Asian American Journal of Psychology
2010, Vol. 1, No. 2, 136 –150
© 2010 American Psychological Association
1948-1985/10/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0020157
Racial Discrimination Stress, Coping, and Depressive Symptoms
Among Asian Americans: A Moderation Analysis
Meifen Wei
P. Paul Heppner
Iowa State University
University of Missouri-Columbia
Tsun-Yao Ku and Kelly Yu-Hsin Liao
Iowa State University
The purpose of our study was to explore: (a) the association between racial discrimination stress and depressive symptoms, and (b) how coping (e.g., individualistic/
collectivistic and dispositional/situation-specific coping) attenuated or strengthened this
association specifically among Asian Americans. Data were collected from 201 Asian
Americans in a large Midwestern state university through an online survey. Results
from a hierarchical regression indicated that racial discrimination stress significantly
predicted depressive symptoms over and beyond perceived general stress and perceived
racial discrimination. For the moderation effect, the simple effect analyses indicated
that low utilization of reactive coping strategies and a high helpfulness rating of family
support reduced the strength of association between racial discrimination stress and
depressive symptoms.
Keywords: racial discrimination stress, coping, moderation, depressive symptoms, and Asian
Americans
Instances of racial discrimination, including
microaggressions and macroaggressions, can be
overt or subtle. The effects of these incidents
can be short-term, chronic, and accumulative
(Clark, Anderson, Clark, & Williams, 1999).
Sue, Bucceri, Lin, Nadal, and Torino (2007)
indicated that racial discrimination could create
a negative aftermath of stress in Asian Americans’ daily functioning, such as in their school/
work, thinking/judgment, or interpersonal relationships. Although there is growing evidence
that perceived discrimination can significantly
Meifen Wei and Kelly Yu-Hsin Liao, Department of
Psychology, Iowa State University; P. Paul Heppner, Department of Educational, School, and Counseling Psychology, University of Missouri-Columbia; and Tsun-Yao Ku,
Psychology in Education Research Lab, Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Iowa State University.
This study was presented at the 117th Annual Convention
of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada, August, 2009. We thank Douglas Bonett for statistical
consultation and all the Asian American students for their
participation.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Meifen Wei, Department of Psychology, W112
Lagomarcino Hall, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 500113180. E-mail: wei@iastate.edu
affect mental and physical health (Clark et al.,
1999), there is little empirically based guidance
with regard to which coping strategies can effectively reduce the magnitude of the association between racial discrimination and negative
emotions (Pascoe & Smart Richman, 2009).
Thus, this study explores potential coping strategies that would either attenuate or strengthen
this association among Asian Americans.
The associations between perceived racial
discrimination and psychological distress have
been well-documented (e.g., Noh, Beiser, Kaspar, Hou, & Rummens, 1999). In particular,
these findings have been found consistently for
people with Asian heritages across various regions of the United States and Canada (e.g.,
Gee, Spencer, Chen, Yip, & Takeuchi, 2007;
Liang, Alvarez, Juang, & Liang, 2007; Lee,
2005; Yoo & Lee, 2005, 2008). However, in a
recent meta-analysis, Pascoe and Smart Richman (2009) revealed that the average correlations between various forms of perceived discrimination and both mental and physical health
were ⫺.20 and ⫺.13, respectively; thus, there
remains much variance unaccounted for by
these associations.
136
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION STRESS
Moreover, Harrell (2000) argued that it is
important to understand the unique contribution
of racial discrimination to outcomes over and
above confounding general life stressors. After
controlling for perceived general stress, some
studies found that perceived discrimination
uniquely predicted psychological distress (e.g.,
Gee, Spencer, Chen, Yip et al., 2007), whereas
others did not (e.g., Taylor & Turner, 2002).
This discrepancy suggests the complexity of
racial discrimination experiences. Joseph and
Williams (2005) indicated that “exposure to a
traumatic event may lead a person to experience
posttraumatic stress. But there are wide individual differences in the severity and chronicity of
reactions. Some people remain affected for considerable periods of time, but others are able to
adjust relatively quickly, and some even go on
to report experiencing positive personal
changes” (p. 1). Thompson-Miller and Feagin
(2007) also reported that while some people
may be only slightly bothered by racial discrimination, others can clearly recall the details of
these incidents for some time after the discrimination events and can still feel greatly bothered
by racial discrimination in their current lives.
Such reports are in line with Clark et al.’s
(1999) contextual racism model. They proposed
that the complexity in the association between
perceived discrimination and health can be further understood by adding other factors into the
model (e.g., discrimination stress responses/
reactions, as well as general and specific coping
strategies). Thus, researchers have called for
more complex models to understand the complex link between racial discrimination and
health.
Racial Discrimination Stress and
Depressive Symptoms
Carter (2007) conceptually integrated the literature on racism, discrimination, stress, and
trauma to promote a clearer understanding of a
new construct, race-based traumatic stress. He
proposed that the severity of race-based traumatic stress can affect a number of areas in
one’s life and should be determined by the
intensity of the person’s reactions that emerge.
“Because many aspects of racism can occur
throughout one’s life, severity may be a consequence of the cumulative effects of numerous
events. . .one seemingly innocuous or minor
137
event could be the last straw in a series of
accumulated racial incidents” (Carter, 2007,
p. 90). Carter noted that severity may also be a
function of several factors, such as duration,
number of events, and the type of social support
both before and after the event (see Carlson,
1997). Similarly, Thompson-Miller and Feagin
(2007) suggested that when conceptualizing and
assessing race-based traumatic stress, researchers should consider the severity (e.g., the degree
of disturbance in the person’s life) and the timing (e.g., the degree of interference in daily life
at the time of the discrimination event and the
current time) of racial discrimination.
As indicated earlier, the literature is limited
to the association between perceived discrimination and health. However, intuitively, because
racial discrimination stress can be short-term,
chronic, and accumulative, it is likely to be
associated with depressed mood. Conceptually,
Clark et al. (1999) argued that “the perception
of racism usually resulted in psychological and
physiological stress responses” and “over time
these stress responses are posited to influence
health outcomes” (see pp. 806 and 812). Thus,
this study’s first hypothesis was to expect a
positive relation between racial discrimination
stress and depressive symptoms. To test this
hypothesis, we also followed Harrell’s (2000)
recommendation by controlling for potential
confounding variables of perceived general
stress and perceived racial discrimination.
Coping Strategies as Moderators
The second purpose of this study was to
examine the role of coping in the association
between racial discrimination stress and depressive symptoms among Asian Americans. After
carefully reviewing the literature, it is surprising
that Pascoe and Smart Richman’s (2009) metaanalysis across 134 studies on discrimination
and health outcomes revealed that only nine
studies have examined the role of coping in this
link. Thus far, only eight published studies have
examined how people with Asian heritages
cope with racial discrimination (Alvarez &
Juang, 2010; Kuo, 1995; Liang et al., 2007; Noh
et al., 1999; Noh & Kaspar, 2003; Wei, Alvarez,
Ku, Russell, & Bonett, in press; Wei, Ku, Russell, Mallinckrodt, & Liao, 2008; Yoo & Lee,
2005).
