Racial discrimination and life satisfaction among Black Canadians: the mediating role of social support and the moderating roles of gender and place of birth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction This study used an intersectional theoretical framework to investigate the association between racial discrimination experience and life satisfaction among Black individuals aged 15 to 40 years old in Canada, exploring the mediation role of social support and the moderation role of gender and place of birth. Methods A convenience sample of 860 participants completed questionnaires assessing life satisfaction, everyday racial discrimination, social support, and sociodemographic information. Results Findings showed that participants exposed to higher levels of everyday racial discrimination had the lowest scores of life satisfaction, W (3, 409) = 5.74; p < 0.001. Regression analyses showed that everyday racial discrimination negatively predicted life satisfaction ( β = −0.15, p < 0.001), while social support ( β = 0.38, p < 0.001) positively predicted it. Results from the mediation moderated model revealed a negative association between racial discrimination and life satisfaction ( β = −0.34, p < 0.001), which was partially mediated by social support ( β = 0.37, p < 0.001). Conclusions This research highlights the adverse effects of racism on Black individuals’ life satisfaction and underscores the role of social support in explaining these effects. Clinicians are encouraged to adopt an intersectional approach, especially for Black women and gender-diverse Black individuals who are at a higher risk of experiencing the impact of racial discrimination on life satisfaction.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".