekly meal dates for couples, access to extracurricular educational experiences for children, other leisure-time activities; Dufur, Parcel, & Troutman, 2013; He & Baker, 2005). Those historical policies that shaped contemporary racial disparities, in conjunction with an economic system rigged along racial lines (e.g., Darolia, Koedel, Martorell, Wilson, & Perez-Arce, 2014; Karger, 2005), have important implications for how contemporary African American families are structured and have access to the needed resources that increase well-being, particularly for Black single mothers (Passias, Sayer, & Pepin, 2017). Choice FST can also be enhanced through incorporation of the concept of choice, particularly in regard to how family systems self-organize or emerge as a result of the family’s interactions with the external environment. As previously explained, FST derives from general systems theory, which includes dynamic systems theory (Thelen & Smith, 1998). One component of dynamic systems theory is the notion of self-organization of biological organization. Thelen and Smith (1998) noted that “pattern and order emerge from the interactions of the components of a complex system without explicit instructions, either from the organism itself or from the environment” (p. 259). Choice regards whether families had a choice in their organization (formation) and/or their patterns of interactions within the family or with its external environment. We disagree with Thelen and Smith’s argument that systems emerge without explicit instructions; rather, we agree with Omi and Winant (2015), who argued that “we make our racial identities, both individually and collectively, but not under conditions of our own choosing” (p. 153). Omi and Winant (2015) further noted that conceptions of race are formed and altered at the state and national level of government (e.g., in the United States, the Census creates ethnoracial categories into which participants self-select). Such formal structures provide mechanisms for internalizing beliefs about racist ideology, which manifest in practice and systemic inequality across social institutions, including in the family. Much evidence 427 shows that families have not always had agentic choice in their formation or patterns of interaction, as we discuss later. In the remainder of this section, we provide historical and contemporary examples to support our argument that the concept of choice enhances FST’s ability to explain how structures of race and racism impact family life. The history of the structure of race and racism is such that state and local policies have resulted in altering the organization of families and their interactions, with affected families having little choice in the matter. For instance, African American slave families existed under the constant threat of spouses and/or children being sold to other slave owners (Patterson, 1982). Because African slaves brought to America were considered property and could be sold by their owners, they did not have the choice of self-organization of their families (i.e., any member of the family system could be sold at the whim of the owner; Williams, 2012). Their family systems were organized on the basis of decisions by slave owners who were more concerned with return on investment than well-being of the families. Thus, decisions such as who was bred to bring about a profit were of more importance than allowing African slaves to structure their own families. Although some slave owners did allow slave families some authority in structuring their families, such decisions could change at any moment. This was not a condition that many European American families were subjected to. From a family interaction perspective, King (2011) detailed how a major goal for African slaves with children was to teach their children how to grow, develop, and survive in the confines of slavery. If children were not socialized in this way, they were at risk of being brutally whipped or killed, similar to the contemporary processes of racial socialization explained earlier. Examples of family life being limited by choice are also relevant (e.g., perceptions of school choice and career opportunities and barriers to upward mobility; Djamba & Kimuna, 2012; Fouad & Byars-Winston, 2005; Osamudia, n.d.). Finally, policy decisions have historically been made along racial lines (e.g., Bell, 2004; Hoffer, 2012; Moran, 2003). This choice links directly to racist structures and ideologies regarding roles in the economic, political, and social structure of the United States. In this vein, a system view that is limited to (agentic) self-organization does not align with the 428 Journal of Family Theory & Review empirical realities discussed earlier. We suggest adding the concept of choice (and lack of choice) to FST to support how racist social structures have provided some families with the choice of family formation and interaction while denying other families (i.e., those lower on the racial hierarchy) the same. As noted earlier, FST has traditionally focused on nuclear families, consisting of parents and their biological children, with other individuals who are influential to the family considered members of extrafamilial systems. Our emphasis on choice opens the door for family boundaries to expand to include biologically related kin (e.g., grandparents, cousins, uncles, aunts) and non-biologically-related individuals (e.g., fictive kin) who, if they play important roles, can be conceptualized as within rather than without the family system. African American families are more likely than European American families to choose to include non-biologically-related and non-legally-connected individuals as members of their families (Taylor, Chatters, & Woodward, & Brown, 2013). Thus, especially when trying to understand African American families, but also all families, it is particularly important that choice be given a more prominent place in the tenets of FST. Implications of Centering Race and Racism in FST The 2017 hurricanes that struck Texas, Florida, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands and other states in their path illustrate the need for incorporating historical time and choice into FST. Without the inclusion of historical time and choice, FST considers how families react to these tragedies in a vacuum, not considering the larger context that influences family processes and outcomes in response to material and other losses stemming from the hurricanes. For example, families of color, who often have not had the choice to purchase and/or build their houses in areas that are less vulnerable to the effects of hurricanes, are disproportionately represented among those who lose their homes and have to rebuild (Bullard & Wright, 2009). Further, historical time affects the process of adjusting to hurricanes, because past events such as slavery, racial discrimination, and housing segregation have created socioeconomic structures that stratify vulnerable communities along racial lines (Adeola & Picou, 2017), thus disproportionately allowing racially and economically privileged families additional choices in responding to impending weather tragedies and/or in coping with them if they do occur. Thus, historical time and choice add to the ability of FST to help us understand how families adjust to major climate events by examining how vulnerability to such events can be traceable along intersecting lines of race and income (Misra, 2017). Programming. Given the importance and frequency of RES among African American families, it is important for scholars to give attention to RES in the development of interventions designed for African American youth and families. Incorporating culturally relevant factors such as RES may serve to increase parent participation and engagement in intervention