138
WEI, HEPPNER, KU, AND LIAO
In studying the role of coping in the racial
discrimination and outcome link, at least two
methodological issues are important: (a) being
sensitive to culturally congruent coping, and (b)
being sensitive to coping dispositions and situation-specific coping. First, many coping inventories used in the United States are based on
Euro-American psychology and values (Heppner, 2008a; Heppner et al., 2006; Wong &
Wong, 2006). However, these U.S.-based coping inventories may not tell the whole story
about how racial ethnic minority groups in the
United States effectively cope with stressful life
events (Heppner, 2008a; Noh et al., 1999; Noh
& Kaspar, 2003). Subsequently, scholars have
called for the inclusion of culturally congruent
coping measures in the general coping literature
(e.g., Heppner, Witty, & Dixon, 2004), in the
Asian or Asian American literature (e.g., Heppner, 2008a, 2008b; Heppner et al., 2006; Yeh,
Arora, & Wu, 2006), and in the coping with
discrimination literature (e.g., Clark et al., 1999;
Harrell, 2000).
Noh and colleagues (1999, 2003) examined
both Western, individualistic ways of coping
(e.g., active coping) and Eastern, collectivistic
ways of coping (e.g., forbearance coping) in
their studies on coping with racial discrimination. Noh et al. (1999) found that, forbearance
coping, a culturally congruent coping strategy,
buffered Southeast Asian refugees from depression in the face of racial discrimination. Later,
Noh and Kaspar (2003) found that active coping
buffered the impact of perceived racial discrimination on depression for Korean Canadian
immigrants. Noh and Kaspar explained that perhaps these immigrants have high education, stable jobs, and social resources which helped
them adopt a Western coping strategy to lessen
the negative impact of perceived discrimination
on depression. These two studies show that individualistic and collectivistic coping strategies
are useful in understanding the moderation role
of coping strategies on the association between
perceived discrimination and depression. Thus,
we continue this line of research by focusing on
both individualistic and collectivistic coping.
The second methodological issue pertains to
dispositional and situation-specific coping. Dispositional coping describes individuals’ “habitual ways of dealing with stress. . .these coping
styles can influence their reactions in new situations” (Carver & Scheier, 1994, p.185). Situation-
specific coping describes coping responses that
vary across different types of problems (Lazarus
& Folkman, 1984). In the discrimination literature, Clark et al. (1999) encouraged researchers
to broaden the knowledge base about racism by
examining “whether general and racismspecific coping responses are. . .effective in mitigating the effects of perceived racism” (p. 813).
This indicates that both dispositional and situation-specific coping strategies may be critical
for managing racial discrimination. Thus, we
examined whether dispositional and situationspecific coping are moderators in the link between racial discrimination stress and depressive symptoms.
To assess Western-based, individualistic, and
dispositional styles of coping, we selected the
Problem-Focused Style of Coping (PF-SOC;
Heppner, Cook, Wright, & Johnson, 1995). It
includes reflective (e.g., design a systematic
plan to solve problems), suppressive (e.g., avoid
coping activities), and reactive (e.g., have
strong emotional responses) coping. Regarding
reflective coping, Pascoe and Smart Richman’s
meta analysis (2009) indicated that “active or
problem-focused coping seemed to be the most
effective type of coping, with all significant
effects showing a buffering effect” (p. 546).
Yoo and Lee (2005) found that for Asian Americans with a strong ethnic identity, problem
solving coping buffered the effects of racial
discrimination on negative affect when perceived racial discrimination was low. Moreover, Asian Americans may use suppressive
coping to avoid interpersonal conflict. However, suppressive coping correlated positively
with depression (e.g., Heppner et al., 1995).
Thus, suppressive coping may enhance the association between racial discrimination stress
and depressive symptoms. Among Asian international students, Wei et al. (2008) found that
suppressive coping increased vulnerability to
depression in the face of discrimination. Finally, because reactive coping is incongruent
with the Asian value of emotional self-control
(Kim, Li, & Ng, 2005), using this strategy to
deal with racial discrimination stress may increase Asian Americans’ distress. Wei et al.
(2008) found that, in the face of discrimination,
reactive coping made Asian international students vulnerable to depression. So, we hypothesized that reflective coping would lessen the
association between racial discrimination stress
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION STRESS
and depressive symptoms. However, suppressive and reactive coping would strengthen this
association.
To assess Eastern, collectivistic, and situation-specific coping, we selected the Collectivistic Coping Styles (CCS: Heppner et al., 2006)
because it is based on Asian cultural values
(Kim et al., 2005) and it allows us to easily
assess coping activities related specifically to
racial discrimination. It consists of five coping
strategies: (a) acceptance, reframing, and striving; (b) family support; (c) avoidance and detachment; (d) religion/spirituality; and (e) private emotional outlets. Asian individuals often
reframe their existing realities (Weisz, Rothbaum, & Blackburn, 1984). In addition, minorities tend to learn how to cope with racial discrimination by interacting with and being
socialized by their family members (Hughes et
al., 2006). Kuo’s (1995) study of coping with
discrimination reported that 60% of Asian
Americans thought that things could be worse
(e.g., reframing), 43% asked advice from relatives (e.g., family support), and 54% just tried to
ignore discrimination (e.g., avoidance). Thus,
faced with racial discrimination stress, Asian
Americans may reframe the discrimination or
seek guidance from family members in order to
weaken the association between racial discrimination stress and depressive symptoms. Thus,
we expected these two strategies to lessen the
direct association.
Conversely, saving face is an Asian cultural
practice (Sue & Sue, 2008). In dealing with
discrimination, the avoidance and detachment
strategy (e.g., “saved face by not telling anyone”) may help Asian Americans temporarily
maintain face. However, the stress related to
discrimination still remains after using avoidant
coping strategies, and consequently, the person
may be vulnerable to depression. Thus, we expected this strategy to enhance the association
between racial discrimination stress and depressive symptoms. Religion/spirituality and private
emotional outlets were used less frequently and
found less helpful in Heppner et al.’s study.
Also, there is an absence of empirical support
for these two coping strategies in coping with
racial discrimination stress for Asian Americans. Hence, no specific hypotheses were made
regarding these two strategies, and they were
only examined for exploratory purposes.
139
In conclusion, the first hypothesis was that
racial discrimination stress would be positively
related to depressive symptoms after controlling
for perceived general stress and perceived discrimination. In addition, two moderation hypotheses posited that (a) reflective coping, (b)
acceptance, reframing and striving, and (c) family support would lessen the relation between
racial discrimination stress and depressive
symptoms, while (a) suppressive coping, (b)
reactive coping, and (c) avoidance and detachment would strengthen this association.
Method
A Prior Power Analysis
We conducted a prior power analysis by using the Power and Precision program (Borenstein, Rothstein, & Cohen, 2001) to estimate the
power. Based on Cohen’s (1992) suggestion
(i.e., r ⫽ .10, .30, or .50 for small, medium, or
large effect size, respectively), the results indicated a sample size of 1480 for a small effect
size (R2 ⫽ .01), 140 for a medium effect size
(R2 ⫽ .09), and 35 for a large effect size (R2 ⫽
.25) with an alpha of .05 and a power of .80.
Due to the lack of available resources, it was a
challenge to collect enough data for a small
effect size; however, we planned to collect
enough data for a medium effect size (i.e., N ⬎
140).
