Parentification, Ethnic Identity, and Psychological Health in Black and White American College Students: Implications of Family-of-Origin and Cultural Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors examined the predictive ability of parentification (i.e., when parental roles and responsibilities are abdicated by parents and carried out by children and adolescents) and ethnic identity on various psychological health factors in college students. Scores from five measures were used to test a conceptual two-factor model in which parentification and ethnic identity predict psychological health; participants were 157 Black Americans and 157 White Americans attending a large public southern university. The measures included the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (Babor, Higgins-Biddle, Saunders, and Monteiro, 2001), the Beck Depression Inventory (Beck, Steer, and Brown, 1996), the Eating Attitudes Test (Gamer, Olmsted, Bohr, and Garfinkel, 1982), the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (Phinney, 1992), and the Parentification Inventory (Hooper, 2009). No evidence of a significant difference in mean parentification scores between Black American and White American college student participants was found. However, results from differential item function analyses on individual Parentification Inventory items uncovered some significant differences between the two groups. Results from bivariate correlations uncovered slight differences in the significant associations between predictor variables and outcome variables. In addition, multivariate regression analyses revealed slight differences in study variables’ ability to predict psychological health. Parentification and ethnic identity explained some of the variability in depressive symptoms in both samples. Additionally, parentification and ethnic identity explained some of the variability in disordered eating symptoms in the Black American sample but not in the White American sample. Implications for culturally tailored practice and directions for future culturally focused research are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".