ACCULTURATION AND RACIAL HARASSMENT AMONG ASIAN AMERICAN
COLLEGE STUDENTS
By
Ivan Wu

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
In partial fulfillment of the requirement
for the degree of
MASTER OF THE ARTS
Psychology
2012

ABSTRACT
ACCULTURATION AND RACIAL HARASSMENT AMONG ASIAN AMERICAN
COLLEGE STUDENTS
By
Ivan Wu
Despite increased research attention to multicultural issues, Asian American immigrants
and citizens continue to report frequent experiences of racial harassment and discrimination.
However, the frequency and consequences of racial harassment among this population have yet
to be adequately examined in the existing research literature. Thus, the authors examined the
relationship between acculturation, racial harassment, and mental health among 193 Asian
American undergraduates. Using a series of hierarchical linear regressions, the current study
tested the minority stress model and the rejection-identification model through an acculturative
perspective. Findings provide support for the minority stress model over the rejectionidentification model. Implications of the findings and directions for future research will also be
discussed.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. iv
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................v
Introduction ......................................................................................................................................1
Racial Discrimination and Harassment ............................................................................................3
Acculturation....................................................................................................................................5
Acculturation and Racism ................................................................................................................5
Measuring Racial Harassment and Discrimination..........................................................................8
Current Study .................................................................................................................................10
Testing Alternative Models................................................................................................11
Minority Stress Model .......................................................................................................11
Rejection-Identification Model ..........................................................................................12
Methods..........................................................................................................................................13
Participants and Procedures ...............................................................................................13
Measures ............................................................................................................................14
Results ............................................................................................................................................18
Main Findings ....................................................................................................................19
Discussion ......................................................................................................................................23
Strengths and Limitations ..............................................................................................................27
Future Directions ...........................................................................................................................29
Conclusion .....................................................................................................................................29
References ......................................................................................................................................32

iii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations...............................................................17
Table 2 Indirect effects of integration and marginalization through racial harassment ...............19
Table 3 Indirect effects of racial harassment through acculturation .............................................23

iv

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Hypothesized relationship between main study variables
in the minority stress model ...........................................................................................12
Figure 2 Hypothesized relationship between main study variables
in the rejection-identification model ..............................................................................13
Figure 3 The mediating role of racial harassment in the relationship
between integration and mental health ..........................................................................20
Figure 4 The mediating role of racial harassment in the relationship
between marginalization and mental health ...................................................................20
Figure 5 The mediating role of marginalization in the relationship
between racial harassment and mental health ................................................................21

v

Introduction
The immigration history of Asian Americans in the United States is fraught with social
and institutionalized racism, including restrictions on interracial marriage, citizenship, and land
ownership. Institutionalized discrimination against Asian Americans began as early as 1882
with the Chinese Exclusionary act, which barred Chinese immigrants in the U.S. from becoming
citizens, and continued to occur as late as 1944 with the Executive Order 9066, which marked
the internment of over 120,000 Japanese Americans during World War II.
Although the law no longer permits blatant institutionalized racism, discrimination
against Asian Americans persists. High incidence rates of racial discrimination among Asian
Americans have been well documented within the literature. For instance, data from the
National Latino and Asian American Study (NLAAS) found that 62% of Asian Americans
reported experiencing unfair treatment, being disliked, or witnessing a friend being treated
unfairly due to race (Chae, Takeuchi, Barbeau, Bennett, Lindsey, & Krieger, 2008). Among the
Chinese American immigrant participants in the NLAAS, 43% reported experiencing racial
discrimination in the past year (Goto, Gee, & Takeuchi, 2002). Furthermore, a study of the 2007
California Health Interview Survey found that reports of threats and harassment ranged from
12% in Japanese Americans to 19% in Filipino Americans (Gee, Ro, Shariff-Marco, & Chae,
2009).
Acculturation, defined as the process of cultural adaptation and adjustment on individual
experiences with sustained contact in a new cultural environment (Balls Organista, Marín, &
Chun, 2010), may be related to racial discrimination, although the findings to date are mixed.
For instance, newly arrived immigrants who maintain the cultural norms and values of their
original culture (i.e., heritage culture) may experience differential treatment than another

