Discrimination and Hypertension Among Older African Americans and Caribbean Blacks: The Moderating Effects of John Henryism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Discrimination is a major contributor to health disparities between Black and White older adults. Although the health effects of discrimination are well established, less is known about factors that may intervene in the discrimination-health connection, such as coping strategies. The study aim was to determine whether John Henryism (JH; high-effort coping) moderates the association between racial discrimination and hypertension in nationally representative samples of older African Americans and Caribbean Blacks. METHODS: The analytic sample was drawn from the National Survey of American Life-Reinterview, which was conducted 2001-2003, and included African Americans (N = 546) and Caribbean Blacks (N = 141) aged 55 and older. Study variables included racial discrimination, JH, and hypertension. Logistic regressions, which controlled key sociodemographic differences, were used to test the study aim. RESULTS: Among both Black ethnic groups, discrimination and JH were not associated with hypertension. For African Americans low and moderate in JH, discrimination was unrelated to hypertension; discrimination was positively associated with hypertension for African Americans high in JH. For Caribbean Blacks, discrimination was positively associated with hypertension among respondents low in JH. Among Caribbean Blacks moderate and high in JH, discrimination was not associated with hypertension. DISCUSSION: The findings indicate that JH, in the face of discrimination, is associated with hypertension of older African Americans but may be an effective coping strategy for older Caribbean Blacks due to cultural and sociodemographic differences between the 2 ethnic groups. Future research should investigate the differing mechanisms by which JH influences health in heterogeneous older Black populations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".