Discrimination, critical consciousness, and mental health in American youth of color
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To resist and cope with oppression, youth of color may use the process of critical consciousness which involves understanding racial injustices (critical reflection), developing motivation to fight these injustices (critical motivation), and taking action to enact sociopolitical change (critical action). However, little is known about how each dimension of critical consciousness affects mental health in adolescents of color. In a sample of 367 ethnically and racially diverse American adolescents of color (age range = 13-17; 68.9% girls, 28.6% boys, and 2.5% gender minority; 84.4% US-born), we conducted multivariate regressions in Mplus to examine the cross-sectional links between each critical consciousness dimension (reflection, motivation, and action) and mental health outcomes (anxiety, depression, and stress) over and above the impact of everyday discrimination. We also investigated the interaction between critical consciousness and discrimination in predicting mental health outcomes. Controlling for age, gender, nativity, and social class, we found that discrimination and critical action were both positively associated with anxiety, depression, and stress. For our covariates, girls and gender minority adolescents reported worse outcomes. No interactions were significant. Overall, critical action, while necessary to enact societal change, may have a complex relationship with youth's depression, anxiety, and psychological stress symptoms and warrants careful exploration. Future research should focus on understanding the longitudinal mechanisms of critical action and how we can maximize the benefits by protecting youth from those negative effects.
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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".