Participants and Procedure
A total of 201 Asian Americans from a public
Midwestern university were obtained for our
study. In this predominantly White university,
about 2.8% of the entire student population was
Asian American. In this study, specific Asian ethnic subgroups were as follows: 23.9% Korean, 21.4% Chinese, 10% Vietnamese, 9.5%
Laotian, 9% Indian, 9% Filipino, 4.5% Japanese, 3.5% Multiethnic Asian, 3% Taiwanese, 2%
Taidam, 1.5% Hmong, 1% Cambodian, 1% Thai,
and 0.5% Indonesian. They included 46% men
and 54% women, with a mean age of 20.16 years
(SD ⫽ 2.79; range ⫽ 18 – 42). Participants varied
in their academic year, including 36% freshmen,
26% sophomores, 18% juniors, 15% seniors, 3%
graduate students, and 2 participants who did not
respond to this question. In terms of generation
status, 6.5% identified themselves as first genera-
140
WEI, HEPPNER, KU, AND LIAO
tion, 37.3% as 1.5 generation (refers to Asian
Americans who were born outside of the United
States but moved to the United States as a child or
adolescent), 48.3% as second generation, 2.5% as
third generation, 4% as fourth generation,
and 1.5% as fifth generation.
A list of Asian American students was obtained from the Registrar’s database. We contacted potential participants via email to invite
them to participate in an online study. An online
methodology was selected because racial discrimination is a sensitive topic, and participants
may feel more comfortable answering the questions online than in person. Those who took
psychology courses received course credits, and
those who did not take psychology courses were
awarded a gift certificate for an ice cream cone
or a $5 check. The participants were informed
that the purpose of the study was to identify
coping strategies that are used effectively by
Asian Americans to reduce psychological distress from stressors. The survey took approximately 20 to 35 minutes to complete. In order to
keep the surveys anonymous, the students’ information for receiving course credits, gift certificates, or $5 checks was stored separately
from the survey answers. Only the first author
could access the students’ information. None of
the authors were instructors of any of the psychology courses. Finally, 232 students were recruited. There were 31 students who answered a
validity-checking item (i.e., an item which
asked participants to check No. 5 as the answer
for the item) incorrectly; therefore, these students were removed from the current study.
Thus, data from 201 students was used in the
data analyses.
Measures
Perceived general stress. The Perceived
Stress Scale (PSS; Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983) was used to measure general
perception of stress in the past month. The PSS
has 10 items which are rated on a 5-point scale,
ranging from (0) never to (4) very often. Total
score ranges from 0 to 40, with higher scores
indicating a greater level of perceived general
stress. The coefficient alpha was .76 for African
Americans (Pieterse & Carter, 2007), and .86 in
our study. An estimate of construct validity was
supported by a positive association with psy-
chological distress among African Americans
(Pieterse & Carter, 2007).
Perceived discrimination. Perceived discrimination was assessed by the Perceived Discrimination (PD) subscale of the Acculturative
Stress Scale for International Students (ASSIS;
Sandhu & Asrabadi, 1994). PD has 8 items
which are rated on a 5-point scale, ranging from
(1) strongly disagree to (5) strongly agree. Total scores range from 8 to 40, with higher scores
indicating greater perceived discrimination. The
coefficient alpha for PD was .92 among Asian
international students (Wei et al., 2008) and .93
in our study. An estimate of construct validity
was supported by a positive association with
depression among Asian international students
(Wei et al., 2008).
Problem focused coping strategies. The
Problem-Focused Style of Coping (PF-SOC;
Heppner et al., 1995) was used to measure dispositional coping. The PF-SOC (18 items) assesses the consequences of problem-focused
coping activities that would either facilitate or
inhibit progress toward the resolution of stressful life events in general. Respondents use a
5-point scale ranging from (1) almost never to
(5) almost all of the time to depict their utilizations of the coping strategies listed in the scale.
The PF-SOC is composed of three styles of
coping: (a) Reflective (7 items), (b) Suppressive
(6 items), and Reactive (5 items). Higher Reflective scores indicate a greater utilization of
coping activities that promote progress in resolving stressful life events. Conversely, higher
Suppressive and Reactive scores indicate a
greater utilization of coping activities that inhibit or hinder the resolution of stressful life
events. Coefficient alphas were .77, .76, and .73
for Reflective, Suppressive, and Reactive coping styles among college students (Heppner et
al., 1995) and .81, .82, and .75, respectively, in
this study. An estimate of construct validity was
supported through a negative correlation between reflective style of coping and depression
and positive associations between suppressive
and reactive style of coping and depression for
Asian international students (Wei et al., 2008).
Collectivistic coping strategies. The Collectivistic Coping Styles-Racial Discrimination
(CCS-RD) was based on the Collectivistic Coping Styles inventory (CCS; Heppner et al.,
2006), which is a situation-specific collectivistic
coping inventory initially developed on Tai-
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION STRESS
wanese college students. The items were developed based on Asian cultural values, primary
control (i.e., control through direct and active
influences) and secondary control (i.e., control
through accommodating and reframing existing
realities), and problem resolution (Zeidner &
Saklofske, 1996). See Heppner et al. (2006) for
more details.
For the CCS-RD, we modified the original
CCS instructions to focus on how people coped
with racial discrimination experiences. This inventory consisted of 30 coping (five factors)
items to assess the utilization of collectivistic
coping strategies that either facilitated or hindered individuals from resolving racial discrimination. Following Heppner et al. (2006), each
item was rated on a 5-point scale ranging from
(0) never used this strategy/not applicable, to
(5) a tremendous amount of help. The largest
factor is Acceptance, Reframing, and Striving
(ARS; 11 items; a sample item: “Believed that I
would grow from surviving the racial discrimination event”), which reflects a blend of acceptance, reframing, efficacy, and interpersonal
harmony strategies. Family Support (FS; 6
items; “Placed trust in my elder’s traditional
wisdom to cope with discrimination”) reflects
the extent to which one seeks support from
one’s family or respected elders. Religion/
Spirituality (RS; 5 items; “Thought about the
meaning of the racial discrimination event from
the perspectives of my religions beliefs”) reflects the degree to which the individual turns to
religious or spiritual activities for coping.
Avoidance and Detachment (AD; 5 items;
“Saved face by not telling anyone”) assesses an
individual’s tendency to detach from others and
avoid thoughts about racial discrimination. Private Emotional Outlets (PEO; 4 items; “Chatted
with people about discrimination on the Internet
in order to gain support”) measures the extent to
which one seeks out confidential, anonymous,
or private coping strategies to resolve problems.
Higher scores on all five factors indicate a
higher level of helpfulness in resolving perceived discrimination. In our study, the coefficient alphas were: .89, .86, .90, .78, and .76,
respectively (cf. .76 –.90 in Heppner et al.,
2006). An estimate of construct validity for the
original CCS coping factors was supported
through correlations in the expected directions
with measures of psychological distress and
141
other problem solving measures for Taiwanese
college students (Heppner et al., 2006).
