Info

N/A

N/A

= 2.28; parent M = 2.36) and lower levels of preparation for bias (child M = 1.71; parent M = 1.32). Paired samples t-tests indicated that the difference between these means was statistically significant (parents: ¿(110) = 21.65, p =.000; children ¿(117) = 7.99, p = .000). In addition, paired samples t-tests showed that, for both parents and children, egalitarianism/cultural socialization was higher than preparation for bias (parents: ¿(110) = 20.34, p = .000; children ¿(117) = 9.41, p = .000). However, as we shall discuss in further detail, the mean value for egalitarianism was significantly higher according to parents' reports than it was according to children's reports, ¿(116 )= 4.37, p = .000, indicating that parents were more likely to report Egalitarianism than were their children. Conversely, the mean value for Preparation for Bias was significantly lower according to parents' reports than according to children's reports, ¿(109) = -6.18, p = .000, indicating that parents were less likely to report preparation for bias than were their children. Table 24.1 displays means for each ethnic group for each dimension of racial/ethnic socialization for the interested reader.5

Correspondence Between Parents' and Children's Reports of Racial/Ethnic Socialization Messages

Our primary and initial question concerned the extent to which parents' reports about racial/ethnic socialization messages they transmit were associated with children's reports about racial/ethnic socialization messages they receive. To examine this question, we first estimated bivariate correlations between parents and children's reports of egalitarianism/cultural socialization and preparation for bias. The relationship between parents' reports of sending messages regarding egalitarianism/cultural socialization and children's reports of receiving such messages was small, but suggestive of some communication between parents and children, r = .15, p = .124. Similarly, the relationship between parents' reports of sending preparation for bias messages and children's reports of receiving these messages suggested some degree of communication but was again quite modest, r = .13, p = .169.

Due to the fact that the White European American sample only answered questions regarding egalitarianism messages, we examined relationships between parents' and children's reports of messages regarding egalitarianism. Findings suggest that there no relationship between parents' and children's reports in this regard, r = .07, p = .413. (This correlation was even smaller when the White European American sample was excluded from the analysis, r = .03, p = .72.)

Overall, these correlations show that the correspondence between parents and children's reports about racial/ethnic socialization is much lower than one might expect. Several explanations seem plausible. For one, parents' reports of the messages they send may correspondence only minimally with their actual practices. Alternatively, parents' messages may not be understood or interpreted by children in the manner intended.

To explore the latter possibility (i.e., that children perceive parents as communicating race-related messages but misinterpret the messages that parents' intend to communicate), we examined cross-over relationships, that is, relationships between parents' reports of egalitarianism/cultural socialization and children's reports of preparation for bias, and between parents' reports of preparation for bias and children's reports of egalitarianism/cultural socialization. Interestingly, parents' reports of egalitarianism/cultural socialization were positively and significantly correlated with children's reports of preparation for bias messages, r = .20, p = .039, suggesting that the racial/ethnic messages parents intend to send may be misinterpreted by children.

Exploring the Weak Relationship Between Children's and Parents' Reports About Racial/Ethnic Socialization Messages

The relatively weak correlation between parents' and children's reports about racial socialization tells us that there is low correspondence between parents and children within a family, but provides incomplete information about the nature of that low correspondence. In an effort to unpack the relationship further, we examined patterns of agreement between parents and their children at the level of the individual item, calculating a direction of agreement score for each parent-child pair. Again, a clear pattern emerged. As we suggested earlier in our presentation of mean differences in parents and children's reports of each dimension of racial/ethnic socialization, disagreement between parents and children for each of the items assessing egalitarianism resulted from a parent reporting sending more of an egalitarianism message than a child reported receiving. These findings are depicted in detail in Table 24.2, which shows that (a) there is agreement between many parents and children in terms of egalitarianism messages that is somewhat obscured when examining simple bivariate correlations, and (b) lack of agreement can often be attributed to a pattern in which parents report greater use of egalitarianism socialization messages than children report hearing. For instance, overall 47% of parent child pairs showed correspondence in response to the item "How often have you told your child/have your parents told you 'People are all equal no matter what the color of their skin or where they are from.'" Among the 53% of pairs lacking correspondence, 39.6% were instances in which the parent reported more frequent messages than did their child whereas only 13.4% were instances in which the child reported more frequent messages than did the parent.6 Future research will be needed to determine if this is because parents' egalitarianism messages are misinterpreted as messages about discrimination and racial bias (preparation for bias), if parents are simply reporting sending those messages that they want the researcher to believe they use, or some combination of the two.

The opposite pattern emerged upon examination of items assessing preparation for bias. In fact, for each of the three items assessing preparation for bias, parents were less likely to report sending preparation for bias messages than children were likely to report receiving preparation for bias messages. These data are also depicted in Table 24.2, and show that lack of correspondence between parent-child pairs in their response to items pertaining to preparation for bias result from a pattern in which children report receiving more frequent preparation for bias messages than parents report communicating7. Again, future research will be needed to determine the degree to which these findings result from miscommunication between parents and children or from biased reporting of messages.

Finally, the pattern found when looking only at the two items assessing cultural socialization was less clear, with one message having a higher parent report mean and the other message having a higher child report mean. However, upon examination of individual items, it is interesting to note that children reported hearing more messages such as, "You should be proud to be Dominican" than parents reported sending, and parents reported sending more messages such as, "It is important to know about the culture of Chinese people" than children reported hearing. Again, we are unable to determine whether parents only report sending those messages that they believe they should be sending, whether children selectively hear those messages that they most prefer, or whether children better understand some messages (e.g., those regarding cultural pride) than others (those pertaining to racial bias).

The Polarity Path

The Polarity Path

The Effects Polarity Has on Career and Health. Get All The Support And Guidance You Need To Be A Success At Understanding Polarity. This Book Is One Of The Most Valuable Resources In The World When It Comes To The Effects Polarity Has on Career and Health.

Get My Free Ebook


Post a comment