Black Canadians' Coping Responses to Racial Discrimination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On the basis of a cultural coping framework, the present study examined coping responses to racial discrimination among 190 Black Canadians. The study assessed the respondents' coping with both general (i.e., problem- and emotion-focused coping) and Africultural coping strategies (i.e., spiritual-centered, collective, and ritual-centered coping) across three different racial discrimination vignettes (i.e., interpersonal, institutional, and cultural discrimination). Furthermore, three individual and cultural difference variables, African self-consciousness, social desirability, and past race-related stress, were controlled in the analyses. As predicted, the results of the profile analysis and multivariate analyses showed that both general and Africultural coping were used by the participants in responding to all three types of discrimination. Additionally, differential coping patterns were found depending on the context of racial discrimination. Overall, the study suggests that Black Canadians are exposed to multiple race-related stressors that require them to adopt a flexible repertoire of general and culture-specific coping strategies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".