Measuring the pros and cons of what it means to be a Black man: Development and validation of the Black Men’s Experiences Scale (BMES).

Bowleg, Lisa; English, Devin; Río-González, Ana María del; Burkholder, Gary J.; Teti, Michelle; Tschann, Jeanne M.

doi:10.1037/men0000026

Cited by 46 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 77 publications

(144 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The AARMS scores were positively correlated with the Asian American Racism Related Stress Inventory (AARRSI) scales (r = .23 to .64), and demonstrated criterion-related validity (r = .14 to .35 with negative affect). Black Men's Experiences Scale (BMES;Bowleg et al, 2016): The BMES is a 12-item scale that assesses Black men's racial experiences. Three items measure racial microaggression, including "How often have White people seemed uncomfortable when they pass you on the street?"…”

Section: Racial Microaggressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associations between microaggression and adjustment outcomes: A meta-analytic and narrative review.

Lui

Quezada

2019

Psychological Bulletin

137

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microaggression has been considered a form of stressor that negatively affects people with marginalized statuses. Research shows variability in how microaggression is measured, and the extent to which it is associated with adjustment outcomes. A new cube model was proposed to conceptualize microaggression across social groups, interpersonal and group-level interactions, and categories of incidents. Synthesizing findings from published and unpublished studies, this study was aimed to examine the relations between microaggression and adjustment outcomes. Meta-analyses quantified the study-level correlations between microaggression and various adjustment outcomes, and estimated the degree to which methodological and individual factors explained between-study variability. Using 72 independent study samples (N = 18,718), omnibus analysis with a random-effects model showed a statistically significant summary correlation between microaggression and adjustment outcomes (r = .20, 95% CI = .16-.23, p < .001). Between-study variability (Q = 319.86, p < .001, t 2 = .01, I 2 = 77.80%) was explained by gender, race, and publication status. Except for gender microaggression, racial, LGBTQ, and health status microaggressions were associated with adjustment outcomes. Microaggression was relatively more strongly associated with internalizing problems, stress/negative affect, and positive affect/adjustment than with externalizing problems and physical symptoms. Adjustment outcomes were more closely linked to interpersonal microaggression than group microaggression, and to microassault than microinsult and microinvalidation. Narrative reviews showed that very few studies tested whether microaggression predicted adjustment outcomes above and beyond overt discrimination and individual difference factors, and examined the indirect mechanisms that may link microaggression to adjustment outcomes. Limitations to the scope of this research synthesis and future research directions are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Racial Microaggressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associations between microaggression and adjustment outcomes: A meta-analytic and narrative review.

Lui

Quezada

2019

Psychological Bulletin

137

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Wong, Wang, and Farmer's (2018) dynamic paradigm of ethnic culture, for example, examines contextual and temporal influences that impact ethnic culture, emphasizing its "fragmented, subjective, antiessentialist, and performative nature" (p. 1). Measures designed to transcend additive and multiplicative approaches to quantitative intersectional research include the Gendered Racial Microaggressions Scale for Black women (Lewis & Neville, 2015) and Asian American women (Keum et al, 2018), the Black Men's Experiences Scale (Bowleg et al, 2016), and the Gendered Racism Scales for Asian American Men (Liu, Wong, Maffini, Mitts, & Iwamoto, 2018).…”

Section: Five: Enrich Intersectionality In Vocational Psychology Schomentioning

confidence: 99%

Something Old and Something New: Future Directions in Vocational Research With People of Color in the United States

Flores

Martinez

McGillen

et al. 2019

Journal of Career Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vocational psychology scholarship has largely overlooked the work experiences of people of color. In this article, we present evidence that vocational research that addresses the work issues of people of color has been neglected in the key outlets for vocational research among vocational psychologists. We outline seven directions for research inquiry with people of color, namely using culturally sensitive research methods, increasing research on the effectiveness of career interventions, integrating interdisciplinary perspectives, merging psychological and educational science with vocational development, using intersectional approaches, examining collective mobility strategies and structural reforms, and assessing the impact of environmental disasters on long-term educational and work outcomes.

show abstract

“…For Objectives 1A and 1B (years 1–2), we will collect and analyze qualitative data from focus groups, cognitive interviews and expert item review to validate and test a culture-specific MBCS among African-American men. Questions for the MCBS will stem from modifications to the (1) the Barriers to Help -Seeking Scale developed by Mansfield et al ,38 (2) the Group-Based Medical Mistrust Scale developed by Thompson et al ,40 (3) Mincey et al Masculinity Inventory Scale,41 (4) the MRNI-SF by Levant et al ,31 Bowleg et al Black Men’s Experiences Scale,42 and the Masculinity Salience scale developed by Hammond et al 13. Six factors are expected for the underlying structure of the 21 items in the MBCS: (1) need for control and self-reliance, (2) minimising health problems and resignation (3) medical mistrust, (4) privacy, (5) emotional control and (6) black masculinity.…”

Section: Methods and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Study protocol for developing #CuttingCRC: a barbershop-based trial on masculinity barriers to care and colorectal cancer screening uptake among African-American men using an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionColorectal cancer (CRC) is preventable, as screening leads to the identification and removal of precancerous polyps. African-American men consistently have the highest CRC mortality rates, and their CRC-screening uptake remains low for complex reasons. Culture-specific masculinity barriers to care may contribute to the low uptake among African-American men. Examining these barriers to care is vital as CRC screening may challenge cultural role expectations of African-American men, whose tendency is to delay help-seeking medical care. Barbershops provide a pathway for reaching African-American men with masculinity barriers to care who are not regularly receiving healthcare services and CRC screening. This study aims to develop and pilot test a theory-driven, culture-specific, barbershop-based intervention targeting masculinity barriers to care and CRC-screening uptake among African-American men ages 45–75.Methods and analysisGuided by the theory of planned behaviour and the behaviour change wheel, we will use a multistage mixed-methods study design, beginning with an exploratory sequential approach to validate items for subsequent use in a pilot mixed-methods intervention. First, we will collect and analyse qualitative data from focus groups, cognitive interviews and expert item review to validate and test a culture-specific Masculinity Barriers to Care Scale (MBCS) among African-American men. Next, we will administer the MBCS to our target population as an online quantitative survey and evaluate the association between scores and CRC-screening uptake. Then, we will consider existing evidence-based approaches, our integrated results (qualitative +quantitative), and community input to design a culture-specific, behavioural intervention aimed at increasing CRC-screening uptake among African-American men and feasible for barbershop delivery. We will test the peer intervention in a pilot study with a two-arm cluster randomised design (six barbershops, randomised by site) to reduce contamination and account for barbershop culture differences. Our primary outcomes for the pilot are recruitment, sample size estimation, preliminary efficacy and acceptability.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the University of Utah Institutional Review Board (00113679), who will also be responsible for receiving communication updates regarding important protocol modifications. To ensure confidentiality, data dispersed to project team members will be blinded of any identifying participant information. Study results will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals, community dialogue sessions, and presentations at conferences.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov identifier:NCT03733197(Pre-results);https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03733197

show abstract

Measuring the pros and cons of what it means to be a Black man: Development and validation of the Black Men’s Experiences Scale (BMES).

Cited by 46 publications

References 77 publications

Associations between microaggression and adjustment outcomes: A meta-analytic and narrative review.

Associations between microaggression and adjustment outcomes: A meta-analytic and narrative review.

Something Old and Something New: Future Directions in Vocational Research With People of Color in the United States

Study protocol for developing #CuttingCRC: a barbershop-based trial on masculinity barriers to care and colorectal cancer screening uptake among African-American men using an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About