Racial discrimination stress. Another part
of the CCS was adapted to assess the degree of
Racial Discrimination Stress (RDS). The effects
of perceived discrimination have been widely
reported to impact many areas of people’s lives
(see Clark et al., 1999) and take an emotional
toll through heightened stress responses (see
Pascoe & Smart Richman, 2009). Consistent
with this literature, we operationalized RDS as
both the degree of interference from racial discrimination in daily life (e.g., interpersonal relationships) as well as unresolved feelings related to racial discrimination. More specifically,
the RDS assessed the level of interference (i.e.,
Interference of Racial Discrimination [IRD]) of
racial discrimination in five major life domains
(i.e., school or work, interpersonal relationships, thinking and judgment, mood, and selfesteem). Moreover, since stress relating to racial
discrimination can be acute and long-lasting
(see Clark et al., 1999; Noh et al., 1999), we
assessed racial interference both at the time of
the discrimination event(s) (IRD-Then) and
presently (IRD-Now). Participants rated each of
the 5 IRD items on a 5-point scale, ranging from
(1) no interference at all to (5) a major interference. In addition, we assessed the degree of
unresolved feelings related to racial discrimination in general (i.e., Resolution of Discrimination [RD]; I am disturbed by my memories
related to discrimination). Participants rated 4
items on a 6-point scale; 1 (strongly agree) to 6
(strongly disagree). The RDS was computed by
summing the standardized scores of IRD (Then
and Now) and RD, with higher scores indicative
of more racial discrimination stress. In our
study, the alpha coefficients were .83, .87, and
.80 for IRD Then, IRDI Now, and RD, respectively. One estimate of construct validity for
these variables was evidenced by positive associations with psychological distress among Taiwanese college students (Heppner et al., 2006).
Depression. The short version of the Center for Epidemiological Studies–Depression
Mood Scale (CES-D-short version; Kohout,
Berkman, Evans, & Cornoni-Huntley, 1993)
was used to measure depressive symptoms during the past week. The CES-D-short version
has 11 items which are rated on a 4-point scale
that ranges from (0) rarely or none of the time
to (3) most or all of the time. Scores range
142
WEI, HEPPNER, KU, AND LIAO
between 0 and 33, with higher scores indicating
a higher level of depressive symptoms. In the
present study, the coefficient alpha was .85. Wei
et al. (in press) reported a coefficient alpha of
.84 for the CES-D short version (11 items) and
demonstrated an estimate of construct validity
through negative associations with life satisfaction and self-esteem among Asian Americans,
African Americans, and Latino Americans.
Results
Preliminary Analyses and Descriptive
Statistics
The regression assumptions of linearity, homoscedasticity, and normality (see Cohen, Cohen,
West, & Aiken, 2003) were first examined. The
results indicated that there was no violation of
the assumption of linearity or residual homoscedasticity. The skewness and kurtosis in the residual scores were 0.31 and 0.23 (Zs ⫽ 1.78
and 0.66, ps ⬎ .05), respectively. The results
showed that there was no statistically significant
departure from normality, which met the residual normality assumption in the regression
analysis.
Next, we examined whether all the main variables (i.e., perceived general stress, perceived
discrimination, racial discrimination stress,
three PF-SOC coping factors, five CCS-RD factors, and depressive symptoms) varied by different Asian American subgroups. No significant results from the MANOVA analysis were
found (Pillai’s Trace ⫽ .74, F value ⫽ 1.11, and
p ⫽ .19). So, all Asian American subgroups
were combined in the later analyses.
Moreover, two other MANOVAs were conducted to examine whether the above measured
variables would vary as a function of participants’ sex and generation status. No significant
results were found (Pillai’s Trace ⫽ .10 to .32,
F values ⫽ 1.69 to 1.15, and ps ⫽ .07 to .10).
In addition, age was not significantly related to
any of the variables (all ps ⬎ .01), with three
exceptions. The results showed that age was
positively related to perceived discrimination
(r ⫽ .20, p ⬍ .01), racial discrimination stress
(r ⫽ .30, p ⬍ .001), and coping through private
emotional outlets (r ⫽ .19, p ⬍ .01). These
results suggest that older college students reported stronger perceived discrimination, stronger racial discrimination stress, and found
higher coping helpfulness through private emotional outlets. However, because the demographic variables were not significantly related
to the dependent variable (i.e., depressive symptoms), none of these variables (i.e., sex, generation status, and age) were used as covariates in
the following analyses.
Means, standard deviations, and zero-order
correlations among the variables are presented
in Table 1. Results showed that depressive
symptoms were positively related to perceived
stress, perceived discrimination, racial discrimination stress, suppressive coping, reactive coping, and private emotional outlets. Conversely,
depressive symptoms were negatively related to
family support and acceptance, reframing, and
striving.
Moderation Analyses
Our model included interaction terms, and we
standardized the predictor and moderator variables to reduce multicollinearity (e.g., Aiken &
West, 1991; Frazier, Tix, & Barron, 2004). In
the hierarchical regression, in Step 1, perceived
general stress and perceived discrimination
were entered as covariate variables. In Step 2,
racial discrimination stress was entered as a
predictor to test a main effect of racial discrimination stress on depressive symptoms over and
beyond perceived general stress and perceived
discrimination. In Step 3, the three individualistic and dispositional coping styles and the five
collectivistic and situation-specific coping strategies were entered as a block. Finally, in Step 4,
all the interaction terms were entered to examine the interaction/moderation effects. A significant standardized regression coefficient and
change in R2 for the interaction term indicated a
significant moderation effect (Aiken & West,
1991).
In Step 1, results indicated that perceived
general stress and perceived discrimination accounted for 53% of the variance in depressive
symptoms (see Table 2). Perceived general
stress was found to significantly predict depressive symptoms, but perceived discrimination
failed to predict depressive symptoms. In
Step 2, racial discrimination stress accounted
for an additional 4% of the variance in depressive symptoms. That is, racial discrimination
stress uniquely predicted depressive symptoms
over and above perceived general stress and
—
.27ⴱⴱⴱ
.42ⴱⴱⴱ
.35ⴱⴱⴱ
.39ⴱⴱⴱ
.32ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.19ⴱⴱ
.55ⴱⴱⴱ
.59ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.13
⫺.07
.05
⫺.03
.08
.73ⴱⴱⴱ
1.91
.64
—
.61ⴱⴱⴱ
.51ⴱⴱⴱ
.49ⴱⴱⴱ
.54ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.07
.28ⴱⴱⴱ
.12
⫺.04
⫺.03
⫺.04
⫺.01
.17ⴱ
.27ⴱⴱⴱ
2.74
0.77
2
—
.86ⴱⴱⴱ
.88ⴱⴱⴱ
.79ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.09
.39ⴱⴱⴱ
.30ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.14ⴱ
⫺.09
.09
⫺.08
.26ⴱⴱⴱ
.49ⴱⴱⴱ
0.01
2.53
3
—
.70ⴱⴱⴱ
.48ⴱⴱⴱ
.06
.31ⴱⴱⴱ
.24ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.03
⫺.10
.14ⴱ
⫺.08
.19ⴱⴱ
.44ⴱⴱⴱ
2.21
.84
3a
—
.52ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.07
.40ⴱⴱⴱ
.32ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.16ⴱ
⫺.12
.06
⫺.10
.25ⴱⴱⴱ
.43ⴱⴱⴱ
1.88
.80
3b
—
⫺.20ⴱⴱ
.27ⴱⴱⴱ
.19ⴱⴱ
⫺.16ⴱ
.00
.01
⫺.04
.23ⴱⴱ
.36ⴱⴱⴱ
2.83
1.11
3c
—
⫺.26ⴱⴱⴱ
.09
.35ⴱⴱⴱ
.19ⴱⴱ
.19ⴱⴱ
.14ⴱ
.04
⫺.12
3.00
.79
4
—
.51ⴱⴱⴱ
⫺.14ⴱ
⫺.02
.19ⴱⴱ
.02
.13
.51ⴱⴱⴱ
2.16
0.76
5
—
.04
⫺.02
.10
.05
.06
.53ⴱⴱⴱ
2.50
.78
6
—
.30ⴱⴱⴱ
.38ⴱⴱⴱ
.28ⴱⴱⴱ
.10
⫺.14ⴱ
2.84
.82
7
—
.15ⴱ
.38ⴱⴱⴱ
.16ⴱ
⫺.18ⴱ
2.40
1.17
8
—
.13
.15ⴱ
.03
1.94
1.00
9
—
.12
⫺.10
1.53
1.59
10
—
.16ⴱ
.98
1.24
11
—
.81
.56
12
Note. N ⫽ 199 –201. All means are based on item-level means except racial discrimination stress, which is based on Z score. PSS ⫽ Perceived Stress Scale; PD ⫽ Perceived
Discrimination; RDS ⫽ Racial Discrimination Stress (i.e., a composite score of standardized IRD-Then, IRD-Now, and IRD); IRD-Then and IRD-Now ⫽ Interference of Racial
Discrimination-Then and Interference of Racial Discrimination-Now; RD ⫽ Resolution of Discrimination; RFS, SS, and RS ⫽ the Reflective, Suppressive, and Reactive Coping
Style subscales of Problem Focused Style of Coping; ARS, FS, AD, RS, and PEO ⫽ the Acceptance, Reframing, and Striving, Family Support, Avoidance and Detachment,
Religion/Spirituality, and Private Emotional Outlet subscales of Collective Coping Style Inventory; CESD-short ⫽ Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Mood Scale-short
version. A high score means a high level of perceived general stress, the interference from racial discrimination stress, racial discrimination interference (then and now), racial
discrimination un-resolution, reflective coping, suppressive coping, reactive coping, perceived utility of acceptance, reframing, and striving, family support, religion/spirituality,
avoidance and detachment, private emotional outlet, and depressive symptoms.
ⴱ
p ⬍ .05. ⴱⴱ p ⬍ .01. ⴱⴱⴱ p ⬍ .001.
1. PSS
2. PD
3. RDS
3a. IRD-Then
3b. IRD-Now
3c. RD
4. RFS
5. SS
6. RS
7. ARS
8. FS
9. AD
10. RS
11. PEO
12. CESD-short
M
SD
1
Table 1
Means, Standard Deviations, and Zero-Order Correlations of Variables
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION STRESS
143
144
WEI, HEPPNER, KU, AND LIAO
Table 2
A Hierarchical Multiple Regression Analysis for the Interactions of Racial Discrimination Stress and
Coping Strategies in Predicting Depressive Symptoms
Variable
B
Step 1 (Covariate)
Perceived General Stress
Perceived Discrimination
Step 2 (Racial Discrimination Stress)
Racial Discrimination Stress (RDS)
Step 3 (Coping Strategies)
Reflective Coping
Suppressive Coping
Reactive Coping
Acceptance, Reframing, and Striving
Family Support
Avoidance and Detachment
Religion/Spirituality
Private Emotional Outlet
Step 4 (Interactions)
Reflective Coping ⫻ RDS
Suppressive Coping ⫻ RDS
Reactive Coping ⫻ RDS
Acceptance, Reframing, and Striving ⫻ RDS
Family Support ⫻ RDS
Avoidance and Detachment ⫻ RDS
Religion/Spirituality ⫻ RDS
Private Emotional Outlet ⫻ RDS
Note. N ⫽ 201.
p ⬍ .05. ⴱⴱ p ⬍ .01.
ⴱ
ⴱⴱⴱ
SE B
␤
sr2
4.37
0.47
.31
.32
.72ⴱⴱⴱ
.08
.46
.01
0.64
.16
.26ⴱⴱⴱ
.04
0.29
0.72
0.68
0.04
⫺0.77
⫺0.32
⫺0.23
0.56
.33
.40
.39
.35
.32
.33
.32
.30
.05
.12
.11
.01
⫺.12ⴱ
⫺.05
⫺.04
.09
.00
.01
.01
.00
.01
.00
.00
.01
⫺0.06
⫺0.09
0.32
⫺0.06
⫺0.39
0.27
0.13
0.20
.12
.14
.16
.13
.13
.14
.14
.12
⫺.03
⫺.05
.13ⴱ
⫺.03
⫺.18ⴱⴱ
.11
.05
.08
.00
.00
.01
.00
.02
.01
.00
.00
R2
⌬R2
⌬F (dfs)
.530
.530
110.38ⴱⴱⴱ (2, 196)
.568
.038
17.10ⴱⴱⴱ (1, 195)
.610
.042
2.54ⴱ (8, 187)
.644
.034
2.11ⴱ (8, 179)
p ⬍ .001.
perceived discrimination. In Step 3, the three
individualistic/dispositional coping styles and
the five collectivistic/racial discrimination specific-coping strategies accounted for an incremental 4% of the variance in depressive symptoms after controlling for perceived general
stress, perceived discrimination, and racial discrimination stress. Among these coping strategies, family support significantly predicted
depressive symptoms. Finally, in Step 4, an
overall two-way interaction significantly predicted depressive symptoms, (⌬R2 ⫽ .03, p ⬍
.05). An R2 value of .03 indicates a small effect
size (Cohen, 1992). However, interaction terms
typically account for about 1% to 3% of the
variance in social science research (Chaplin,
1991). Specifically, the regression coefficients
for racial discrimination stress ⫻ reactive coping ( p ⬍ .05) and racial discrimination stress ⫻
family support ( p ⬍ .01) were statistically
significant.
Simple effect analyses were conducted to explore the nature of the two-way interactions.
Based on the suggestions by Aiken and West
(1991), one standard deviation below and above
the mean for predictor and moderator was used
to plot the variables and to test the statistical
significance for each of the simple slopes. In
Figure 1, the result indicated that the relation
between racial discrimination stress and depressive symptoms was positive and significant at
high utilization of reactive coping strategies—
which tend to hinder resolution—(B ⫽ 0.74,
␤ ⫽ .30, sr2 ⫽ .02, p ⬍ .01), but was not
statistically significant at low utilization of reactive coping strategies (B ⫽ 0.10, ␤ ⫽ .04,
sr2 ⫽ .00, p ⬎ .05). These results indicated that
high utilization of reactive coping strategies
added to the vulnerability to depressive symptoms, whereas low utilization of reactive coping
strategies was associated with a low level of
depressive symptoms, even when racial discrimination stress was strong.
Moreover, the simple effect results (see
Figure 2) revealed that the relation between
racial discrimination stress and depressive
symptoms was positive and significant at low
helpfulness ratings of family support (B ⫽ 0.81,
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION STRESS
145
16
Depressive Symptoms
14
12
H b = .74***
10
HighReactive
Coping
LowReactive
Coping
8
L b = .10
6
4
2
Low (1SD below)
High (1SD above)
Racial Discrimination Stress
Figure 1. The relations between racial discrimination stress and depressive symptoms at the
high and low levels of reactive coping.