1

immigrant who strongly identifies with the dominant culture’s norms and values (i.e.,
mainstream culture). A recent study revealed a negative relationship between reports of racerelated workplace discrimination and time spent in the U.S. among Filipino Americans (de
Castro, Gee, & Takeuchi, 2008); however, other studies have found that time spent in the US
(Goto, Gee, & Takeuchi, 2002) and nativity (i.e., American versus foreign born; Kuo, 1995) was
positively related to reports of racial discrimination among Asian Americans in general.
Despite these studies on racial discrimination, racial harassment, which is a form of racial
discrimination, has been underexamined among Asian Americans. The lack of psychological
research in this area limits our knowledge about the mental health effects, as well as the extent to
which racial harassment is experienced by Asian Americans. Thus, the proposed study seeks to
examine the relationship between acculturation, racial harassment, and mental health among
Asian American college students. By examining the indirect effects of acculturation and racial
harassment on mental health, the study tests two competing models. The minority stress model
(Meyer, 2003a) suggests that less acculturated individuals will experience more frequent racial
harassment leading to worse mental health. Under this model, individuals with high mainstream
culture orientation will experience better mental health due to fewer instances of racial
harassment than individuals with low mainstream culture orientation. Thus, racial harassment
mediates the relationship between acculturation and mental health. In contrast, the rejectionidentification model (Branscombe, Schmitt, & Harvey, 1999) predicts that individuals who
experience greater racial harassment will decrease identification with the mainstream culture
(i.e., become less acculturated) leading to better mental health. In other words, individuals who
respond to racial harassment by decreasing mainstream culture orientation will experience better
mental health than those who respond by increasing mainstream culture orientation. Thus, this

2

model proposes that acculturation mediates the relationship between racial harassment and
mental health. The main difference between the two models is whether mental health is
influenced by differential treatment due to an individual’s acculturation level or influenced by a
shift in mainstream culture orientation in the face of racial harassment.
Racial discrimination and harassment
Racial discrimination refers to unequal treatment based on an individual’s race, color,
ethnicity, or national origin that results in disparate outcomes to the individual (Civil Rights Act,
1964); they are associated with a variety of negative psychological, physical and work outcomes
(Barnes, Mendes de Leon, Lewis, Bienias, Wilson, & Evans, 2008; Darity, 2003; Forman, 2003;
Harrell, 2000; Jackson, Brown, Williams, Torres, Sellers, & Brown, 1996; Klonoff, Landrine, &
Ullman, 1999; Schneider, Hitlan, & Radhakrishnan, 2000; Sellers, Caldwell, Schmeelk-Cone, &
Zimmerman, 2003; Williams, Neighbors, & Jackson, 2003). Following the 1972 ruling in
Rogers v. EEOC, racial harassment was defined as a form of racial discrimination in violation
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Legal definitions of racial harassment refer to a variety of
comments, gestures, and behaviors based on race, color, ethnicity, or national origin that create a
hostile environment, interfere with one’s education or work, or interfere with an individual’s
ability to fully participate in, or benefit from, academic or work-related activities (CRA of 1964,
Title VI, as amended 42 U.S.C. § 2000d; CRA of 1964, Title VII, as amended 42 U.S.C. §
2000e).
For the current study, we define racial discrimination as the reservation of benefits for
one racial group and the limitation of benefits for another (Bergman, Palmieri, Drasgow, &
Omerod, 2007). For example, racial discrimination may manifest as the limitation of
opportunity in a workplace environment such as hiring or firing an employee based on race. In

3

contrast, we define racial harassment as the differential treatment of an individual based on
his/her race (Harrick & Sullivan, 1995). For example, racial harassment may manifest as
offensive racial remarks or slurs or exclusive behavior due to an individual’s race (Schneider,
Hitlan, & Radhakrishnan, 2000). Racially harassing behaviors may result in observable forms of
disparate work or educational opportunities, thus meeting the legal definitions of discrimination.
However, a variety of negative race-based behaviors may fall short of the legal standard despite
being harmful (e.g., Buchanan , Bergman, Bruce, Woods, & Lichty, 2009; Fox & Stallworth,
2005; Raver & Nishii, 2010).
Racial harassment, particularly among Asians and Asian Americans, has received
relatively little attention in existing research compared to perceived racial discrimination and
racial micro-aggressions. A number of studies have associated perceived racial discrimination
with depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, low self-esteem, and poor psychological
well-being among Asian American populations (e.g., Carter and Forsyth, 2010; Dion, Dion, &
Pak, 1992; Gee, Spencer, Chen, Yip, & Takeuchi, 2007; Juang and Cookston, 2009; Loo et al.,
2001; Mossakowski, 2003; Noh & Kaspar, 2003). Similarly, racial microaggressions, or subtle
acts of racism, have been associated with low self-esteem, depression, anxiety, stress, and
negative internalizing and externalizing emotions among Asian American college students
(Wang, Leu, & Shoda, 2011; Yoo, Steger, & Lee, 2010). Our understanding of Asian American
experiences of racial harassment, however, is underdeveloped. One study found that racial
harassment was associated with poor life satisfaction and general clinical symptomology among
Asian American college students (Buchanan et al., 2009). Research conducted with other ethnic
minority populations in the U.S. have found relationships between racial harassment and
increased emotional discomfort, anger, feelings of threat (Hurtado, 1992; Neville, Hepner, &

