Assessing the Everyday Discrimination Scale Among American Indians and Alaska Natives
Assessing the Everyday Discrimination Scale Among American Indians and Alaska Natives
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/a0039337
复制
发表时间：
2016-01-01
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Roubideaux, Yvette
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gonzales, Kelly L.;Noonan, Carolyn;Roubideaux, Yvette
日常鉴别量表(EDS)已被广泛用于测量受歧视的主观体验。这一衡量标准在评估美洲印第安人和阿拉斯加土著(AI/AN)人感受到的歧视经历方面的有用性尚未得到探讨。数据来自印度人糖尿病特别计划-健康心脏示范项目(SDPI-HH)，这是一项旨在降低患有2型糖尿病的AI/AN的心血管风险的大规模倡议。参与者(N=3,039)完成了一项自我报告调查，其中包括EDS以及趋同和发散效度的测量。缺失的数据通过多种填补技术进行估计。对EDS的可靠性估计进行了计算，得出了内部一致性很高的单一因素(α=E=92)。更年轻、受教育程度更高的受访者报告的歧视程度更高；退休或丧偶的受访者报告的歧视程度更低。焦虑、愤怒和敌意的程度证明了趋同效度，这些程度随着感觉到的歧视程度的增加而增加(所有P<；.001)。EDS和弹性应对之间没有关联，这证明了效度的不同。弹性应对和特定于胰岛素的糖尿病知识与感知歧视没有显著关联(p分别为0.61和0.16)。然而，与糖尿病相关的一般健康知识与感知到的歧视显著相关(p=0.02)。EDS是评估参与SDPI-HH的人工智能/ANS中感觉到的歧视经历的一种很有前途的衡量标准。
The Everyday Discrimination Scale (EDS) has been used widely as a measure of subjective experiences of discrimination. The usefulness of this measure for assessments of perceived experiences of discrimination by American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) peoples has not been explored. Data derived from the Special Diabetes Program for Indians-Healthy Heart Demonstration Project (SDPI-HH), a large-scale initiative to reduce cardiovascular risk among AI/ANs with Type 2 diabetes. Participants (N = 3,039) completed a self-report survey that included the EDS and measures of convergent and divergent validity. Missing data were estimated by multiple imputation techniques. Reliability estimates for the EDS were calculated, yielding a single factor with high internal consistency (alpha = Eta.92). Younger, more educated respondents reported greater perceived discrimination; retired or widowed respondents reported less. Convergent validity was evidenced by levels of distress, anger, and hostility, which increased as the level of perceived discrimination increased (all p < .001). Divergent validity was evidenced by the absence of an association between EDS and resilient coping. Resilient coping and insulin-specific diabetes knowledge were not significantly associated with perceived discrimination (p = .61 and 0.16, respectively). However, general diabetes-related health knowledge was significantly associated with perceived discrimination (p = .02). The EDS is a promising measure for assessing perceived experiences of discrimination among those AI/ANs who participated in the SDPI-HH.