Group-based Disparities Research Articles

Harnessing Hope in Digital Spaces for Health Equity: How Group Comparison Information and Supportive Comments Influence Bone Marrow Donor Intentions for African Americans.

Pursuing health equity necessitates recognizing health disparities that disproportionately impact disadvantaged groups and eliminating their barriers to essential health resources. Interactive digital technologies-specifically, popular social media platforms such as blogs and social networks-can be leveraged to engage underserved minority populations in collective social action aimed at addressing key determinants of health disparities and promoting equitable health outcomes. The present research focuses on the plight of African Americans-a minority group facing significant health disparities. Particularly in the domain of bone marrow donation, African Americans remain the group least likely to find a matching donor. Guided by the social comparison framing literature, we conducted an online experiment to investigate how group comparison information (GCI) emphasizing group-based disparities and supportive user comments on social media platforms influence African Americans' intentions to join a bone marrow registry. In doing so, we considered hope as a mediator and group identification as a moderator. Results based on a conditional process analysis showed that GCI led to greater bone marrow donor intentions in the presence of supportive comments through elicitation of hope, particularly among those low in group identification. The current findings demonstrate that it is important to consider the role of supportive message environments and group identification when addressing health disparities with GCI. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Residential differentiation characteristics based on “socio-spatial” coupling: A case study of Zhengzhou

Residential differentiation transcends its physical aspect, necessitating attention to deeper issues such as group-based disparities underlying spatial configurations. This paper based on multiple data sources, utilizes indicator dimensionality reduction, spatial clustering, and indices of dissimilarity to conducts clustering and matching analysis of social groups and residential spaces. It summarizes and distills the social-spatial coupling types of residential differentiation in Zhengzhou city under a layered model, focusing on social spatial polarization and solidification phenomena in China, and proposing optimization and control recommendations. Findings include: (1) Residential space differences primarily manifest in pricing, while social group distinctions focus on consumption capacity and age. Residential differentiation is a process of continuous differentiation and interaction between two dimensions; (2) Urban housing types do not strictly align with socio-economic attributes, with six typical coupling types observed within the “inner city - new city - outskirts” framework; (3) The “filtering” effect of high housing prices in Zhengzhou leads to wealthy clustering in new city outskirts, while low-income groups aggregate in peripheral and declining inner-city areas, resulting in pronounced spatial segregation; (4) Urban residential differentiation reflects the interaction between macro-controls in the housing market and individual residential choices, serving as a spatial representation of social stratification outcomes.

Guideline adherence in speech and language therapy in stroke aftercare. A health insurance claims data analysis.

Impairments to comprehension and production of speech (aphasia, dysarthria) and swallowing disorders (dysphagia) are common sequelae of stroke, reducing patients' quality of life and social participation. Treatment oriented on evidence-based guidelines seems likely to improve outcomes. Currently, little is known about guideline adherence in stroke aftercare for the above-mentioned sequelae. This study aims to analyse guideline adherence in the treatment of aphasia, dysarthria and dysphagia after stroke, based on suitable test parameters, and to determine factors that influence the implementation of recommended therapies. Six test parameters were defined, based on systematic study of guidelines for the treatment of speech impairments and swallowing disorders (e.g. comprehensive diagnostics, early initiation and continuity). Guideline adherence in treatment was tested using claims data from four statutory health insurance companies. Multivariate logistic and linear regression analyses were performed in order to test the outcomes. 4,486 stroke patients who were diagnosed with specific disorders or received speech therapy were included in the study. The median age was 78 years; the proportion of women was 55.9%. Within the first year after the stroke, 90.3% of patients were diagnosed with speech impairments and swallowing disorders. Overall, 44.1% of patients received outpatient speech and language therapy aftercare. Women were less frequently diagnosed with specific disorders (OR 0.70 [95%CI:0.55/0.88], p = 0.003) and less frequently received longer therapy sessions (OR 0.64 [95%CI:0.43/0.94], p = 0.022). Older age and longer hospitalization duration increased the likelihood of guideline recommendations being implemented and of earlier initiation of stroke aftercare measures. Our observations indicate deficits in the implementation of guideline recommendations in stroke aftercare. At the same time, they underscore the need for regular monitoring of implementation measures in stroke aftercare to address group-based disparities in care.

Otherization in the Novels Maps by Nurudin Farah, The Buddha of Suburbia by Hanif Kureishi and Snow by Orhan Pamuk

The world order has changed drastically after the Second World War. In this new world that seems to be mysterious and confusing, almost all global, national, and regional tensions are linked with group-based disparities. “Otherization” has become an important problem of the twentieth century, caused by the conflicts such as religious strife, military conflict, and poverty. Group ideologies play a key role in each of these conflicts. Each group has its own set of principles and excludes people who do not comply with them. However, difference of religion or ethnicity cannot be the reason alone in explaining such disputes; multiple identities revived under circumstances of cultural, geographical, and political backgrounds and problems should also be considered. Otherization takes place at a central point based on group identities and it is also the fundamental principle of common processes and conditions that advance group-based discrimination and marginality. Otherization is built upon many foundations such as ethnic group, race, gender, and religion. In this study, the concept of the “other” will be discussed in three novels. These novels, each describing a different type of otherization process, address the problem of the “other” and touch upon the processes that caused this problem.