4

Wang, 1997; Sellers, Caldwell, Schmeelk-Cone, & Zimmerman, 2003; Swim, Hyers, Cohen,
Fitzgerald, & Bylsma, 2003), and poor physical health (Raver & Nishii, 2010).
Acculturation
Early attempts at modeling acculturation were based on a unidimensional perspective in
which heritage culture maintenance and dominant culture learning were on two poles of a
unidirectional construct (Thurnwald, 1932). Later reconceptualizations, however, viewed
acculturation as a bidimensional process wherein heritage culture maintenance and dominant
culture learning is orthogonal (Berry, 2003). This model describes four modes (integration,
assimilation, separation, and marginalization) that are used to describe the extent to which the
individual finds (1) maintaining one’s heritage culture important and (2) creating relationships in
or learning about the dominant culture important. Individuals who report maintenance of
heritage culture and openness to the dominant culture as important are categorized under the
integration mode. Individuals who report heritage culture maintenance is important and
dominant culture learning is unimportant are categorized under the separation mode. In contrast,
individuals who report that heritage culture maintenance is unimportant, while believing in the
importance of learning about the dominant culture are categorized under the assimilation mode.
Finally, if neither heritage culture maintenance nor dominant culture learning are important, the
individual is categorized under the marginalization mode (Berry, 2003). Whereas many studies
conceptualize acculturation as a unilateral process (i.e., high/low acculturation), in the present
study we adopt a multidimensional approach, which adds greater complexity to our knowledge
of how Asian Americans experience racial harassment.
Acculturation and Racism

5

Two common frameworks that have been used to help understand minority experiences
of racism are the minority stress model and the rejection-identification model. The minority
stress model proposes that “individuals from stigmatized social categories are exposed to excess
stress as a result of their social, often a minority, position” (Meyer, 2003a, p. 676). One
component of the model identifies prejudicial events (e.g., racial discrimination or harassment)
as mediators between minority status and negative mental health outcomes. In partial support of
this model, minority stressors in general (Wei, Liao, Chao, Mallinckrodt, Tsai, & BotelloZamarron, 2010; Wei, Ku, & Liao, 2011), and racial discrimination and harassment in particular,
have been associated with poor mental and physical health among ethnic minority individuals
(Brondolo, Rieppi, Kelly, & Gerin, 2003; Clark, Anderson, Clark, & Williams, 1999; Contrada
et al., 2000; Dion, 2002; Landrine, Klonoff, Corral, Fernandez, & Roesch, 2006; Myer 2003).
Because minority status is both socially constructed and imposed upon individuals by
members of the dominant culture (Sanchez & Chavez, 2010), it is possible that experiences of
minority stress (e.g., racial harassment) may vary according to an individual’s ability to navigate
the mainstream culture. Successful integration into the mainstream society may diminish an
individual’s “foreignness,” resulting in fewer negative experiences with the dominant group (see
Byrne, 1971, for similarity hypothesis). Empirical studies have found that perceived racial
discrimination is related to acculturation; however, findings from existing studies are mixed. For
instance, de Castro, Gee, and Takeuchi (2008), found that length of U.S. residency was
negatively related to experiences of racially based work discrimination among Filipino
Americans. However, Goto, Gee, and Takeuchi (2002) found that more acculturated Chinese
American immigrants were more likely to report frequent racial discrimination. Ying, Lee, and
Tsai (2000) similarly revealed a positive relationship between reports of discrimination and

6

mainstream cultural orientation among Chinese American immigrants. One possible explanation
for these mixed findings is differences in background characteristics of the samples (e.g.,
geographic region, ethnic density, age, socioeconomic status, and contact with the dominant
society) or potential limitations in existing measures of perceived racial discrimination, which
will be discussed later. Accordingly, the minority stress model predicts that individuals with
integration and assimilation acculturation styles may have fewer experiences of racial
harassment. Furthermore, individuals who experience fewer instances of racial harassment will
have better mental health regardless of identification with heritage culture.
An alternative framework to the minority stress model is the rejection-identification
model (Branscombe, Schmitt, & Harvey, 1999), which explains how experiences of
discrimination lead ethnic minorities to increase ingroup identification. When faced with an
event that may potentially threaten an individual’s social identity, the model suggests that those
who enhance minority group identification will fare better than those who do not. Empirical
studies with various ethnic groups such as Arab Americans/Middle Eastern Americans, Latino
Americans, and African Americans support this model (Awad, 2010; Branscombe, Schmitt, &
Harvey, 1999; McCoy & Major, 2003); however, few studies have examined the extent to which
racism affects the process of cultural adaptation and adjustment among Asian Americans. In one
exception, a longitudinal study of Chinese American adolescents living in San Francisco found
that initial levels of discrimination predicted slower orientation toward the mainstream culture
over time (Juang & Cookston, 2009). As follows, it is plausible that minorities may respond to
racial discrimination or harassment by decreasing orientation toward the mainstream culture.
More frequent experiences of racial harassment, therefore, may lead to the separation mode of
acculturation, which may lead to better mental health outcomes.