programming, increase positive parenting practices, and promote social, emotional, and behavioral outcomes among children (Coard et al., 2004). Current strategies to implement culturally relevant strategies have included the development of parenting curricula and written materials. Policy. The use of an FST lens, with the additions of historical time and choice, to examine wealth disparities in the United States strengthens the call for reparations for African Americans (Coates, 2014) and redemptive housing policies (Briggs, 2006). These disparities are the result of the legacy of slavery, Jim Crow, and continuing discrimination. There is precedent for the provision of reparations to ethnic minority groups that were subject to racist policies and treatments (Yamamoto, 1998). The suggested reframing of FST so that it provides a mechanism for addressing how historical policies are directly related to current disparities in family well-being potentially supports the need to redress the financial harm done to African American families. Parenting. Although all parents struggle with the challenges of raising children, research confirms that many African American parents’ parenting styles differ from those typically used by European American parents (Miller & Miller, 2009), particularly in terms of “no nonsense parenting” (Brody & Flor, 1998) and an increased prevalence of authoritarian parenting (Dornbusch, Ritter, Leiderman, Roberts, & Fraleigh, 1987). These differences in parenting Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory styles are partially attributed to cultural variations and unique historical experiences that African American parents have faced (e.g., racism, prejudice, discrimination), as well as a protective strategy to help prepare their children for future experience with structures of racism. While all African American parents may not use the same parenting styles, the reality is that today’s African American children are exposed to substantial adversities at young ages, a process that parents of European American children have more choice about because of their privilege in society. African American families are, on average, poorer than their European American counterparts; they face discrimination and racism, both overt and subtle; and they are judged by double standards (Anton, Jones, & Youngstrom, 2015; Barajas-Gonzalez & Brooks-Gunn, 2014; Verduzco-Baker, 2017). They all too frequently must come of age in unhealthy communities, with disinvested surroundings, increasing crime, and substandard housing and substandard services. As a result, African American parents are faced with the formidable task of helping their youth interpret information developed and delivered by a system that historically has not had their best interest at heart, and their youth are challenged with the tasks of interpreting these messages during their developmental years. Teaching youth how to deal with being the target of prejudice, discrimination, and racism is a task that is viewed as critical to healthy African American child developmental outcomes and positive parent–child interactions. Research. The additions of historical time and choice to FST provide an opportunity for research that informs the literature on understanding families of color. Future work can examine how a race and racism-centered FST lens might fit within or push against the boundaries of traditional FST. In this article, we focused primarily on how race and racism have an impact on family life in an African American family context. We encourage scholars to expand on, or refute, our concepts by applying them to family structures or processes of other families, particularly those in other nations, or even expanded discussion regarding other family structures within the wide spectrum of African American families (e.g., LGBTQ families, single-father- or single-mother-headed households). 429 Conclusion Family systems theory has had a major influence on family research and practice. Its influence extends far beyond instances of researchers and practitioners explicitly stating that they are using FST to ground their work; in fact, some of its main tenets, principles, assumptions, and terms (e.g., boundaries, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, triangulation, hierarchy, changes in one subsystem have reverberating effects throughout the entire family system, bidirectional effects) have become so commonplace that they are used without specifically connecting them to FST. Nevertheless, despite the extensive influence of FST, we have argued here that it can be extended to give the key constructs of race and racism a more central role in the theory. In particular, FST is often decontextualized and applied as if all families had similar historical experiences and levels of choice in creating their families as they so choose. Thus, we believe that FST can be strengthened by a thoughtful inclusion of historical time and choice as key factors to be considered when applying FST to understanding and helping families. As an illustration of how considering historical time and choice can enhance FST, we have provided an in-depth analysis of RES and how our extended version of FST can provide a nuanced understanding of how the process of RES is conducted within African American families. We have also argued that it is important to consider how historical time and choice influence how African American parents engage in this important process. We hope that our initial foray into reframing FST can help us understand aspects of race and racism in addition to racial socialization in the future. Although we focus primarily on African American family process and structures, we hope that our suggested reframing of FST spurs additional theorizing to equip family science professionals with essential knowledge about the structure of and processes across diverse families. References Adeola, F. O., & Picou, J. S. (2017). Hurricane Katrina–linked environmental injustice: Race, class, and place differentials in attitudes. Disasters, 41, 228–257. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa .12204 430 Alexander, M. (2012). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. New York, NY: New Press. Anton, M. T., Jones, D. J., & Youngstrom, E. A. (2015). Socioeconomic status, parenting, and externalizing problems in African American single-mother homes: A person-oriented approach. Journal of Family Psychology, 29, 405–415. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000086 Awokoya, J. T. (2012). Identity constructions and negotiations among 1.5- and second generation Nigerians: The impact of family, school, and peer contexts. Harvard Educational Review, 82, 255–281. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.82.2 .9v77p329367116vj Baker, L. A., Silverstein, M., & Putney, N. M. (2008). Grandparents raising grandchildren in the United States: Changing family forms, stagnant social policies. Journal of Societal & Social Policy, 7, 53–69. Banerjee, M., Harrell, Z. T., & Johnson, D. J. (2011). Racial/ethnic socialization and parental involvement in education as predictors of cognitive ability and achievement in African American children. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 595–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-010-9559-9 Barajas-Gonzalez, R. G., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2014). Income, neighborhood stressors, and harsh parenting: Test of moderation by ethnicity, age, and gender. Journal of Family Psychology, 28, 855–866. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038242 Barr, S. C., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798408314138 Bell, D. (2004). Silent covenants: Brown v. Board of Education and the unfulfilled hopes for racial reform. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Bennett, M. D. (2006). Cultural resources and school engagement among African American youths: The role of racial socialization and ethnic identity. Children & Schools, 28, 197–206. https://doi.org/10 .1093/cs/28.4.197 Billingsley, A. (1968). Black families in White America. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Boyd-Franklin, N. (2013). Black families in therapy: Understanding the African American experience. London, England: Guilford. Boykin, A. W., & Toms, F. (1985). Black child socialization: A conceptual framework. In H. McAdoo & J. McAdoo (Eds.), Black children: Social, educational and parental environments (pp. 33–51). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Briggs, X. D. S. (2006). The geography of opportunity: Race and housing choice in metropolitan America. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Journal of Family Theory & Review Brody, G. H., & Flor, D. L. (1998). Maternal resources, parenting practices, and child competence in rural, single-parent African American families. Child Development, 69, 803–816. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06244.x 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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798410390689 Bullard, R. D., & Wright, B. (2009). Race, place, and environmental justice after Hurricane Katrina: Struggles to reclaim, rebuild, and revitalize New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Cabrera, N. J., Fagan, J., Wight, V., & Schadler, C. (2011). Influence of mother, father, and child risk on parenting and children’s cognitive and social behaviors. Child Development, 82, 1985–2005. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01667 .x Coard, S., & Sellers, R. (2005). African American families as a context for racial socialization. In V. C. McLoyd, N. E. Hill, & K. Dodge (Eds.), African-American family life: Ecological and cultural diversity (pp. 264–284). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Coard, S. I., Wallace, S., Stevenson, H., & Brotman, L. (2004). Towards culturally competent preventive interventions: The consideration of racial socialization in parent training with African American families. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 1, 277–293. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JCFS .0000022035.07171.f8 Coates, T. (2014, June). The case for reparations. Atlantic Monthly. Retrieved from https://www .theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/thecase-for-reparations/361631/ Conley, D. (1999). Being black, living in the red: Race, wealth, and social policy in America. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press. Darolia, R., Koedel, C., Martorell, P., Wilson, K., & Perez-Arce, F. (2016). Race and gender effects on employer interest in job applicants: New evidence from a resume field experiment. Applied Economics Letters, 23(12), 853–856. https://doi .org/10.1080/13504851.2015.1114571 Dent, E. B., & Umpleby, S. A. (1998). Underlying assumptions of several traditions in systems theory and cybernetics. In R. Trappl (Ed.), Cybernetics and Systems (pp. 513–518). Vienna, Austria: Austrian Society for Cybernetic Studies. Djamba, Y. K., & Kimuna, S. R. (2012). The labor force participation and earnings gap among African immigrant women in the USA. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 13, 481–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-0110218-0 Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory Dornbusch, S. M., Ritter, P. L., Leiderman, P. H., Roberts, D. F., & Fraleigh, M. J. (1987). The relation of parenting style to adolescent school performance. Child Development, 58, 1244–1257. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130618 Dufur, M. J., Parcel, T. L., & Troutman, K. P. (2013). Does capital at home matter more than capital at school? Social capital effects on academic achievement. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 31, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2012 .08.002 Edin, K., & Kefalas, M. (2011). Promises I can keep: Why poor women put motherhood before marriage. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Edwards, A. L., & Few-Demo, A. L. (2016). African American maternal power and the racial socialization of preschool children. Sex Roles, 75, 56–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0633-y Eid, M., & Larsen, R. J. (Eds.) (2008). The science of subjective well-being. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Feagin, J. R. (2014). Racist America: Roots, current realities, and future reparations. New York, NY: Routledge. Ford, D. H., & Lerner, R. M. (1992). Developmental systems theory: An integrative approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Fouad, N. A., & Byars-Winston, A. M. (2005). Cultural context of career choice: Meta-analysis of race/ethnicity differences. Career Development Quarterly, 53(3), 223–233. https://doi.org/10 .1002/j.2161-0045.2005.tb00992.x Gibson-Davis, C. M., Edin, K., & McLanahan, S. (2005). High hopes but even higher expectations: The retreat from marriage among low-income couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 1301–1312. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737 .2005.00218.x Golash-Boza, T. (2016). A critical and comprehensive sociological theory of race and racism. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 2, 129–141. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/2332649216632242 Green, V. H. (1936). The Negro motorist green-book. New York, NY: Victor Green. He, X. Z., & Baker, D. W. (2005). Differences in leisure-time, household, and work-related physical activity by race, ethnicity, and education. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 20, 259–266. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.40198.x Holoien, D. S., & Shelton, J. N. (2012). You deplete me: The cognitive costs of colorblindness on ethnic minorities. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(2), 562–565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j .jesp.2011.09.010 Hoffer, W. J. H. (2012). Plessy v. Ferguson: Race and inequality in Jim Crow America. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 431 Hoyt, H. (1933). 100 years of land values in Chicago: The relationship of the growth of Chicago to the rise in its land values, 1830–1933. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 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. https://doi.org/10.1207/ s1532480xads0104_4 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. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.747 Hughes, D., Witherspoon, D., Rivas-Drake, D., & West-bey, N. (2009). Received ethnic-racial socialization messages and youth’s academic and behavioral outcomes: Examining the mediating role of ethnic identity and self-esteem. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15, 112–124. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015509 James, A. G., & Fine, M. (2013). Race/ethnicity (as a risk for divorce). In R. E. Emery (Ed.), Cultural sociology of divorce: An encyclopedia (pp. 426–430). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Jones, C. P. (2000). Levels of racism: A theoretic framework and a gardener’s tale. American Journal of Public Health, 90, 1212–1215. Juang, L. P., & Syed, M. (2014). Sharing stories of discrimination with parents. Journal of Adolescence, 37, 303–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j .adolescence.2014.02.004 Karger, H. J. (2005). Shortchanged: Life and debt in the fringe economy. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler. Katznelson, I. (2005). When affirmative action was White: An untold history of racial inequality in twentieth-century America. New York, NY: Norton. Kazak, A. E., Segal-Andrews, A. M., & Johnson, K. (1995). Pediatric psychology research and practice: A family/systems approach. In M. C. Roberts (Ed.), Handbook of pediatric psychology (pp. 84–104). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Kelly, S., Maynigo, P., Wesley, K., & Durham, J. (2013). African American communities and family systems: Relevance and challenges. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 2, 264–277. https://doi.org/10.1037/cfp0000014 Kerr, M. E. (2002). One family’s story: A primer on Bowen theory. Washington, DC: Bowen Center for the Study of the Family, Georgetown Family Center. King, W. (2011). Stolen childhood: Slave youth in nineteenth-century America. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. 432 Lerner, R. M. (1984). On the nature of human plasticity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Lesane-Brown, C. L. (2006). A review of race socialization within Black families. Developmental Review, 26, 400–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr .2006.02.001 Lincoln, K. D., & Chae, D. H. (2010). Stress, marital satisfaction, and psychological distress among African Americans. Journal of Family Issues, 31, 1081–1105. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0192513X10365826 Lipman, P. (2013). The new political economy of urban education: Neoliberalism, race, and the right to the city. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1970). The German ideology. New York, NY: International. Mayorga-Gallo, S. (2014). Behind the white picket fence: Power and privilege in a multiethnic neighborhood. Durham, NC: University of North Carolina Press. 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. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00942.x Miller, R. L., & Miller B. (2009). Mothering the biracial child: Bridging the gaps between African-American and White parenting styles. Women & Therapy, 10, 169–179. https://doi.org/ 10.1300/J015v10n01_15 Misra, T. (2017, August). A catastrophe for Houston’s most vulnerable people. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/ 2017/08/a-catastrophe-for-houstons-mostvulnerable-people/538155/ Moran, R. F. (2003). Interracial intimacy: The regulation of race and romance. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Morton, J. M. (2014). Cultural code-switching: Straddling the achievement gap. Journal of Political Philosophy, 22, 259–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/ jopp.12019 Murry, V. M. B., Brown, P. A., Brody, G. H., Cutrona, C. E., & Simons, R. L. (2001). Racial discrimination as a moderator of the links among stress, maternal psychological functioning, and family relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 915–926. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737 .2001.00915.x Neblett, E. W., White, R. L., Ford, K. R., Philip, C. L., Nguyên, H. X., & Sellers, R. M. (2008). Patterns of racial socialization and psychological adjustment: Can parental communications about race reduce the impact of racial discrimination? Journal of Research on Adolescence, 18, 477–515. https://doi .org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2008.00568.x Journal of Family Theory & Review Oliver, M. L., & Shapiro, T. M. (2006). Black wealth, White wealth: A new perspective on racial inequality. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. Omi, M., & Winant, H. (2014). Racial formation in the United States. New York, NY: Routledge. Osamudia, J. R. (n.d.). Opt-out education: School choice as racial subordination. Iowa Law Review, 99, 1083–1135. Patterson, O. (1982). Slavery and social death: A comparative study. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Payne, M. (2015). Modern social work theory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Passias, E. J., Sayer, L., & Pepin, J. R. (2017). Who experiences leisure deficits? Mothers’ marital status and leisure time. Journal of Marriage and Family, 79, 1001–1022. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf .12365 Peters, M. F. (2002). Racial socialization of young Black children. In H. P. McAdoo, Black children: Social, educational, and parental environments (2nd ed., pp. 57–72). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Pew Research Center. (2015). Parenting in America. Pew Research Center: Social & Demographic Trends. Retrieved from https://www .pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/17/1-the-americanfamily-today/ Pew Research Center. (2016). On views of race and inequality, Blacks and Whites are worlds apart. Pew Research Center: Social & Demographic Trends. Retrieved from https://www .pewsocialtrends.org/2016/06/27/on-views-ofrace-and-inequality-blacks-and-whites-areworlds-apart/ Phenice, L. A., & Griffore, R. J. (2000). Social identity of ethnic minority families: An ecological approach for the new millennium. Michigan Family Review, 5(1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.3998/ mfr.4919087.0005.103 Priest, N., Walton J., White, F., Kowal, E., Baker, A., & Paradies, Y. (2014). Understanding the complexities of ethnic-racial socialization processes for both minority and majority groups: A 30-year systematic review. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 43, 139–155. https://doi.org/10 .1016/j.ijintrel.2014.08.003 Raley, R. K. (1996). A shortage of marriageable men? A note on the role of cohabitation in black-white differences in marriage rates. American Sociological Review, 61, 973–983. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 2096303 Ramsey, C. A., & Strauss, G. (2010). Ruth and the green book. Minneapolis, MN: Carolrhoda Books. Reynolds, J. E., & Gonzales-Backen, M. A. (2017). Ethnic-racial socialization and the mental health of African Americans: A critical review. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 9, 182–200. https://doi .org/10.1111/jftr.12192 Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory Riegel, K. F. (1975). Toward a dialectical theory of human development. Human Development, 18, 50–64. https://doi.org/10.1159/000271475 Saito, L. T. (2009). The politics of exclusion: The failure of race-neutral policies in urban America. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Smock, P. J., Manning, W. D., & Porter, M. (2005). “Everything’s there except money”: How money shapes decisions to marry among cohabitors. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 680–696. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00162.x Squires, G. D. (1992). Community reinvestment: An emerging social movement. In G. D. Squires (Ed.), From redlining to reinvestment: Community responses to urban divestment (pp. 1–37). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Taylor, J. (1990). Relationship between internalized racism and marital satisfaction. Journal of Black Psychology, 16, 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 00957984900162004 Taylor, R. J., Chatters, L. M., Woodward, A. T., & Brown, E. (2013). Racial and ethnic differences in extended family, friendship, fictive kin, and congregational informal support networks. Family Relations, 62, 609–624. https://doi.org/10.1111/ fare.12030 Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1998). Dynamic systems theories. In R. M. Lerner (Series Ed.) & W. Damon (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (5th ed., pp. 563–634). New York, NY: Wiley. Thornton, M. C., Chatters, L. M., Taylor, R. J., & Allen, W. R. (1990). Sociodemographic and environmental correlates of racial socialization of Black parents. Child Development, 61, 401–409. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131101 Tillman, K. H., & Miller, B. (2017). The role of family relationships in the psychological wellbeing of interracially dating adolescents. Social Science Research, 65, 240–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j .ssresearch.2016.11.001 Trail, T. E., Goff, P. A., Bradbury, T. N., & Karney, B. R. (2012). The costs of racism for marriage how racial discrimination hurts, and ethnic identity protects, newlywed marriages among Latinos. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 454–465. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211429450 Tynes, B. M. (2007). Role taking in online classrooms: What adolescents are learning about race 433 and ethnicity. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1312–1320. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.43 .6.1312 Turney, K. (2014). The intergenerational consequences of mass incarceration: Implications for children’s co-residence and contact with grandparents. Social Forces, 93, 299–327. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/sf/sou062 Verduzco-Baker, L. (2017). “I don’t want them to be a statistic”: Mothering practices of low-income mothers. Journal of Family Issues, 38, 1010–1038. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X15610616 Western, B., & Pettit, B. (2010). Collateral costs: Incarceration’s effect on economic mobility. Washington, DC: Pew Charitable Trusts. Whitchurch, G. G., & Constantine, L. L. (2009). Systems theory. In P. Boss, W. Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. Schumm, & S. Steinmetz (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theories and methods (pp. 325–355). Boston, MA: Springer. Williams, D. R. (1999). Race, socioeconomic status, and health the added effects of racism and discrimination. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 896, 173–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/j .1749-6632.1999.tb08114.x Williams, D. R., & Collins, C. (2001). Racial residential segregation: A fundamental cause of racial disparities in health. Public Health Reports, 116, 404. https://doi.org/10.1093/phr/116.5.404 Williams, H. A. (2012). Help me to find my people: The African American search for family lost in slavery. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press. Winker, M. A. (2004). Measuring race and ethnicity: Why and how? JAMA, 292, 1612–1614. Woods, L. L. (2012). The Federal Home Loan Bank board, redlining, and the national proliferation of racial lending discrimination, 1921–1950. Journal of Urban History, 38(6), 1036–1059. https://doi .org/10.1177/0096144211435126 Yamamoto, E. K. (1998). Racial reparations: Japanese American redress and African American claims. Boston College Third World Law Journal, 19, 477–523. Zhang, Y. (2011). Boundaries of power: Politics of urban preservation in two Chicago neighborhoods. Urban Affairs Review, 47, 511–540. https://doi .org/10.1177/1078087411400376 Copyright of Journal of Family Theory & Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. Asian American Journal of Psychology © 2018 American Psychological Association 1948-1985/19/$12.00 2019, Vol. 10, No. 2, 91–102 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aap0000128 Racist Experiences, Openness to Discussing Racism, and Attitudes Toward Ethnic Heritage Activities: Adoptee–Parent Discrepancies Kimberly J. Langrehr, Sydney K. Morgan, Jessica Ross, Monica Oh, and Wen Wen Chong This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. University of Missouri—Kansas City This study used hierarchical linear modeling to examine discrepancies among 95 dyads of Asian adolescent transnational adoptees and their parents (N ⫽ 190). Results revealed that parents underestimated the degree to which adoptees experienced racism and overestimated their positive attitudes toward ethnic heritage activities and openness to discussing racism. Adoptees with a high percentage of friends of color reported fewer racist experiences; however, parents with a high percentage of friends of color perceived adoptees to experience higher instances of racism. In addition, parents with low colorblind attitudes overestimated adoptees’ positive attitudes toward ethnic heritage activities and openness to discussing racism; whereas, at both high and low levels of colorblind attitudes, parents underestimated adoptees’ racist experiences. Implications that center on the perspectives of Asian adolescent transnational adoptees as well as practical suggestions for clinicians and adoption professionals are discussed. What is the public significance of this article? Based on a study that compared the reports of 95 Asian transnational adoptees and their parents, results indicated that parents overestimated adoptees’ openness to discussing racism and their positive attitudes toward ethnic heritage activities; however, results also revealed that parents underestimated the level of racism experienced by adoptees. Although parents’ level of racial awareness made a difference in their views toward adoptees’ encouraging behaviors, all parents, regardless of their racial awareness, underestimated the racism experienced by adoptees. Results speak to the need to explore Asian transnational adoptees’ views of their parents’ willingness to discuss issues of racism and the nature of the racial messages that they receive. Keywords: transnational adoption, adoptees, colorblind attitudes, racism, socialization Supplemental materials: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aap0000128.supp research on transnational adoption was largely concerned with behavioral and adjustment outcomes and failed to adequately address the sociocultural implications of within-family racial difference on the developmental experiences of ATAs (Lee, 2003). For the current study purpose, we will use the terms adoptee and transnational adoptee interchangeably when referring to ATAs who have been adopted by White American parents (i.e., adoptive parents). Over the past 15 years, however, studies have made attempts to address the sociocultural implications of transnational adoption in the lives of ATAs by focusing on parents’ efforts to familiarize adoptees with different aspects of their ethnic heritage (Lee, Grotevant, Hellerstedt, & Gunnar, 2006; Lee & Quintana, 2005). This body of research has been characterized as largely parent-driven (Kim, Reichwald, & Lee, 2013), as most studies have relied on the perspectives of parents with young children. Findings suggest that parents of ATAs tend to overlook the topic of racial difference (Zhang & Lee, 2011) and rarely talk to adoptees about racism (Berbery & O’Brien, 2011; Johnston, Swim, Saltsman, Deater-Deckard, & Petrill, 2007; Langrehr, 2014). Knowledge gained from this research has Since the mid-1950s, Asian countries have remained the primary source of transnational adoptions for White American families (Selman, 2015; U.S. Department of State, 2010). Unlike domestic transracial adoptions where early disputes are centered on the impact of racial difference for Black children (Brooks & Barth, 1999), debates concerning Asian transnational adoptees (ATAs) have not been as concerned with race (Lee & Miller, 2009). For example, White families were initially advised to raise ATAs “as if they were White,” based on the assumption that emphasizing racial differences would negatively affect their development (Lee, 2003). Similarly, early This article was published Online First September 13, 2018. Kimberly J. Langrehr, Sydney K. Morgan, Jessica Ross, Monica Oh, and Wen Wen Chong, Counseling and Educational Psychology Program, School of Education, University of Missouri—Kansas City. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kimberly J. Langrehr, Counseling and Educational Psychology Program, School of Education, University of Missouri—Kansas City, 5100 Rockhill Road, Kansas City, MO 64110. E-mail: langrehrk@umkc.edu 91 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. 