Are Litigation Outcome Disparities Inevitable? Courts, Technology, and the Future of Impartiality

This Article explores the ability of technology—specifically, online judicial procedures—to eliminate systematic group-based litigation outcome disparities (i.e., disparities correlated with the visible identity markers of litigants). Our judicial system has long operated under the assumption that it can only be “impartial enough.” After all, judges, like all human beings, harbor implicit biases that often are sizable, unconscious, and triggered automatically, and research indicates that strategies to curb implicit biases in human decision-making may be ineffective, especially in the face of the resource and caseload constraints of modern-day adjudication. The recent emergence of online court proceedings, however, offers new hope for curtailing disparities. By allowing hearings to occur without face-to-face interactions, online legal proceedings may lessen the salience of group-identity traits, thereby mitigating unwarranted disparities and enhancing the impartiality of the justice system. Yet online proceedings differ from in-person hearings in ways beyond merely reducing the salience of age, gender, and race—and these differences may also influence group-based outcome disparities. Using state-court data, we study group-based disparities in online and offline civil infraction cases. We present evidence that is consistent with the existence of implicit or other structural biases in face-to-face proceedings; all else equal, legal outcomes appear to vary by litigant age and race but not by gender. These disparities fade with the change in medium, possibly by circumventing implicit biases. We explore the implications of our findings for system impartiality and weigh the challenges confronting efforts to realize substantive, procedural, and digital justice in online courts.

Political ideology shapes the amplification of the accomplishments of disadvantaged vs. advantaged group members

Recent years have witnessed an increased public outcry in certain quarters about a perceived lack of attention given to successful members of disadvantaged groups relative to equally meritorious members of advantaged groups, exemplified by social media campaigns centered around hashtags, such as #OscarsSoWhite and #WomenAlsoKnowStuff. Focusing on political ideology, we investigate here whether individuals differentially amplify successful targets depending on whether these targets belong to disadvantaged or advantaged groups, behavior that could help alleviate or entrench group-based disparities. Study 1 examines over 500,000 tweets from over 160,000 Twitter users about 46 unambiguously successful targets varying in race (white, black) and gender (male, female): American gold medalists from the 2016 Olympics. Leveraging advances in computational social science, we identify tweeters' political ideology, race, and gender. Tweets from political liberals were much more likely than those from conservatives to be about successful black (vs. white) and female (vs. male) gold medalists (and especially black females), controlling for tweeters' own race and gender, and even when tweeters themselves were white or male (i.e., advantaged group members). Studies 2 and 3 provided experimental evidence that liberals are more likely than conservatives to differentially amplify successful members of disadvantaged (vs. advantaged) groups and suggested that this is driven by liberals' heightened concern with social equality. Addressing theorizing about ideological asymmetries, we observed that political liberals are more responsible than conservatives for differential amplification. Our results highlight ideology's polarizing power to shape even whose accomplishments we promote, and extend theorizing about behavioral manifestations of egalitarian motives.

Personal and organizational mindsets at work

Decades of research have shown that people’s mindsets beliefs—their beliefs about the fixedness or malleability of talent, ability, and intelligence—can powerfully influence their motivation, engagement, and performance. This article explores the role of mindsets in organizational contexts. We start by describing the evolution of mindset theory and research and review why mindsets matter for people’s workplace outcomes. We discuss some of the most common growth mindset misconceptions—termed “false growth mindset”—that emerged as the fixed and growth mindset became popularized and (mis)applied in educational settings. We review literature on the situations that move people between their fixed and growth mindsets. Finally, we review new research on organizational mindsets and how organizations’ mindset culture—communicated through its norms, policies, practices, and leadership messages—influences people’s motivation and behavior in the workplace. We outline open theoretical and methodological questions as well as promising future directions for a forward-looking research agenda on mindsets at work. We suggest that extending mindset research—at the personal and organizational levels—to workplace contexts may shed new light on classic organizational behavior questions such as how to create more positive, innovative, and ethical organizational cultures; how to increase employee engagement; and how to reduce group-based disparities and inequalities in organizations.

Individual differences in system justification predict power and morality-related needs in advantaged and disadvantaged groups in response to group disparity

Guided by the needs-based model, we explored how individual differences in system justification predict group members’ needs in response to information about group-based disparities. Across two studies ( N = 819), we found that among disadvantaged-group members (LGBTIQ* individuals/women) system justification was negatively related to need for power. Among advantaged-group members ([cis-]heterosexuals/men), system justification was negatively related to motivation to restore their ingroup’s moral essence (i.e., moral shame and wish that the ingroup would act more morally) but positively related to motivation to restore their ingroup’s moral image (i.e., need for positive moral image and expectation that the outgroup should acknowledge the ingroup’s morality). These results theoretically extend the needs-based model by offering a more nuanced picture of morality-related needs. Further, they underline the importance of considering individual differences in system justification for understanding advantaged- and disadvantaged-group members’ responses to social inequality.