7

Measuring racial harassment and discrimination
The majority of existing studies examining negative race-based experiences utilize
potentially problematic measures that prompt participants to report how often they have
perceived themselves to be the target of discrimination, broadly defined (e.g., Finch, Hummer,
Kolody, & Vega, 2001, Kessler, Mickelson, & Williams, 1999; Noh et al., 1999; Pernice &
Brook, 1996; Gee, 2002). However, measures of perceived racial discrimination, defined as the
subjective experience of prejudicial treatment based on a person’s race/ethnicity (Jackson,
Brown, & Kirby, 1998), are limited to the perceptions of the target and whether or not the target
labeled the experience as discrimination based on his or her race. As such, they may not fully
capture Asian American experiences of racism or offer sufficient clarity in regard to the nature
and context of the experience. First, vague perceived racial discrimination items (e.g., “People
dislike me because of my race”) that do not specify the types of behaviors experienced may lead
respondents to refer to vastly different types or dimensions of racial discrimination that may be
associated with more or less severe outcomes (Yoo & Lee, 2009). One responder may endorse
this item referring to overhearing a racial joke, whereas another may endorse this item in
reference to being socially excluded, and a third in reference to a physical assault. A second
limitation to existing perceived racial discrimination studies is the continued conflation of racial
discrimination and harassment despite efforts to differentiate the two (see Bergman, Palmieri,
Drawsgow & Omerod, 2007, or Harrick & Sullivan, 1995, for distinctions), which may both be
the result of and a contributor to limited knowledge in regard to racial harassment experiences
among ethnic minorities. Lastly, a number of perceived racial discrimination measures lack
specificity in assessing the context within which the experiences occurred. As such researchers

8

are unable to determine whether or not respondents are reporting experiences that occurred at
work, in stores, at school, etc.
Research on sexual harassment and gender discrimination (two concepts similar to racial
harassment and racial discrimination, respectively) have faced similar challenges in scale
construction. In a review of such measures Arvey and Cavanaugh (1995) argued against the use
of measures of perceived discrimination and encouraged the use of behaviorally-based measures
of specific harassing and discriminatory behaviors (e.g., “Touched you in a way that made you
feel uncomfortable?”; Sexual Experiences Questionnaire; Fitzgerald et al., 1988). Similarly,
Fitzgerald and Shullman (1993) highlighted the importance of using behavioral items in
measuring sexual harassment to ensure uniform interpretation across responders by providing
clear references to different types or dimensions of sexual harassment. Given that sensitivity to
perceptions of racism differ among Asian Americans (Garrod & Kilkenny, 2007), behaviorallybased racial harassment measures may provide a more stable assessment of their experience. A
second challenge addressed by Buchanan and Fitzgerald (2008) argued that aggregating negative
gender-related experiences across a variety of contexts limits one’s ability to assess the impact
these experiences have on many outcomes. For example, outcomes that are necessary for
establishing that discrimination has occurred or assessing the extent to which individuals feel
negatively toward their organization and its leadership (both key factors in determining liability
and appropriate legal redress) cannot be assessed unless participants are referring to experiences
that occurred in a particular work or school environment where responsibility for preventing
their occurrence is clear. Further, the valence of such experiences may differ as a result of the
investment an individual has in that context. For example, negative treatment at work or school
may be more distressing than a random event at a store. Thus, reports of negative outcomes

9

following such experiences may be attenuated or exacerbated as a result of the context in which
the harassment or discrimination occurred. In light of these recommendations, the use of racial
harassment scales (e.g., Racial Acts, Crimes, and Experiences Scale, RACES; Bergman &
Buchanan, 2008; Buchanan et al., 2009) that specify types and dimensions of racism, as well as
the context from which participants should report experiences (e.g., school-based experiences
only) may facilitate a greater understanding of racism among Asian Americans.
Previous studies using measures of perceived racial discrimination have significantly
contributed to our understanding of the psychological underpinnings of racism among Asian
Americans; however, the current study seeks to address some of their limitations. Most notably,
this study will incorporate a measure of negative race-based experiences that requires
respondents report only those experiences that occurred at school with the past 12 months and
uses behavioral items rather than items dependent on the individual respondent’s perception of
the event.
Current Study
The present study aims to test two competing models, the minority stress model and the
rejection-identification model, with a behavioral measure of racial harassment. To accomplish
this aim, we plan to examine the extent to which: (1) racial harassment mediates the relationship
between acculturation and mental health (minority stress model) and (2) acculturation mediates
the relationship between racial harassment and mental health (rejection-identification model).
We plan to test these models using two alternative hypotheses. The first hypothesis, drawn from
the minority stress model, suggests that integration and assimilation modes of acculturation will
lead to fewer instances of racial harassment resulting in better mental health outcomes. In
contrast, the alternative rejection-identification hypothesis predicts that greater instances of racial