␤ ⫽ .33, sr2 ⫽ .03, p ⬍ .001). However, the
association between racial discrimination stress
and depressive symptoms was not statistically
significant at high helpfulness ratings of family
support (B ⫽ 0.03, ␤ ⫽ .01, sr2 ⫽ .00, p ⬎ .05).
In other words, when racial discrimination
stress increased, Asian American students who
reported low helpfulness levels of family support to resolve racial discrimination were more
vulnerable to depressive symptoms. Conversely, those who reported high helpfulness
levels of family support to resolve racial discrimination were less vulnerable to depressive
symptoms.
Discussion
The first purpose of our study was to examine
whether racial discrimination stress was signif-
icantly related to depressive symptoms after
controlling for perceived general stress and perceived discrimination. The results supported
this hypothesis. The finding of this significant
positive direct association not only supports but
also extends the existing literature (e.g., Liang
et al., 2007; Noh et al., 1999; Noh & Kaspar,
2003; Yoo & Lee, 2005). In line with the recommendation by Harrell (2000) to remove potentially confounding variables, our study adds
to the growing literature by demonstrating that
racial discrimination stress added an additional
4% of variance in predicting depressive symptoms over and beyond perceived general stress
and perceived discrimination. As Sue (2009)
persuasively argued, ethnic minority studies
need to consider the importance of the cumulative effect of single small effects over time; this
additional 4% is both informative and meaning-
Depressive
Symptoms
Depressive
Symptoms
16
14
14
12
12
10
L b = .81***
10
8
8
6
H b = .03
Low Family
Support
Low Family
High Family
Support
Support
High Family
Support
6
4
4
2
2
Low (1SD below)
High (1SD above)
Racialbelow)
DiscriminationHigh
Stress
Low (1SD
(1SD above)
Racial Discrimination Stress
Figure 2. The relations between racial discrimination stress and depressive symptoms at the
high and low levels of family support. ⴱⴱⴱ p ⬍ .001.
146
WEI, HEPPNER, KU, AND LIAO
ful. This implies that racial discrimination stress
is an important construct by itself and is not a
proxy for general life stressors or perceived
discrimination of Asian Americans and merits
additional attention in future discrimination research. These findings also support Carter’s
(2007) call to examine race-based traumatic
stress, which will help us to understand the
complexities surrounding the very important
and persistent societal problem of racial discrimination.
The second purpose of this study was to
examine the moderation effects of coping strategies on depressive symptoms. The first significant moderator was the individualistic/dispositional strategy of reactive coping. This result
suggested that the frequent use of reactive coping (which tends to hinder the resolution of
stressful situations) heightened the strength of
the association between racial discrimination
stress and depressive symptoms. Conversely,
less frequent use of reactive coping weakened
this association. Emotional self-control is an
important component of Asian values (Kim et
al., 2005) and typically implies maturity in
Asian cultures. A tendency to have strong, unregulated emotional reactions and/or to react
impulsively is thus incongruent with the Asian
value of emotional control. These results are
similar to Wei et al.’s (2008) findings that, in
the face of perceived discrimination, Asian international students with high use of reactive
coping are more likely to have increased depressive symptoms regardless of their self-esteem
levels. Thus, stressful problems like racial discrimination that evoke reactive coping (i.e.,
strong emotional responses) may be particularly
challenging for Asian Americans and Asian international students because such a reactive
coping style is incongruent with basic Asian
values, customs, and norms.
The second significant moderator was the
collectivistic and discrimination-specific family
support. This result indicated that high level of
helpfulness from family support can be beneficial in lessening the association between racial
discrimination stress and depression. The helpfulness of family support in dealing with stressful problems such as racial discrimination reflects a culturally congruent coping strategy.
Specifically, the family in Asian cultures plays a
central cultural role (Kim et al., 2005) and is
deemed as a vital supportive system (Inman &
Yeh, 2007; Yeh et al., 2006). People are likely
to informally learn how to cope with racial
discrimination through the process of racial socialization within their families (Hughes et al.,
2006) and through observing what their family
has done in the past to deal with racial discrimination (Harrell, 2000). Thus, Asian Americans
may cope with racial discrimination stress by
following family norms of handling racial discrimination and trusting in the elders’ wisdom
and accepting guidance from parents or elders.
Thus, receiving guidance and support within a
sanctioned collectivistic family environment
may help lessen the strength between racial
discrimination stress and depressive symptoms.
Even though the above coping strategies
serve as significant moderators, it may be important to speculate why other coping strategies
failed to serve as significant moderators. The
PF-SOC reflective and suppressive factors were
not significant moderators, nor were the
CCS-RD factors of acceptance, reframing, and
striving, as well as avoidance and detachment.
Perhaps, because racial discrimination stress is
often long lasting and accumulative, this type of
problem may not be easily mitigated with a
general coping style that is reflective or suppressive. Perhaps, even if people accept racial discrimination, they may still feel upset because it
occurs on a daily basis and is not just a one-time
occurrence. Or perhaps it reflects the complexity of coping with racial discrimination stress. A
two-way interaction may be inadequate to understand its complexity. As we discussed earlier, Yoo and Lee (2005) found that high use of
problem solving coping reduced the effects of
perceived racial discrimination on negative affect only for Asian Americans with a strong
ethnic identity in a low racial discrimination
condition (i.e., a three-way interaction of problem solving coping ⫻ ethnic identity ⫻ perceived discrimination). A third variable (e.g.,
acculturation/enculturation levels) may serve as
a moderator to interact with these coping strategies in predicting depression (see a detailed
discussion below). Finally, this study may not
have sufficient power to detect these moderation effects.
The results from this study have implications
for the coping literature in general and for coping with discrimination among Asian Americans specifically. Our results suggest that it is
important to recognize the role of culturally
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION STRESS
congruent coping in dealing with racial discrimination. Increasingly, scholars have maintained
that coping inventories based on European psychology may not tell the whole story about how
racial ethnic minority groups in the United
States effectively cope with stressful life events
(e.g., Harrell, 2000; Heppner et al., 2006; Heppner, 2008a; Wong & Wong, 2006; Yeh et al.,
2006). Despite cogent data indicating that the
cultural context influences the perceptions of
problems, the perceived effectiveness of coping
strategies, and even the acceptable solutions to
specific stressors (see Heppner, 2008a), scholars have ignored the cultural context in coping
for far too long (Heppner, 2008a, 2008b). Our
results clearly indicate a need to include culturally congruent coping activities for Asian
Americans.
Limitations, Future Research Directions,
and Counseling Implications
It is important to note some limitations in our
study. First, although one of the strengths of this
study was that the sample was collected from a
region (i.e., Midwest) where studies of Asian
Americans are underinvestigated, the generalization of the current results to other regions
needs to be done with caution. Second, 85% of
the participants were 1.5 or 2nd generation
Asian American college students. The results
may not be generalizable to other racial groups
or recent Asian immigrants. Third, the associations between racial discrimination stress, coping strategies, and depressive symptoms may be
different for different ethnic subgroups within
Asian Americans. In one recent article, researchers found that Asian ethnic subgroups
differ in the association between perceived discrimination and some chronic health conditions
(Gee, Spencer, Chen, & Takeuchi, 2007). Future investigators can conduct a follow-up study
with a specific ethnic group. Fourth, given the
voluntary nature of research participation, this
kind of design is a potential limitation because
these findings cannot be generalized to participants who decided not to participate. Also,
given the cross-sectional design with all selfreport data, common method variance may be
an issue.
Kim (2007) encouraged researchers to examine levels of enculturation (i.e., retaining the
traditional ethnic cultural norms) and accultur-
147
ation (i.e., adapting to the mainstream U.S. cultural norms) in future studies. Many Asians
believe that “adversity makes one a better person” or “to lose is to win.” When encountering
adverse situations (e.g., racial discrimination),
Asians may try to accept the adversity and make
efforts to overcome it by believing they can be
stronger people through this challenge. Following this reasoning, for those with high enculturation, discrimination-specific coping strategies (e.g., acceptance, reframing, and striving)
might buffer the link between racial discrimination stress and depressive symptoms. Future
studies might examine a three way interaction
of racial discrimination stress ⫻ enculturation ⫻ acceptance, reframing, and striving coping strategy (or other collectivistic coping strategies) to expand this line of research. Finally,
our results indicated that older students reported
stronger perceived discrimination and racial
discrimination stress; similarly, a recent study
(Yip, Gee, & Takeuchi, 2008) reported differential effects by age for Asian Americans. Future studies might consider age in their studies
with Asian Americans. In short, with the growing empirically based knowledge about Asian
Americans’ coping with racial discrimination
stress, we suggest future researchers examine
more complex coping models (e.g., a model
with a three-way interaction) and critical individual difference variables such as acculturation/enculturation levels and age.
There are several counseling implications
from the current results. First, it is important for
practitioners to understand that racial discrimination stress is an independent stressor over and
above perceived general stress and perceived
discrimination. Clinicians need to increase their
awareness of Asian Americans’ race-related experiences and assess levels of racial discrimination stress. Second, practitioners need to take
into consideration the cultural context of Asian
Americans when these clients present with issues related to racial discrimination stress, specifically coping strategies that might increase
(e.g., reactive coping) or lessen (e.g., family
support) depressive symptoms. More specifically, our results suggest that practitioners need
to understand how reactive coping strategies
might contribute to Asian American students’
coping with racial discrimination stress. Since
emotional self-control is a sign of maturity in
Asian culture (Kim et al., 2005), those who tend
148
WEI, HEPPNER, KU, AND LIAO
to use reactive coping strategies might experience inner emotional turmoil after reacting
strongly to racial discrimination and might
blame themselves for losing control. In essence, although their emotional reactions are
clearly understandable and normal, they may
feel such reactions are culturally inappropriate and thus feel depressed about having these
feelings. In addition, coping strategies related
to family support are not only culturally congruent, but also can be a helpful resource for
Asian American college students. The helpfulness of family support in coping with racerelated stress can lessen the impact of racial
discrimination stress on depressive symptoms. Practitioners can pay attention to the
role of family support in helping them cope
with racial discrimination stress.
References
Aiken, L., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression:
Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Alvarez, A. N., & Juang, L. P. (2010). Filipino Americans and Racism: A multiple mediation model of
coping. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57,
167–178. doi:10.1037/a0019091
Borenstein, M., Rothstein, H., & Cohen, J. (2001).
Power and precision (Version 2.0) [Computer
software]. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Biostat, Inc.
Carlson, E. B. (1997). Trauma assessments: Clinician’s guide. New York: Guilford Press.
Carter, R. T. (2007). Racism and psychological and
emotional injury: Recognizing and assessing racebased traumatic stress. The Counseling Psychologist, 35, 13–105. doi:10.1177/0011000006292033
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1994). Situational
coping and coping discriminations in a stressful
transaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 184 –195. doi:10.1037/0022–
3514.66.1.184
Chaplin, W. E. (1991). The next generation of moderator research in personality psychology. Journal
of Personality, 59, 143–178. doi:10.1111/j.1467–
6494.1991.tb00772.x
Clark, R., Anderson, N., Clark, V., & Williams, D.
(1999). Racism as a stressor for African Americans: A biopsychosocial model. American Psychologist, 54, 805– 816. doi:10.1037/0003066X.54.10.805
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological
Bulletin, 112, 155–159. doi:10.1037/0033–
2909.112.1.155
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S.
(2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation
analysis for the behavioral science (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A
global measure of perceived stress. Journal of
Health and Social Behavior, 24, 385–396. doi:
10.2307/2136404
Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P., & Barron, K. E. (2004).
Testing moderator and mediator effects in counseling psychology research. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 51, 115–134. doi:10.1037/0022–
0167.51.1.115
Gee, G. C., Spencer, M. S., Chen, J., & Takeuchi,
D. T. (2007). A nationwide study of discrimination
and chronic health conditions among Asian Americans. American Journal of Public Health, 97,
1275–1282. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2006.091827
Gee, G. C., Spencer, M. S., Chen, J., Yip, T., & Takeuchi, D. T. (2007). The association between selfreported racial discrimination and 12-month DSM–IV
mental disorders among Asian Americans nationwide. Social Science & Medicine, 64, 1984 –1996.
doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.02.013
Harrell, S. P. (2000). A multidimensional conceptualization of racism-related stress: Implication for
the well-being of people of color. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 70, 42–57. doi:10.1037/
h0087722
Heppner, P. P. (2008a). Expanding the conceptualization and measurement of applied problem solving and coping: From stages to dimensions to the
almost forgotten cultural context. American Psychologist, 63, 805– 816. doi:10.1037/0003066X.63.8.805
Heppner, P. P. (2008b). The role of culture in applied
problem solving: Overlooked and almost forgotten.
Giornale Italiano di Psicologia dell’Orientamento,
9/2, 9 –14.
Heppner, P. P., Cook, S. W., Wright, D. M., &
Johnson, C. (1995). Progress in resolving problems: A problem-focused style of coping. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 42, 279 –293. doi:
10.1037/0022– 0167.42.3.279
Heppner, P. P., Heppner, M. J., Lee, D., Wang, Y.,
Park, H., & Wang, L. (2006). Development and
validation of a Collectivist Coping Styles Inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 107–
125. doi:10.1037/0022– 0167.53.1.107
Heppner, P. P., Witty, T. E., & Dixon, W. A. (2004).
Problem-solving appraisal and human adjustment: A
review of 20 years of research using the Problem
Solving Inventory. The Counseling Psychologist, 32,
344 – 428. doi:10.1177/0011000003262793
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. doi:
10.1037/0012–1649.42.5.747
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION STRESS
Inman, A. G., & Yeh, C. J. (2007). Asian American
stress and coping. In F. T. L. Leong, A. G. Inman,
A. Ebreo, L. Yang, L. Kinoshota, & M. Fu (Eds.),
Handbook of Asian American Psychology (2nd ed.,
pp. 323–340). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Joseph, S., & Williams, R. (2005). Understanding posttraumatic stress: Theory, reflections, context and future.
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 33, 423–
441. doi:10.1017/S1352465805002328
Kim, B. S. K. (2007). Acculturation and enculturation. In F. T. L. Leong, A. G. Inman, A. Ebreo, L.