92 LANGREHR, MORGAN, ROSS, OH, AND CHONG mostly applied to adoptees’ early developmental experiences without addressing their understanding of race and ethnicity in adolescence. Unlike young children who have a rudimentary understanding of race, adolescents of color are often exposed to the realities of race as they learn how to navigate the demands of a racialized world (Hughes, Watford, & Del Toro, 2016). For example, ATAs must learn to negotiate their self-concept as Asian Americans in relation to their understanding of White individuals, given that most are raised in predominantly White areas and have minimal contact with Asian Americans or other people of color (Langrehr, Yoon, Hacker, & Caudill, 2015; Meier, 1999). As a result, ATAs are often highly aware of their out-group status as people of color (Day, Godon-Decoteau, & Suyemoto, 2015; Kim, Suyemoto, & Turner, 2010) and may hold perspectives about race, culture, and ethnicity that are not always consistent with that of their parents (Kim et al., 2013) who face a different social reality based on their racial majority status. Studies suggest that White Americans are less inclined to consider themselves as having a racial identity or belonging to a racial group, which can make it difficult to recognize the implications of race and privilege in their lives (Bonilla-Silva, Goar, & Embrick, 2006). For example, it is not uncommon for White individuals to endorse the belief that race does not matter (Carr, 1997), as this allows them to deny or minimize the significance of racism in contemporary society (Neville, Lilly, Duran, Lee, & Browne, 2000). By supporting the ideals of colorblindness, White individuals can situate themselves to live and function in predominantly White communities, which minimizes their exposure to the undesirable realities of racial injustice. Based on their adoptive status, many ATAs have gained admittance into these communities where they are treated by others (and sometimes themselves) as members of the majority (Lee, 2003); yet, unlike their parents, they still face the demands of navigating their out-group status within the context of a highly racialized society. In an effort to help bridge some of these experiences between ATAs and their parents, a goal of the current study was to specifically examine discrepancies in their reports about adoptees’ experiences with racism, openness to discussing racism, and attitudes toward ethnic heritage activities. Based on the tenets of social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), we expected to find significant discrepancies in adoptee–parent reports, given that ATAs face different sociocultural experiences due to their racial out-group status. Although it is not uncommon for parents and children to hold different perspectives, studies suggest there is a greater likelihood for relational conflict (Kim, Zarit, Birditt, & Fingerman, 2014) and adjustment difficulties (Ohannessian, 2012) when family members hold significantly different views about sensitive issues, such as racism. In addition, it is particularly important to explore parents’ ability to recognize the racial nature of ATAs’ experiences, given that racial prejudice can have a negative impact on youth of color (García Coll et al., 1996; Qin, Kim, Su, Hu, & Lee, 2017) and has been specifically linked with increased behavioral difficulties (Hjern, Lindblad, & Vinnerljung, 2002; Lee, 2010) and higher psychological distress among international adoptees (Lee, Lee, Hu, & Kim, 2015). Overall, the study results are intended to provide a more critical understanding of the experiences of ATAs and other transnational adoptees as people of color. ATA Racial–Ethnic Experiences Ethnic Heritage Exposure Unlike early transnational adoption practices, findings from contemporary research suggest that parents are now making concerted efforts to expose young ATAs to affirming aspects of their ethnic heritage. Specifically, studies have examined parents’ efforts to celebrate ethnic holidays (Johnston et al., 2007), travel to adoptees’ country of birth, read culturally relevant books (Freidlander et al., 2000), and take language classes (Crolley-Simic & Vonk, 2011). Although such activities have been linked to positive identity outcomes (Lee & Quintana, 2005), the importance of these activities for adolescent ATAs remains less apparent, given that these findings are largely based on parents’ perceptions of adoptees early on in their development. As they reach their teens, studies suggest that ATAs become less interested in exploring their ethnic background (Meier, 1999) and more concerned about fitting in with their White peers. For example, some ATAs have reported that they purposefully avoided ethnically based events, feeling as though their involvement would highlight their racial differences (Langrehr et al., 2015). With the exception of traveling to Korea, adult Korean adoptees have identified other ways of meaningfully connecting with their heritage, such as living in racially diverse areas, interacting with other people of color, and learning about their birth family (McGinnis, Smith, Ryan, & Howard, 2009). Racialized Experiences Although issues of race have not been largely represented in the discourse concerning transnational adoption, existing research suggests that ATAs are not exempt from racial stress and prejudice (Kim et al., 2010; Lee et al., 2015; Qin et al., 2017). As they age and develop more cognitive maturity, studies suggest that ATAs often face a variety of racial stressors. For example, adolescent ATAs report feeling uncomfortable with being racially different (Day et al., 2015; McGinnis et al., 2009) and greater incidents of racism compared with younger adoptees (Lee & Quintana, 2005). However, research also suggests that transnationally adoptive parents make minimal effort to address adoptees’ lived experiences with racism and place more emphasis on fostering adoptees’ ethnic heritage (Berbery & O’Brien, 2011). In particular, parents have been depicted as eager and enthusiastic in discussing their efforts to familiarize ATAs with their ethnic background; whereas, they have also been found to avoid the topic of racism (Kim et al., 2013), describe preferences for colorblind parenting (Zhang & Lee, 2011), and normalize racism as a universal experience (Crolley-Simic & Vonk, 2011). Overall, these findings pose questions about transnationally adoptive parents’ ability to recognize and address the significance of racism in the lives of ATAs (Quiroz, 2012). Studies on monoracial families of color suggest that encouraging adolescents to talk about their experiences with racism can help parents foster an overall sense of trust and connection (Tatum, 2004). However, research on transnationally adoptive families has rarely touched on the importance of helping ATAs cope with racism. Instead, adult Korean adoptees have described their parents as ill-equipped to talk about issues of racism (Shiao & Tuan, 2008) and as dismissing the painful nature of their racist encounters (Meier, 1999) to the RACIST EXPERIENCES degree that some lost confidence in their parents’ ability to protect and support them (Langrehr et al., 2015). At the same time, some Korean adoptees have reported that they were comfortable reaching out to their parents who they felt acknowledged their racist experiences and validated their feelings of marginalization (Shiao & Tuan, 2008). To help gain insight about why some parents are more likely than others to recognize and attend to adoptees’ racialized needs, we address some of the influences involved with the racial identity process for White Americans that are distinguishable from that of ATAs. This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. Colorblind Attitudes and Connection to White Identity Although colorblind attitudes are prevalent across society and have been linked with socialization practices among monoracial families (Barr & Neville, 2008), the implications of colorblind attitudes are particularly relevant to the racial identity processes of White Americans and transnationally adoptive parents. Also known as contemporary racism (Carr, 1997), the pervasiveness of colorblind attitudes has helped maintain the dominance of White racial identities that continue to shape notions of normality, acceptance, and American culture as a whole (Bonilla-Silva, 2003). For example, White individuals often consider living in all-White neighborhoods, attending predominantly White schools, and having few interracial friends as being natural, unproblematic, and unrelated with race (Bonilla-Silva et al., 2006). By distancing themselves from race, White individuals reinforce symbolic boundaries that favor White in-group status and simultaneously devalue racial out-groups. Often endorsed by the well-intended, colorblind mentalities enable White Americans to view themselves as open and socially progressive despite being uncomfortable with racial difference (Bonilla-Silva et al., 2006). Several studies on transnationally adoptive parents have addressed their tendency to endorse colorblind racial attitudes and minimize the significance of race in the lives of ATAs (CrolleySimic & Vonk, 2011). For example, parents with colorblind mentalities have been found to express more ambivalence toward adoptees’ ethnic background and prefer socialization messages that endorse fairness and racial equality without also acknowledging the realities of racial injustice (Crolley-Simic & Vonk, 2011; Zhang & Lee, 2011). In contrast, low colorblind attitudes have been linked with beneficial outcomes such as greater endorsement of racial– ethnic socialization among internationally adoptive families (Langrehr, 2014; Lee et al., 2006). Contact and Friends of Color In general, White Americans often live and function in racially homogenous spaces and maintain relatively distant relationships with people of color (Bonilla-Silva et al., 2006). This is particularly evident for transnationally adoptive families who tend to reside in predominantly White communities (Langrehr, 2014; Meier, 1999; Shiao & Tuan, 2008) and engage in few interracial relationships (Zhang & Lee, 2011) outside of their interactions with other transnationally adoptive families (Crolley-Simic & Vonk, 2011; Freidlander et al., 2000). According to contact theory (Allport, 1954), rarely engaging in meaningful interracial contact could ultimately thwart parents’ opportunities to gain a genuine understanding of adoptees’ experiences with racism. For decades, 93 studies have investigated the value of intergroup contact in reducing prejudicial attitudes across a variety of groups. Although the benefits of general contact have been mixed, contemporary research has found evidence to support its effectiveness when the conditions of optimal contact are met (Davies, Tropp, Aron, Pettigrew, & Wright, 2011). Comparable with close personal friendships, the optimal conditions of contact (i.e., equal social status, shared goals, incentive to cooperate, and authority support) have been especially effective in promoting greater awareness and understanding of other groups (Brewer & Miller, 1984). In the only study that has addressed the value of racial contact for transnationally adoptive families, results revealed that parents who lived in racially diverse areas engaged in more interracial friendships and endorsed stronger messages of racial bias preparation and ethnic pride (Langrehr, 2014). Unlike their parents, living in predominantly White environments can have different implications for ATAs, given that they have fewer opportunities to interact with members of their racial group. For example, having minimal contact with Asian Americans and other people of color could unintentionally compromise adoptees’ psychosocial development, sense of belongingness, and ability to mitigate stresses associated with their non-White identity (Tatum, 2004). Establishing same-race connections is considered adaptive for adolescents of color (García Coll et al., 1996), particularly when their relationships are based on shared experiences with marginalization. At the same time, peers can also be perpetrators of racial prejudice (Hughes et al., 2016), especially for Asian youth who are often targets of peer-initiated racism (RivasDrake, Hughes, & Way, 2008). Indeed, many ATAs have identified their peers as the main perpetrators of racism growing up (Meier, 1999; Shiao & Tuan, 2008); yet, others have described several early racial encounters that involved adults and strangers (Langrehr et al., 2015). Study Purpose The purpose of the current study was to examine the dyadic reports of adolescent ATAs and their parents about adoptees’ racist experiences, openness to discussing racism, and attitudes toward ethnic heritage activities. Based on the tenets of social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), which highlights the unique implications of racial out-group status, we focused on adoptees’ experiences as people of color within the context of their White families and specifically examined adoptee–parent discrepancies. Based on previous research that suggested that transnationally adoptive parents tend to minimize discussions of racism (CrolleySimic & Vonk, 2011; Kim et al., 2013) and prefer the affirming nature of ethnic heritage exposure (Johnston et al., 2007; Zhang & Lee, 2011), we hypothesized that parents would underestimate adoptees’ racist experiences and overestimate their openness to discussing racism and positive attitudes toward ethnic heritage activities. To provide some context for these differences, we tested the degree to which parents’ colorblind racial attitudes, adoptee age, and living in racially diverse neighborhoods were associated with these discrepancies. We expected that stronger colorblind attitudes, older adoptee age, and living in neighborhoods with a low percentage of people of color would relate to discrepancies where parents underestimated adoptees’ racist experiences and overesti- LANGREHR, MORGAN, ROSS, OH, AND CHONG This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. 94 mated their openness to discussing racism and positive attitudes toward ethnic heritage activities. Finally, based on the optimal conditions of contact theory (Davies et al., 2011; Langrehr, 2014; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006) and evidence that points to the benefits of establishing same-race connections for youth of color (García Coll et al., 1996; Tatum, 2004), we examined the relationships between maintaining close friendships with people of color and the three outcome variables for ATAs and their parents. We hypothesized that adoptees with a high proportion of friends of color would report fewer racist experiences, greater openness to discussing racism, and positive attitudes toward ethnic heritage activities. For parents, we expected that percentage of friends of color would relate differently to the three outcome variables, but did not provide directional hypotheses due to the exploratory nature of the study. Method Participants For the current investigation, data were taken from a larger study that examined socialization processes among transnationally adoptive families. Participants were recruited from two adoptive family organizations located in different areas of the Midwest. All recruitment and data collection procedures were approved by the authors’ respective university institutional review board. Data collection took place during organization-sponsored events where parents and adoptees took part in various social– cultural activities throughout the day. The current study goal was to recruit dyads that consisted of one ATA (age ⱖ10) and one White, adoptive parent who were both present at the event. Parents were given