10

harassment will result in the separation mode of acculturation and better mental health outcomes
in turn.
Testing Alternative Models
Minority Stress Model. In support of the minority stress model, the following three
hypotheses must be supported. First, higher integration and assimilation scores should predict
fewer experiences of racial harassment, whereas higher separation and marginalization scores
should predict greater experiences of racial harassment (H1). Second, greater reports of racial
harassment should predict better mental health (H2). Third, following the recommendations for
mediation outlined by Hayes (2009), the indirect effects of acculturation (integration,
assimilation, separation, and marginalization) are statistically significant (H3). Thus, for high
mainstream culture orientation we expect to find integration and assimilation to be negatively
related to racial harassment, racial harassment to be positively related to mental health, and
integration and assimilation to be positively related to mental health and mediated by racial
harassment. For low mainstream culture orientation, we expect to find separation and
marginalization to be positively related to racial harassment, racial harassment to be negatively
related to mental health, and separation and marginalization to be negatively related to mental
health and mediated by racial harassment.
To test this model, four sets of analyses for each acculturation mode will be conducted
using INDIRECT, an SPSS script developed by Preacher and Hayes (2008), to examine the
direct and indirect effects of acculturation (integration, assimilation, separation, and
marginalization scores) on mental health (BSI, BDI-II, and PTSD checklist scores) through racial
harassment (RACES score). As recommended by a number of scholars (e.g., Hayes, 2009;
Shrout & Bolger, 2002), a bootstrapping procedure will be used and confidence intervals will be

11

analyzed to assess the mediation model. A significant indirect effect is demonstrated by the
absence of zero between the upper- and lower-bound 95% confidence interval. If integration and
assimilation are negatively related to racial harassment, separation and marginalization are
positively related to racial harassment, racial harassment is positively related to poor mental
health, and the indirect effect of mainstream culture orientation on mental health through racial
harassment is significant, then the minority stress model is supported.
Racial Harassment

Acculturation

Mental Health

Figure 1. Hypothesized relationships of main study variables in the minority stress model.
Rejection-Identification Model. In support of the rejection-identification model, the
following hypotheses must be met. First, greater racial harassment should predict higher
separation and marginalization scores, and lower integration and assimilation scores (H4).
Second, higher separation and marginalization scores should predict better mental health,
whereas higher integration and assimilation scores should predict worse mental health (H5).
Finally, the indirect effects of acculturation (integration, assimilation, separation, and
marginalization) through racial harassment should be statistically significant (H6).
To test the rejection-identification model, we will use INDIRECT specifying racial
harassment as the independent variable, acculturation (integration, assimilation, separation, and
marginalization) as the mediator, and mental health (BSI, BDI-II, and PTSD checklist scores) as
the dependent variable. A bootstrapping procedure will be used and confidence intervals will be
analyzed to assess the mediation model. A significant indirect effect is demonstrated by the
absence of zero between the upper- and lower-bound 95% confidence interval. If racial
12

harassment is positively related to separation and marginalization, and positively related to
integration and assimilation (H4); separation and marginalization and is related to better mental
health, and integration and assimilation are related to poor mental health (H5); and the indirect
effects of racial harassment through acculturation are significant (H6), then the rejectionidentification model is supported.
Acculturation

Racial Harassment

Mental Health

Figure 2. Hypothesized relationships between main study variables in the rejectionidentification model.

Methods
Participants and Procedures
Participants were drawn from a larger survey of undergraduate students from a large,
Midwestern university (N=2990) that completed an on-line survey on their experiences in
college. Participants that self-reported their ethnic membership as Asian/Pacific Islander
(n=193, 6.5% of the total sample) were retained for the present study. The mean age of the
retained sample was 20.59 years (SD=2.87; range: 16-40), and was comprised of more women
(n=134, 69.4%) than men (n=59, 30.6%). Participants were recruited via the departmental
research subject pool and received course credit as compensation for their time. The
questionnaire began by asking demographic and school-related information (sex, age, education,
ethnicity and race, grade point average, and major). Then, psychological, health, and academic
outcome measures appeared, followed by the measure of racial harassment. This order was used
to minimize the influence of memories of racial harassment on outcome measures.

13

Measures
Unless stated otherwise, measures were coded such that higher scores indicate greater
endorsement of the construct.
Acculturation. Acculturation was measured using a modified version of the East Asian
Acculturation Measure (EAAM; Barry, 2001). The EAAM is a 25-item self-report questionnaire
that measures acculturation as a multidimensional construct. Changes were made to the wording
of the original EAAM to generalize to all ethnic groups. For instance, “Most of the music I
listen to is Asian” was change to “Most of the music I listen to is from my own racial/ethnic
background.” The EAAM was used for the current study because it provides comprehensive
coverage of assimilation as measured using eight items (e.g., “I feel more comfortable
socializing with Americans than I do with people of my own ethnicity”), integration as measured
using four items (e.g., “I feel that both people from my own ethnicity and Americans value me”),
marginalization as measured using seven items (e.g., “I find that both people from my own
ethnicity and Americans often have difficulty understanding me”), and separation as measured
using six items (e.g., “People of my ethnicity should not date people of another ethnicity”)
subscales. Items are scored using a 5-point Likert-type scale (1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly
agree). The integration subscale has been found to be significantly correlated with length of time
the person has been in the new culture (Barry, 2001), allowing it to act as a proxy measure of
biculturalism. In a sample of East Asian immigrants, Barry (2001) found a subscale reliability of
.77, .76, .85, and .74 for assimilation, separation, marginalization and integration, respectively.
For the current study, we found subscale reliability coefficients of .79, .76, .87, and .71, for
assimilation, separation, marginalization, and integration, respectively. One item (“I tell jokes in

