Relative Roles of Race Versus Socioeconomic Position in Studies of Health Inequalities: A Matter of Interpretation

Abstract

An abundance of research has documented health inequalities by race and socioeconomic position (SEP) in the United States. However, conceptual and methodological challenges complicate the interpretation of study findings, thereby limiting progress in understanding health inequalities and in achieving health equity. Fundamental to these challenges is a lack of clarity about what race is and the implications of that ambiguity for scientific inquiry. Additionally, there is wide variability in how SEP is conceptualized and measured, resulting in a lack of comparability across studies and significant misclassification of risk. The objectives of this review are to synthesize the literature regarding common approaches to examining race and SEP health inequalities and to discuss the conceptual and methodological challenges associated with how race and SEP have been employed in 169

The Price of the Ticket: Health Costs of Upward Mobility among African Americans

“…Although socioeconomic status helps to narrow racial disparities in health, these inequities do not completely disappear, even when levels of education and income are similar between African Americans and whites [8,[68][69][70][71][72]. The barriers to upward social mobility for African Americans are formidable.…”

Racial discrimination, the superwoman schema, and allostatic load: exploring an integrative stress‐coping model among African American women

“…First, we restricted our sample to AA women. We did this for several reasons: (1) to avoid conflating the racial discrimination experiences reported by AA women and white women, thus avoiding what scholars have noted as the incommensurability of measures across groups, which compromises internal validity; (2) to acknowledge the heterogeneity that exists among AA women both with respect to the experience of racial discrimination and the SWS, thereby avoiding the conventional practice of using averages to describe the experience of a heterogeneous group (i.e., common when examining differences between groups) and better isolating variability in the exposure of interest (i.e., providing a more appropriate counterfactual quantity); and (3) to avoid treating AAs as a monolith and instead use intersectionality as an analytic strategy to explore the unique experiences of AA women . Second, the cross‐sectional nature of this study and purposive sampling strategy preclude our ability to infer causality and generalize our study findings.…”

Coding the Everyday Discrimination Scale: implications for exposure assessment and associations with hypertension and depression among a cross section of mid-life African American women

“…Additionally, the within-group study design uniquely facilitates an assessment of racial discrimination—rather than race—as the exposure of interest, a critical step toward understanding the drivers of racial health inequity 55. Future research should explore these coding schemes in relation to health outcomes among African American men.…”