This post is about a study on intersectionality--a combination of race and gender--in the lives of Black women in college. The empirical study appeared in the Journal of American College Health, and a journalist from PsyPost summarized it on the PsyPost website.
To start, here's the journalist's introduction to gendered racism, which is related to intersectionality:
Racism and sexism are both forms of discrimination that can take a significant psychological toll on the person suffering from it. Black women in particular are a group who often suffer from the combination of both forms of oppression, which can be referred to as gendered racism.
And here is an overview of the study's methods:
For their new study, the researchers utilized 164 Black, female participants who were undergraduate or graduate students at a primarily White public university in the Southeast United States to serve as their sample. Data was self-reported online during the fall of 2016. Participants completed measures on demographic information, gendered racial microaggressions (e.g. “Someone accused me of being angry when I was speaking in a calm manner”), depression, and psychological distress.
One of the results reported by the journalist is the following:
There was ... a relationship between frequency of gendered racism microaggressions and depression, with those experiencing more instances of microaggressions experiencing increased depression.
a) Using the table below, identify the variables in this study:
| Variable name | How was this variable operationalized? (if you can't really tell, say so) | Is this manipulated or measured? |
| (add rows as needed) |
This study took important steps toward understanding negative outcomes associated with gendered racism. Despite this, there are limitations to note. One such limitation is that due to the cross-sectional nature of this study, causation cannot be inferred. Additionally, data was only collected from one, primarily White institution and may not be generalizable to other schools.
d) Let's dig into the first caveat, "One such limitation is that due to the cross-sectional nature of this study, causation cannot be inferred." Apply the three criteria for causation here.
i) First, does the study have covariance?
ii) Second, why does the study not have temporal precedence?
iii) Third, what is a third variable (a "C" variable) that might independently go with both gendered racism microaggressions AND with higher levels of depression?
e) Now let's address the second caveat, "data was only collected from one, primarily White institution (PWI) and may not be generalizable to other schools".
Which big validity is this caveat addressing?
f) Do you think that the association they found between gendered racism microaggressions and depression might be stronger, weaker, or the same if they conducted the study at a historically Black college or university (HBCU)? Explain your reasoning.
(Note: In question f, you are thinking about a moderator! Specifically, you are thinking about whether the type of institution (PWI vs. HBCU) moderates the relationship between gendered racism microaggressions and depression).
g) How could you interrogate the construct validity of this study? List two questions you could ask (one for each major variable).