14

English and in another language”) was found to have poor psychometric reliability and was
dropped from the previous integration subscale analysis.
Racial harassment. The frequency of racial harassment was measured using the Racial
Acts, Crimes, and Experiences Scale (RACES; Bergman & Buchanan, 2008). Modeled after the
Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ; Fitzgerald, Gelfand, & Drasgow, 1995; Fitzgerald et
al., 1988), the RACES asks respondents to report the number of times they experienced 24
specific unwanted race-based behaviors during the past 12 months. Items are structured such
that they are applicable to all respondents, regardless of their race, such as “Told jokes or stories
which were racist or depicted your race negatively,” “Made statements suggesting that people of
your race are inferior,” “Made offensive remarks about your appearance (for example, about skin
color, hair) based on your race?,” “Physically threatened or intimidated you because of your
race?”. Respondents indicated the frequency of these behaviors using a 5-point Likert-type scale
from 0 (never) to 4 (many times). To avoid bias related to labeling themselves as victims of
discrimination or harassment, the phrase “racial harassment” was not used until the end of the
scale. The scale has been shown to have strong internal consistency (Buchanan et al., 2009);
with the present sample, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was .96.
General clinical symptoms. The 28-item Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI; Derogatis,
1993; Derogatis & Melisaratos, 1983) was used to measure the frequency of clinical symptoms
across five areas (Depression, Anxiety, Somatization, Phobic Anxiety, and Paranoid Ideation)
within the past week. Items were rated using a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (not at all) to 4
(extremely). The summed items yielded a General Severity Index indicating severity of
psychological distress. Based on the norms of a predominantly White sample of non-patients
(Derogatis & Melisaratos, 1983), over 38.7% of our sample met the clinical cutoff for high

15

distress as indicated by scores greater than 65T. In the present study, the internal consistency
coefficient was .94.
Depression. Symptoms of depression were measured using the Beck Depression
Inventory-II (BDI-II; Beck, Steer, & Brown, 1996). The 21-item self-report measure assesses
depression according to criteria found in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
th

Disorders (4 ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994). Respondents report the presence
and severity of depressive symptoms within the past two weeks by choosing one of four
statements for each item. For instance, for feelings of pessimism, participants are asked to
choose which statement best represents their feelings: “I am not discouraged about my future;” “I
feel more discouraged about my future than I used to be;” “I do not expect things to work out for
me;” “I feel my future is hopeless and will only get worse.” Items are scored on a 3-point Likert
scale from 0 (least severe) to 3 (most severe). Twenty percent of our sample scored greater than
20 suggesting moderate levels of depression and 7.6 percent scored higher than 30 suggesting
severe levels of depression. In the present study, the internal consistency coefficient was .94.
Trauma-related symptoms. Trauma-related symptoms were measured using the PTSD
Checklist (Weathers & Ford, 1996), a 17-item self-report measure of posttraumatic stress
th

symptoms according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4 ed.;
American Psychiatric Association, 1994) criteria. Unlike the other well-being measures, the
PCL was presented after RH items; instructions were modified slightly to inquire about reactions
within the last month to harassment experiences. Responses ranged from 0 (Not at all) to 4
(Extremely). Example items include “repeated, disturbing memories, thoughts, or images of your
stressful experience” and “suddenly acting or feeling as if any of those stressful experiences were

16

happening again.” Less than one percent of our sample met the clinical cutoff for PTSD. In this
study, the internal consistency coefficient was .97.

17

Table 1
Descriptive Statistics and Bivariate Correlations
1
2
1. Age
-2. Marginalization
.02
(.82)
3. Separation
-.01
.32*
4. Integration
-.18**
-.18**
5. Assimilation
-.22**
.06
6. Racial Harassment
-.08
.28**
7. General Clinical Symptoms
-.04
.24**
8. Depression
-.10
.23**
9. PTSD
.00
.30**
M
20.46 17.80
SD
2.89
5.09
Range
16-40 ------%
------- -------

3

4

5

(.77)
-.15*
(.70)
-.11
.57** (.79)
.12
-.22**
-.07
.08
-.18**
-.05
-.03
-.06
.07
.19** -.16*
-.08
16.88 15.31
25.02
4.29
2.98
5.74
------- ------- ------------- ------- -------

6

8

9

(.96)
.33** (.94)
.30**
.72** (.92)
.30**
.40**
.31** (.97)
11.82 20.47
13.32
6.34
14.41 16.53
9.62
11.29
------- 0-75
0-46
0-59
------- 38.7% 7.6%
0.4%

Note. Numbers in parentheses are Cronbach’s alphas. %=Percent that met clinical cut off
* p < .05, ** p < .01