Yang, L. Kinoshota, & M. Fu (Eds.), Handbook of
Asian American Psychology (2nd ed., pp. 141–
158). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kim, B. S. K., Li, L. C., & Ng, G. F. (2005). The
Asian American Values Scale - Multidimensional:
Development, reliability, and validity. Cultural
Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 11, 187–
201. doi:10.1037/1099 –9809.11.3.187
Kohout, F. J., Berkman, L. F., Evans, D. A., &
Cornoni-Huntley, J. (1993). Two shorter forms of
the CES-D Depression Symptoms Index. Journal
of Aging and Health, 5, 179 –193. doi:10.1177/
089826439300500202
Kuo, W. H. (1995). Coping with racial discrimination: The cases of Asian Americans. Ethnic and
Racial Studies, 18, 109 –127.
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.
Lee, R. M. (2005). Resilience against discrimination:
Ethnic identity and other-group orientation as protective factors for Korean Americans. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 52, 36 – 44. doi:10.1037/
0022– 0167.52.1.36
Liang, C. T. H., Alvarez, A. N., Juang, L., & Liang,
M. X. (2007). The role of coping in the relationship between perceived racism and racism-related
stress for Asian Americans: Gender difference.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 132–141.
doi:10.1037/0022– 0167.54.2.132
Noh, S., Beiser, M., Kaspar, V., Hou, F., & Rummens, J. (1999). Perceived racial discrimination,
depression, and coping: A study of Southeast
Asian refugees in Canada. Journal of Health and
Social Behavior, 40, 193–207. doi:10.2307/
2676348
Noh, S., & Kaspar, V. (2003). Perceived discrimination and depression: Moderating effects of coping,
acculturation, and ethnic support. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 232–238. doi:10.2105/
AJPH.93.2.232
Pascoe, E. A., & Smart Richman, L. (2009). Perceived discrimination and health: A meta-analytic
review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 532–554. doi:
10.1037/a0016059
Pieterse, A. L., & Carter, R. T. (2007). An examination of
the relationship between general life stress, racismrelated stress, and psychological health among Black
149
men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 101–109.
doi:10.1037/0022–0167.54.1.101
Sandhu, D. S., & Asrabadi, B. R. (1994). Development of an acculturative stress scale for international students: Preliminary findings. Psychological Reports, 75, 435– 448.
Sue, D. W., Bucceri, J., Lin, A. I., Nadal, K. L., &
Torino, G. C. (2007). Racial microaggressions and
the Asian American experience. Cultural Diversity
and Ethnic Minority, 13, 72– 81. doi:10.1037/
1099 –9809.13.1.72
Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (2008). Counseling the culturally diverse: Theory and practice (5th ed.). New
York: Wiley.
Sue, S. (2009, April). Ethnicity and mental health:
Myths and misunderstandings. Invited Presentation, Midwestern Psychological Association Convention, Chicago.
Taylor, J., & Turner, R. J. (2002). Perceived discrimination, social stress, and depression in the transition to adulthood. Social Psychology Quarterly, 65, 213–225. doi:10.2307/3090120
Thompson-Miller, R., & Feagin, J. R. (2007). Continuing injuries of racism: Counseling in a racist
context. The Counseling Psychologist, 35, 106 –
115. doi:10.1177/0011000006294664
Wei, M., Alvarez, A. N., Ku, T.-Y., Russell, D. W.,
& Bonett, D. G. (in press). Development and validation of a Coping with Discrimination Scale:
Factor structure, reliability, and validity. Journal
of Counseling Psychology.
Wei, M., Ku, T.-Y., Russell, D. W., Mallinckrodt, B.,
& Liao, K. Y.-H. (2008). Moderating effects of
three coping strategies and self-esteem on perceived discrimination and depressive symptoms: A
Minority Stress Model for Asian international students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55, 451–
462. doi:10.1037/a0012511
Weisz, J. R., Rothbaum, F. M., & Blackburn, T. C.
(1984). Standing out and standing in: The psychology of control in America and Japan. American
Psychologist, 39, 955–969.
Wong, P. T. P., & Wong, L. C. J. (2006). Handbook
of multicultural perspectives on stress and coping.
New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/b137168
Yeh, C. J., Arora, A. K., & Wu, K. A. (2006). A new
theoretical model of collectivistic coping. In
P. T. P. Wong & L. C. J. Wong (Eds.). Handbook
of multicultural perspectives on stress and coping
(pp. 55–72). New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/0 –
387-26238-5_3
Yip, T., Gee, G. C., & Takeuchi, D. T. (2008). Racial
discrimination and psychological distress: The impact of ethnic identity and age among immigrant
and united stated-born Asian adults. Developmental Psychology, 44, 787– 800. doi:10.1037/0012–
1649.44.3.787
150
WEI, HEPPNER, KU, AND LIAO
Yoo, H. C., & Lee, R. M. (2005). Ethnic identity and
approach-type coping as moderators of the racial discrimination/well-being relation in Asian Americans.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 497–506.
Yoo, H. C., & Lee, R. M. (2008). Does ethnic identity buffer or exacerbate the effects of frequent
racial discrimination on situational well-being.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55, 63–74. doi:
10.1037/0022– 0167.52.4.497
Zeidner, M., & Saklofske, D. (1996). Adaptive and
maladaptive coping. In M. Zeidner & N. S. Endler
(Eds.), Handbook of coping: Theory, research, applications (pp. 505–537). New York: Wiley.
Received January 3, 2010
Revision received May 6, 2010
Accepted May 12, 2010 䡲
Asian American Journal of Psychology
Special Issue on the Secondary Analysis of the
National Latino Asian American Study (NLAAS) Dataset
Call for Papers
For many decades, there was a dearth of community-based epidemiological studies of mental
health problems among Asian Americans despite the NIMH Epidemiological Catchment Area (ECA)
program of study from 1980-1985. The field was restricted to clinical case studies and treated
prevalence studies (i.e., clinic and hospital visit data) to gauge the nature and extent of mental health
problems within Asian American communities. The NIMH funding of the National Latino Asian
American Study (NLAAS) was a pioneering step in correcting that situation. The National Latino and
Asian American Study (NLAAS) is “a nationally representative community household survey that
estimates the prevalence of mental disorders and rates of mental health service utilization by Latinos
and Asian Americans in the United States” (http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/CPES/background.html). It
also contains variables that allow for the comparison of “social position, environmental context, and
psychosocial factors with the prevalence of psychiatric disorders and utilization rates of mental health
services.”
The purpose of this special issue is to highlight and showcase the empirical research that has been
generated by the release of the NLAAS for secondary analysis and to promote more research using
that dataset. This special issue will include empirical articles that are based on analysis of the Asian
American data within the NLAAS dataset. Studies using comparative data from other datasets within
the Collaborative Psychiatric Epidemiology Surveys (CPES) with those from the NLAAS dataset
will also be permitted.
Submission Requirements
Authors interested in submitting articles on this topic for the special issue should first email the
Editor, Frederick T.L. Leong, at fleong@msu.edu with an indication of interest by August 1, 2010.
Final manuscripts should be submitted electronically via the Manuscript Submission Portal under
the Instructions to Authors, located at www.apa.org/pubs/journals/aap by December 1, 2010. Manuscripts will undergo the usual peer review process. A cover letter indicating that the submitted ms is
for the NLAAS special issue should also be included with the submission. Questions regarding this
special issue may be emailed to the Editor at fleong@msu.edu.