Me, Myself and Us? The Relationship between Ethnic Identity and Hope, Resilience and Family Relationships among Different Ethnic Groups
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For ethnic minority populations, ethnic identity is associated with an increase in psychological well-being while also being recognized as a protective factor against discrimination and family distress. The aim of this study is to determine the association between ethnic identity and resilience, hope, social connectedness, experiences of discrimination and family relations in a diverse group of ethnicities. This study is correlational in nature and took place at Mount Royal University, located in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, between January and April 2019. We included 326 introductory psychology students ranging in age from 17 to 48 with participants identifying as White, Asian, South Asian, Mixed, Black, Latino, First Nations, Metis, Inuit, and Middle Eastern. Participants were asked to complete six questionnaires measuring ethnic identity, resilience, hope, social connectedness, experiences of discrimination and family relations. Results revealed a significant relationship between ethnic identity and hope (r = .14, p = .01). Additionally, family relationships were a significant moderator of the relationship between ethnic identity and resilience (F(1, 322) = 4.98, p < .05). Finally, White participants had a significantly weaker ethnic identity when compared to the Asian, South Asian and Black participants (Welch’s F(7,41) = 9.39, p = .001,η 2= .22). Ethnic identity is associated with higher levels of hope, while strong family relationships moderate the relationship between ethnic identity and resilience. Furthermore, individuals who identify as White have a weaker ethnic identity compared to individuals who identify as Asian, South Asian and Black. More research is required to understand ethnic identity in the White population to help bring awareness to the power and privilege associated with Whiteness and to find ways in which this awareness can help reduce systemic racism and discrimination.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".