17

7

Results
Descriptive statistics, bivariate correlations, and Cronbach alphas are shown in Table 1.
Consistent with Berry’s (2003) fourfold acculturation framework, we find some evidence of the
inverse relationship between high and low mainstream culture orientations. Integration was
negatively related to separation and marginalization, and positively related to assimilation.
Furthermore, separation was positively related to marginalization. These findings suggest that
integration and assimilation may be measuring high mainstream culture orientation, whereas
separation and marginalization may be measuring low mainstream culture orientation. Although
the EAAM was intended to be a multidimensional measure of acculturation, our results indicate
that it may be measuring acculturation unidimensionally in our sample. In other words, the
EAAM appeared to be measuring the degree to which individuals orient toward the mainstream
culture.
We also found relationships between acculturation and mental health consistent with the
existing literature. Marginalization was positively related to general clinical symptoms,
Depression, and PTSD. In contrast, integration was negatively related to general clinical
symptoms and PTSD, and separation was positively related to PTSD. Thus, high mainstream
culture orientation (integration and assimilation) predicted better mental health than low
mainstream culture orientation (marginalization).
As expected, racial harassment was positively related to general clinical symptoms,
depression, and PTSD. Racial harassment was also positively correlated with marginalization
and negatively correlated with integration. Because the assimilation and separation modes of
acculturation were not found to be significantly related to racial harassment, subsequent

18

mediation analyses to test the minority stress model focus on the integration and marginalization
modes of acculturation.
Main Findings
To test the minority stress model, we assessed whether frequency of racial harassment
experiences mediate the relationship between acculturation and mental health. Specifically, we
tested this model using a regression-based analysis with integration and marginalization as the
predictors, general clinical symptoms, depression, and PTSD as the mental health outcomes, and
racial harassment as the mediator. Two separate set of analyses using INDIRECT, an SPSS
macro developed by Preacher and Hayes (2008), were run to examine the relationship between
acculturation, racial harassment, and mental health.
Table 2
Indirect effects of Integration and Marginalization through Racial Harassment
Integration
Marginalization
Outcome
Bootstrap Estimate
SE
Adjusted
Bootstrap Estimate
SE
Variable
(CI)
R2
(CI)
BSI
-0.51 (-1.10, -0.16) 0.22
0.17
0.29 (0.11, 0.60)
0.12
BDI
-0.36 (-0.75, -0.11) 0.16
0.20
0.20 (0.07, 0.38)
0.08
PTSD
-0.20 (-0.55, -0.03) 0.12
0.04
0.10 (0.01, 0.27)
0.06
Note: Based on 5,000 bootstrap samples. Indirect effects are significant if the range
of the upper and lower 95% CI does not contain zero (CI are in parentheses).
CI=confidence interval. BSI = General Psychological Health, BDI = Depression,
PTSD = PTSD symptoms.

19

Adjusted
R2
0.17
0.21
0.08

Racial Harassment
.30**

-.20**
-.04(.02)
Integration

Depression

Racial Harassment
-.21**
Integration

-.16*(.09)

.30**
General Clinical
Symptoms

Racial Harassment
.28**

-.22**
-.14*(.08)
Integration

PTSD

Figure 3. The mediating role of racial harassment in the relationship between integration and
mental health.
Note. Coefficients are standardized and coefficients in parentheses are direct effects holding
racial harassment constant. *p < .05, **p < .01
.27**
Marginalization

.26**
Marginalization

.27**
Marginalization

Racial Harassment

.25**

.22**(.15*)
Depression
Racial Harassment
.24**(.16*)

.28**
General Clinical
Symptoms

Racial Harassment
.23**
.30**(.24**)

PTSD

Figure 4. The mediating role of racial harassment in the relationship between marginalization
and mental health.
Note. Coefficients are standardized and coefficients in parentheses are direct effects holding
racial harassment constant. *p < .05, **p < .01

20

Marginalization
.16**

.27**
Racial Harassment

.32**(.28*)
General Clinical Symptoms

Marginalization
.28**
Racial Harassment

.27**
Racial Harassment

0.15*
.29**(.25**)
Depression

Marginalization

.24**

.29**(.23**)
PTSD

Figure 5. The mediating role of marginalization in the relationship between racial harassment
and mental health
Note. Coefficients are standardized and coefficients in parentheses are direct effects holding
racial harassment constant. *p < .05, **p < .01
Our results provided partial support for the minority stress model, which predicted that
integration and assimilation would lead to fewer experiences of racial harassment, which would
be related to better mental health. First, the integration and marginalization modes of
acculturation significantly predicted frequency of racial harassment experiences (H1; Figures 3
and 4). Integration was negatively related to racial harassment and marginalization was
positively related to racial harassment. Second, racial harassment significantly predicted poor
mental health for both the integration and marginalization modes (H2). Finally, based on the
95% confidence intervals of the indirect effects, racial harassment significantly mediated the
effects of integration and marginalization on all three mental health measures (H3; Table 2).
Specifically, racial harassment fully mediated the effects of integration on general clinical
symptoms (Figure 3b), and PTSD symptoms (Figure 3c), and partially mediated the effects of
21

