Evaluating the utility and validity of a discrimination‐specific measure of shift‐&‐persist coping


Journal article


N. K. Christophe, Michelle Y Martin Romero, G. L. Stein
Infant and Child Development, 2023

Semantic Scholar DOI
Cite

Cite

APA   Click to copy
Christophe, N. K., Romero, M. Y. M., & Stein, G. L. (2023). Evaluating the utility and validity of a discrimination‐specific measure of shift‐&‐persist coping. Infant and Child Development.


Chicago/Turabian   Click to copy
Christophe, N. K., Michelle Y Martin Romero, and G. L. Stein. “Evaluating the Utility and Validity of a Discrimination‐Specific Measure of Shift‐&Amp;‐Persist Coping.” Infant and Child Development (2023).


MLA   Click to copy
Christophe, N. K., et al. “Evaluating the Utility and Validity of a Discrimination‐Specific Measure of Shift‐&Amp;‐Persist Coping.” Infant and Child Development, 2023.


BibTeX   Click to copy

@article{n2023a,
  title = {Evaluating the utility and validity of a discrimination‐specific measure of shift‐&‐persist coping},
  year = {2023},
  journal = {Infant and Child Development},
  author = {Christophe, N. K. and Romero, Michelle Y Martin and Stein, G. L.}
}

Abstract

Shift‐&‐persist (S&P) coping has been shown to buffer against the effects of discrimination on psychosocial functioning in racially and ethnically minoritized youth. However, existing measures of S&P refer broadly to coping with stress and are not specifically tailored to the type of stressor individuals are coping with (e.g., discrimination). The current study evaluated the measurement properties, utility, and validity of a discrimination‐specific adapted measure of S&P relative to an existing, general measure among a sample of 327 minoritized youth (Mage = 18.80, SD = 1.28, 78.6% female, 50.5% Black) recruited from a large public minority‐serving institution in the southeastern United States. Contrary to our hypotheses, when the item stem was changed to refer to coping specifically with discrimination, the measurement properties of a validated S&P scale (Lam et al., 2018) were worse relative to the original measure. Overall, the general S&P measure produced larger main effects and explained two times more variance in depressive symptoms than discrimination‐specific S&P. Findings do not rule out the idea that context‐specific measures may better characterize coping with discrimination experiences than ‘trait‐like’ general coping measures. However, results highlight that small adaptations to current measures may not be sufficient and may compromise predictive validity. Coping with discrimination measurement recommendations is discussed.


Share


Follow this website


You need to create an Owlstown account to follow this website.


Sign up

Already an Owlstown member?

Log in