Everyday discrimination and subsequent cognitive abilities across five domains.

Zahodne, Laura B.; Morris, Emily P.; Sharifian, Neika; Zaheed, Afsara B; Kraal, A. Zarina; Sol, Ketlyne

doi:10.1037/neu0000693

Cited by 45 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 51 publications

(65 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cognition was operationalized by using five-factor scores obtained from a published confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the HCAP neuropsychological battery (Zahodne et al, 2020). Factor scores indexed the following domains: episodic memory, executive function, visuoconstruction, processing speed, and language.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associations between social network components and cognitive domains in older adults.

Meister¹,

Zahodne²

2022

Psychology and Aging

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research shows that social network components are associated with cognitive function later in life. However, fewer studies consider different cognitive domains or disaggregate the social network by relationship type. Using data from 2,553 participants aged 65 or older in the Health and Retirement Study's Harmonized Cognitive Assessment Protocol, this study examined relationships between social network structure (i.e., size, contact frequency) and quality (i.e., support, strain) and performance in five cognitive domains (i.e., episodic memory, executive function, visuoconstruction, language, and processing speed) 2-4 years later, controlling for sociodemographics and previous global cognition. Separate linear regressions were conducted for each cognitive outcome. When averaged across relationship types, network size was not associated with any domain. Contact frequency was positively associated with all domains except episodic memory. Support and strain were negatively associated with all cognitive domains. When considering individual relationship types, larger friend networks were positively associated with visuoconstruction, and greater contact frequency with friends was positively associated with all cognitive domains. Larger family networks were associated with worse executive function, visuoconstruction, and speed. Strain from friends had a negative relationship with every domain except episodic memory. Support from family was negatively associated with episodic memory, executive function, and language. These associations were equivalent to one to 3.5 years of cognitive aging. These results showed that both social network structure and quality may be consequential for cognitive functioning and that links between social relations and cognition differ across domains and as a function of relationship type.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associations between social network components and cognitive domains in older adults.

Meister¹,

Zahodne²

2022

Psychology and Aging

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…That is due to its continuity, identity-relatedness, and the fact it is enacted by a member representing a dominant influential Group than yours or a powerful institution, such as the police (or the powerful family for the child). Further, longitudinal research (Barnes et al, 2012; Zahodne et al, 2020) found that everyday discrimination is associated with worse cognitive functioning in multiple domains that included executive functioning, processing speed, and visuoconstruction.…”

Section: Interdependence Stressors and Traumasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Taxonomy of stressors and traumas: An update of the development-based trauma framework (DBTF): A life-course perspective on stress and trauma.

Kira¹

2022

Traumatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

COVID-19 challenged the current paradigms of traumatic stress. Although there are diagnostic taxonomies of mental disorders such as Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, the taxonomy of stressors and traumas that contribute significantly to such disorders is lacking. The current article tried to fill parts of this gap by proposing an update and refinement of the development-based taxonomy of stressors and traumas from a life-course perspective. We discussed the different trends in defining trauma and their limitations considering the recent empirical data that provided evidence for the limited predictive validity of the current posttraumatic stress disorder model and when confronting serious real-life events such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The updated taxonomy presented in this paper included preidentity (complicated birth, attachment disruptions, early childhood adversities), identity traumas (physical, personal, and social), interdependence (primary, secondary, and tertiary), and aging stressors and traumas, with the severity of stressors, is categorized on a scale from I to III. We identified 4 primary sources and pathways of these development-based stressors: intrapersonal, interpersonal, systemic, and environmental. The systemic sources are further divided into systemic “A,” including traumas perpetrated by groups, institutions, or governments, and systemic “B,” traumas such as recessions and global warming. The environmental sources and pathways are further divided into environmental “A” (physical), traumas such as earthquakes and hurricanes, and environmental “B” (biological/pathogenic), traumas such as pandemics. The macrodynamics of accumulation and proliferation and the interaction among preidentity, identity, and postidentity stressors and traumas determine their total mental health impact from a life-course perspective.

show abstract

“…In recognition of such pathways, Zuelsdorff et al 57 . and others 58,59 have investigated stress and cognition in racially diverse cohorts. Those studies examining late‐life stress in Black elders found that disproportionately high stress exposure partially explains racial disparities in cognitive health 57,58 …”

Section: Understanding Race and Racialization With The Health Dispari...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Alzheimer's disease biomarkers in Black and non‐Hispanic White cohorts: A contextualized review of the evidence

Gleason

Zuelsdorff

Gooding

et al. 2021

Alzheimer's & Dementia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Black Americans are disproportionately affected by dementia. To expand our understanding of mechanisms of this disparity, we look to Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers. In this review, we summarize current data, comparing the few studies presenting these findings. Further, we contextualize the data using two influential frameworks: the National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer's Association (NIA‐AA) Research Framework and NIA's Health Disparities Research Framework. The NIA‐AA Research Framework provides a biological definition of AD that can be measured in vivo. However, current cut‐points for determining pathological versus non‐pathological status were developed using predominantly White cohorts—a serious limitation. The NIA's Health Disparities Research Framework is used to contextualize findings from studies identifying racial differences in biomarker levels, because studying biomakers in isolation cannot explain or reduce inequities. We offer recommendations to expand study beyond initial reports of racial differences. Specifically, life course experiences associated with racialization and commonly used study enrollment practices may better account for observations than exclusively biological explanations.

show abstract

Everyday discrimination and subsequent cognitive abilities across five domains.

Cited by 45 publications

References 51 publications

Associations between social network components and cognitive domains in older adults.

Associations between social network components and cognitive domains in older adults.

Taxonomy of stressors and traumas: An update of the development-based trauma framework (DBTF): A life-course perspective on stress and trauma.

Alzheimer's disease biomarkers in Black and non‐Hispanic White cohorts: A contextualized review of the evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About