Equitable leadership on the ground: Converging on high-leverage practices

What would leadership standards look like if developed through a lens and language of equity? We engaged with a group of 40 researchers, practitioners, and community leaders recognized as having expertise on equity in education to address this question. Using a Delphi technique, an approach designed to elicit expert feedback and measure convergence around a question of interest, these leaders participated in three rounds of data gathering. In Rounds One and Two, the 40 participants described and then rated leadership practices they believed to be most likely to mitigate race, class, and other group-based disparities between dominant and nondominant students. In Round Three, 14 of these experts participated in focus group sessions, using the findings from the first two rounds to ultimately converge around 10 high-leverage leadership practices for equity. Findings highlight the importance of leadership centered on countering systemic and structural barriers that maintain disparities, with implications for leadership preparation, policy, and tools to support organizational leadership for equity.

The dynamics of intergroup helping: The case of subtle bias against Latinos.

Despite the traditional importance of Latinos in the U.S., the growing Latino population, and evidence of group-based disparities, psychological studies of discrimination against Latinos are surprisingly rare. The present research investigated the relationship between prejudice against Latinos and subtle bias, specifically the degree to which people offer autonomy-oriented relative to dependency-oriented assistance to a Latina in need. Participants read scenarios that described concrete social problems faced by particular Latinas, African Americans, or Whites and then indicated their support for forms of helping. Participants higher in prejudice against Latinos, assessed with an adaptation of the Modern Racism Scale, were less likely to offer autonomy-oriented help, and significantly more so after reading scenarios about a Latina than about an African American or a White woman. These findings extend previous work by identifying, experimentally, subtle bias against Latinas in helping and directly implicate the role of prejudice against Latinos in this process.

“White Box” Epidemiology and the Social Neuroscience of Health Behaviors

Crucial advances have been made in our knowledge of the social determinants of health and health behaviors. Existing research on health disparities, however, generally fails to address a known paradox in the literature: While blacks have higher risk of medical morbidity relative to non-Hispanic whites, blacks have lower rates of common stress-related forms of psychopathology such as major depression and anxiety disorders. In this article we propose a new theoretical approach, the Environmental Affordances Model, as an integrative framework for the origins of both physical and mental health disparities. We highlight early empirical support and a growing body of experimental animal and human research on self-regulatory health behaviors and stress coping that is consistent with the proposed framework. We conclude that transdisciplinary approaches, such as the Environmental Affordances Model, are needed to understand the origins of group-based disparities to implement effective solutions to racial and ethnic group inequalities in physical and mental health.

The meaning and role of ideology in system justification and resistance for high- and low-status people.

In this article we explore how beliefs about system ideals and the achievement of those ideals differentially predict system justification among low- and high-status groups. Our goal was to reconcile how people can promote system ideals such as equal opportunities for all and at the same time recognize that group-based disparities are, in part, due to these unfulfilled ideals. Three studies examined whether people perceived a discrepancy between a system's ideal goals and its achievement of those goals. Everyone endorsed these goal ideals more than they believed that the goals were being achieved; however, this discrepancy was larger for low-status people. The larger the perceived discrepancy, the more dissatisfied people were with the system and the more likely they were to support hierarchy-attenuating policies. Studies 2 and 3 also examined people's motivation for endorsing goal ideals. People of all statuses endorsed system ideals to promote an ideal system more than to legitimize the actual system (Study 2); however, high-status people were slightly more likely to endorse system ideals to legitimize the actual system than low-status people (Study 3). In summary, low-status people were more likely than high-status people to recognize discrepancies between system goals and system outcomes, show dissatisfaction with the American system, and prefer policies that would attenuate extant hierarchies.

Thou shalt not discriminate: How emphasizing moral ideals rather than obligations increases Whites' support for social equality

An important step toward reducing group-based disparities in society is creating support for equality among advantaged group members (e.g., Whites and men). The current research examined how presenting social equality between ethnic groups in terms of moral ideals (i.e., equal treatment) vs. moral obligations (i.e., non-discrimination) affected the attitudes of Whites (students in Study 1, N = 45 and 2, N = 44 and employees in Study 3a, N = 67 and Study 3b, N = 62) toward various social equality issues. It was found that participants in the moral ideals condition reported more activation rather than inhibition tendencies regarding equality (Study 1), were more supportive of affirmative action (Study 2), indicated lower levels of social identity threat, and were more favorable toward cultural diversity which resulted in greater prioritization of equality (Study 3a) than those in the moral obligation condition. These effects did not arise when the ideals/obligations distinction was applied to a nonmoral domain (i.e., competence, Study 3b), underlining the central argument that these processes are specific to morality. The broader theoretical implications for morality and intergroup research are discussed.