a description of the study purpose, procedures, and consent process. Specifically, parents were asked to provide verbal consent indicating that they and their children were willing to participate in the study. Once parents verbally consented, adoptees were given a similar study description and were asked to provide verbal assent. If multiple adoptees from the same family participated, parents were asked to base their reports on the oldest child. Although 100 adoptee–parent dyads agreed to participate, five cases involving adoptees from non-Asian countries were excluded from the final sample of 95 adoptee–parent dyads (N ⫽ 190). Adoptees (girls ⫽ 70%, boys ⫽ 30%) ranged in age from 10 to 17 years (M ⫽ 14.19, SD ⫽ 2.25) and represented the following ethnic groups: Chinese (n ⫽ 71), South Korean (n ⫽ 16), Taiwanese (n ⫽ 6), and Vietnamese (n ⫽ 2). Average age at the time of adoption was 13.40 months (SD ⫽ 2.41) and ranged from 6 months to 2.75 years. Parents’ ages ranged from 40 to 69 years (M ⫽ 49.92, SD ⫽ 5.71), and 59% were women and 41% were men. In addition, all parents identified as White and 95% identified as heterosexual. The majority of parents were partnered or married (74%), and 42% indicated having other transnationally adopted children. Parents were highly educated (62% held advanced degrees), and 56% reported household annual incomes of over $100,000. Procedure At each event, several announcements were made throughout the day to inform adoptees and parents of the opportunity to participate in the study. Each adoptee–parent dyad who agreed to participate were given one questionnaire packet for adoptees and one questionnaire packet for parents. Adoptees’ questionnaire packets included measures that asked about their racist experiences, openness to discussing racism, and attitudes toward ethnic heritage activities, as well as a data form that asked about their racial friendships and interpersonal behaviors such as assertiveness and willingness to self-disclose. Parents’ questionnaire packets included measures that asked about the aforementioned experiences of their oldest adopted child and a measure of colorblind attitudes. In addition, parents’ questionnaire packets included a data form that asked them to provide demographic information about themselves and their family (e.g., age, gender, marital status, and household income) and the racial demographics of their close personal friends and neighborhood. All survey items and demographic questions included in adoptees’ questionnaire packets were modified to accommodate a fourth-grade reading level. The principal investigator and research assistants were present at the events to answer questions and help participants (primarily adoptees) complete the questionnaires. Upon submitting both questionnaires, each adoptee–parent dyad received one $5.00 gift card for participating in the study. Measures—Completed by Adoptees and Parents Experiences with racism. At the time of the current study, there were no published measures available to accommodate the multi-informant approach to examining adoptees’ experiences with racism. Given that the goal was to assess the racist experiences of ATAs that would also be observable by parents, we adapted items from a previous study (Lee, 2010) on internationally adoptive parents and their perceptions of discrimination. The original measure was created to specifically assess the frequency by which different parties (e.g., strangers, family members, and peers) made intrusive or inappropriate racial and adoption comments toward participants’ children or family. Using this same format, four items were created that asked adoptees to indicate how often they experienced racism from friends, peers, strangers, and other family members (i.e., How often do your friends tease or say mean things about your race or ethnicity? How often do other kids tease or say mean things about your race or ethnicity? How often do strangers tease or say mean things to you about your race or ethnicity? How often do other family members tease or say mean things to you about your race or ethnicity?). Four additional items were created (similar to the statements presented to adoptees) that asked parents to indicate how often their adopted child experienced racism from friends, peers, strangers, and other family members (e.g., How often do your child’s friends tease or say mean things to them about their race or ethnicity?). Both adoptees and parents responded to each statement using a scale from 1 (never) to 6 (all of the time), with higher ratings indicating more experiences with racism. Scores were calculated by summing the four adoptee-rated items and the four parent-rated items to create two total scores of racist experiences that could range from 4 to 24. As recommended by Kenny, Kashy, and Cook (2006), exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted using principal axis factoring and oblimin rotation to ensure that the constructs of interest emerge consistently across individual and combined samples. Using Tabachnick and Fidell’s (2001) standard criteria for This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. RACIST EXPERIENCES determining the number of factors to retain (i.e., eigenvalues ⬎1, factors explaining at least 5% of variance, interpretable factors, loadings of ⱖ0.32, scree test, and discarding cross-loaded items ⬎0.32), EFA results revealed that racist experiences emerged as a single factor and explained 48.63%–54.34% of the variance in individual and full sam...
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Hello. Please check the attached file and please feel free to ask me incase of any question. Also, if you have more questions, please invite me. Thanks and good bye!

Running head: ARTICLE REVIEW

1

Article Review Assignment
Student’s Name
Institution Affiliation
Course

ARTICLE REVIEW

2
Article review assignment

I. Article title/year of publication
Article title: normal family processes
Authors: F. Walsh, Ed. (2015)
Year of publication: 2015
II. Key terms/ article constructs
Racism
Colorblind attitudes
Socialization
Adoptees
Transnational adoption
(111) Research hypothesis or research questions
(a) Do white Americans consider themselves having a racial identity?
Studies depict that it is challenging to recognize that the group has such implications on
racial identity. Other studies illustrate that white individuals try to minimize exposure to racism in
their cultures (Bonilla-Silva, 2003).
(b) What is the purpose of the study?
The study wanted to get and examine the report of adolescent ATAs and their parents about
adopting experiences.
(111) Design and method
(i) Participants
The participants involved transnationally adoptive families. In the study, two adoptive
families were recruited that lived in the Midwest. Data collection took place on various social,

ARTICLE REVIEW

3

cultural activities. Individuals, less than 10 years, were recruited. A white adoptive parent also
participated in the process. It also involved adoptees that are 70% of girls and 30% of boys
(Carr,1997).
(ii) Procedures/measures
The event announcement was used as a mode of communication to inform parents and
adoptees about the study.
The adoptee parent who accepted to carry out the study was given a questionnaire to fill.
The adoptees also were supposed to fill their questionnaires.
Measures
The measures were completed by parents and adoptees.
They were to fill on the experiences about racism
They were supposed to give attitudes towards ethnic heritage activities.
The following measures were supposed to be completed by parents only; that is colorblind
attitudes, demographics
(iii) Analysis
In the analysis of the research, a linear modeling procedure...


Anonymous
Very useful material for studying!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags