The talk and walk in Black families: Exploring racial socialization content and competency in the context of parental worries about racial profiling and adolescents' internalizing outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although many parents worry that their child will be the target of racial profiling, there is a dearth of literature on how parental worries about children facing racism are linked to racial socialization (RS) practices and youth internalizing symptoms. Additionally, it is unclear how RS content relative to competency may uniquely influence whether and how parental worries influence youth internalizing outcomes. Using data from 203 Black parents (Mage = 44.099, 68% mothers) of adolescents, the current study examines the direct effects of parental worries on RS content (cultural socialization, preparation for bias, and promotion of mistrust) and competency (confidence, skills, general stress, and call to action stress) on youth internalizing outcomes, as well as whether RS content and competency indirectly links parental worries about racial profiling with youth internalizing symptoms. Parental worries were positively related to greater RS content across domains and child internalizing symptoms, but there were no indirect links. Parents' worries about racial profiling were positively associated with more call to action stress, general stress, and youth internalizing symptoms. RS confidence and general stress were associated with fewer and greater internalizing symptoms, but there were similarly no significant indirect effects. Findings speak to supporting and addressing parental stress in the context of family racial worries and child adjustment and have implications for policy efforts to dismantle racism and fund programs that support youth and caregivers in managing the ongoing consequences of this insidious stressor.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".