The heterogeneity of COVID-19 experience and response for each individual is irrefutable; nevertheless, similarities can be observed between countries with respect to people's psychological responses. The main aim of this Commentary is to provide a cultural perspective of the sources of trauma, at the individual and social level, in three different countries: Italy, US and UK. The evidence from previous outbreaks, such as SARS, H1N1 flu, Ebola, and the ongoing Italian, the US, and the UK experience of COVID-19 shows that COVID-19 has introduced not only an individual trauma but also a collective trauma, that researchers should attend to now and in future global emergencies. Future clinical interventions should aim to reconnect dissociated parts both in the individual and in society. This commentary discusses four potential sources of trauma: high-stakes decision fatigue in healthcare professionals, traumatic grief, and bereavement in people who have lost loved ones, loss of roles and identity, and social divisions related to economic shutdown.

This study examines the extent to which discrimination and harassment contribute to gendered health disparities. Analyzing data from the 2006, 2010, and 2014 General Social Surveys ( N = 3,724), we ask the following: (1) To what extent are perceptions of workplace gender discrimination and sexual harassment associated with self-reported mental and physical health? (2) How do multiple forms of workplace mistreatment (e.g., racism, ageism, and sexism) combine to structure workers' self-assessed health? and (3) To what extent do perceptions of mistreatment contribute to the gender gap in self-assessed health? Multivariate analyses show that among women, but not men, perceptions of workplace gender discrimination are negatively associated with poor mental health, and perceptions of sexual harassment are associated with poor physical health. Among men and women, perceptions of multiple forms of mistreatment are associated with worse mental health. Gender discrimination partially explains the gender gap in self-reported mental health.

No abstract

Studies indicate that African American men report more personal experiences with discrimination than do African American women. According to the subordinate male target hypothesis, this gender difference reflects an underlying reality in which African American men are the primary targets of anti-Black discrimination. From the perspective of intersectionality theory, African American women and men experience racial discrimination differently; and therefore greater reports of discrimination among African American men might be a result of measurement bias that favors the experiences of African American men vis-à-vis African American women. To assess these perspectives, the authors analyze data from the 1995 Detroit Area Study and the 2001–2003 National Survey of American Life. The authors use multiple-group confirmatory factor analytic models with latent means and categorical outcomes to observe the degree to which gender bias in measurement accounts for disparities in perceived discrimination among African American women and men. The results show that gender bias in the measures most often used to assess unfair treatment in social surveys is responsible for the gender gap in certain kinds of perceived discrimination among African Americans. Measures of everyday discrimination are mostly gender balanced, but measurement bias is responsible for a large portion of the gap in perceptions of major life discrimination and the entire gap when major life discrimination is attributed to race. The results highlight the importance of intersectionality theory for assessing discrimination, and the authors argue that revisions in the measurement of perceived discrimination are required to better reflect the experiences of African American women.

This article examines the limitations of the sociological research on feminist identities and ideologies that ignores the intersection of race and gender. Drawing from multiracial feminist theorizing, the author asks, Is self-identification as feminist a biased indicator of the salience of feminism in African American women's lives? Do women's racial statuses mediate the relationship between particular life events and experiences and the extent to which they embrace feminism? and To what extent are racial differences important when considering what women understand feminism to be?To answer these questions, the author conducted multiple group analyses of structural equation models to analyze data from the 1996 General Social Survey. Her findings are consistent with multiracial feminist theories and suggest a need to rethink traditional approaches to feminist research so that women's differences are no longer marginalized.

No abstract

While racism has been shown to negatively affect health care quality, little is known about the extent to which racial discrimination works with and through gender, class, and sexuality to predict barriers to health care (e.g., perceived difficulty accessing health services). Additionally, most existing studies focus on racial disparities in the U.S. context, with few examining marginalized groups in other countries. To address these knowledge gaps, we analyze data from the 2014 Australian General Social Survey, a nationally representative survey of individuals aged 15 and older living in 12,932 private dwellings. Following an intersectional perspective, we estimate a series of multivariable logit regression models to assess three hypotheses: racial discrimination will be positively associated with perceived barriers to health care (H1); the effect of perceived racial discrimination will be particularly severe for women, sexual minorities, and low socio-economic status individuals (H2); and, in addition to racial discrimination, other forms of perceived discrimination will negatively impact perceived barriers to health care (H3). Findings show that perceptions of racial discrimination are significantly associated with perceived barriers to health care, though this relationship is not significantly stronger for low status groups. In addition, our analyses reveal that perceived racism and other forms of discrimination combine to predict perceived barriers to health care. Taken together, these results speak to the benefits of an intersectional approach for examining racial inequalities in perceived access to health care.

This study investigates the relationship among perceptions of racial-ethnic, age, and gender discrimination for racial-ethnic minority individuals. Three broad frameworks for understanding discrimination are described: unidimensional, oppositional, and intersectional. The strengths of each approach are assessed by analyzing data from the General Social Surveys (2002, 2006, and 2010). Findings provide no support for the oppositional framework, qualified support for the unidimensional framework, and strong support for the intersectional framework. Many racialethnic minorities perceive discrimination on the basis of only one social status. Among older respondents, however, more than half of those who perceive racial-ethnic discrimination also perceive discrimination based on age. Half of the racial-ethnic women surveyed who perceive racial-ethnic discrimination also perceive gender discrimination. Moreover, perceptions of gender-, age-, and race-based discrimination are significantly and positively correlated with one another. The results highlight the benefits of using an intersectional framework to conceptualize and analyze multiple forms of discrimination.Social science research reveals that perceptions of discrimination remain high in the contemporary United States. Ronald C. Kessler, Kristin D. Mickelson, and David R. Williams (1999) found that one-third of respondents in a nationally representative study perceived at least one "major" experience with discrimination over the course of their lives, and 61 percent of respondents perceived "day-to-day" discriminatory experiences. Forman, Williams, and Jackson (1997) found that 70 percent of African Americans report experiencing at least one discriminatory event in their lifetime, and a recent study by