marginalization on depression (Figure 4a), general clinical symptoms (Figure 4b), and PTSD
symptoms (Figure 4c). In sum, individuals who scored high on the integration scale experienced
fewer instances of racial harassment, which was associated with better mental health.
Individuals who scored high on the marginalization score, in contrast, experienced more
instances of racial harassment, which was associated with poorer mental health.
Our results did not support the rejection-identification model, which was an alternative
hypothesis that proposed that individuals who increase ingroup identification in response to
racial harassment will have better mental health than those who increase outgroup identification
in response to racial harassment. Racial harassment significantly predicted integration and
marginalization (H4), and marginalization was significantly associated with depression and
PTSD symptoms (H5). However, the indirect effect of racial harassment on mental health
through the integration, assimilation, and separation modes of acculturation were not significant.
Marginalization was the only acculturation mode that significantly mediated the relationship
between racial harassment and mental health (Table 3). However, the direction of the
relationship between marginalization and mental health did not provide evidence to support the
rejection-identification model. Racial harassment was positively related to marginalization,
which was positively related to general clinical symptoms (Figure 5). Thus, this finding suggests
that individuals who decrease both mainstream and heritage culture orientation when
experiencing racial harassment experience worse mental health outcomes.

22

Table 3
Indirect effects of Racial Harassment through Acculturation
Outcome
BSI
BDI
PTSD
Bootstrap
Bootstrap
Bootstrap
Acculturation
Estimate
Estimate
Estimate
Mode
(CI)
SE
(CI)
SE
(CI)
SE
Integration
0.02 (-0.02,0.07) 0.02 0.00 (-0.02,0.03) 0.01 0.00(-0.03, 0.02) 0.01
Assimilation
0.00 (-0.02, 0.01) 0.01 0.00(-0.03, 0.01) 0.01 0.00(-0.01, 0.03) 0.01
Separation
0.00 (-0.03,0.02) 0.01 -0.01(-0.04, 0.01) 0.01 0.00(-0.01, 0.04) 0.01
Marginalization 0.05 (0.01, 0.11) 0.03
0.03(0.01, 0.08)
0.02 0.05(0.02, 0.10) 0.02
Note: Based on 5,000 bootstrap samples. Indirect effects are significant if the range of the upper
and lower 95% CI does not contain zero (CI are in parentheses). CI=confidence interval. BSI =
General Psychological Health, BDI = Depression, PTSD = PTSD symptoms.
Discussion
The present study examined the relationship between four modes of acculturation, racial
harassment, and mental health. Specifically, we aimed to test two competing models: the
minority stress model and the rejection-identification model. The minority stress model
proposed that racial harassment mediates the effects of acculturation and mental health.
Conversely, the rejection-identification model posited that acculturation would mediate the
effects of racial harassment on mental health. Our results provided partial support for the
minority stress model and did not support the rejection-identification model.
Partially consistent with the minority stress model, racial harassment significantly
mediated the mental health effects of two of the four modes of acculturation. The results
indicated that integration (high mainstream culture orientation, high heritage culture orientation)
was associated with fewer instances of racial harassment, which was related to less depression
and PTSD symptoms. In contrast, marginalization (low mainstream culture orientation, low
heritage culture orientation) was associated with more instances of racial harassment, which was
23

related to psychological distress, depression, and PTSD symptoms; racial harassment partially
mediated the mental health effects of marginalization suggesting that individuals who scored
high on the marginalization scale may be experiencing other stressors that contribute to their
poor mental health. Finally, racial harassment did not mediate the mental health effects of the
separation (low mainstream culture orientation, high heritage culture orientation) or assimilation
(high mainstream culture orientation, low heritage culture orientation) modes of acculturation.
The significant findings highlight the importance of assessing acculturation in the study
of racial harassment among Asian American college students. Consistent with earlier findings
that less acculturated individuals experience greater racial discrimination (de Castro, Gee, &
Takeuchi, 2008), the current study reveals within group differences among Asian American
college students with regard to racial harassment. In particular, integration was negatively
associated with racial harassment, whereas marginalization was positively associated with racial
harassment. These findings suggest that individuals who subscribe to the mainstream culture, as
evidenced by their high mainstream orientation, may behave similarly to the dominant society,
thus diminishing perceptions of “foreignness” and influencing their minority status (Meyer,
2003a). Those who are more similar to the dominant society may experience better treatment
than those who are not (Byrne, 1971). This is in line with cognitive studies that find that
bicultural Asian Americans possess greater cognitive flexibility and self-efficacy than their
monocultural counterparts (Kim & Omizo, 2005). Bicultural individuals or individuals
categorized in the integration mode of acculturation, who subscribe to both heritage and
mainstream cultural values, may perceive themselves as able to navigate and cope with the
demands of novel situations. Furthermore, the bivariate findings that show integration
significantly predicted fewer PTSD symptoms and better general psychological health further

24

affirms the robust nature of biculturalism (Miller, Yang, Hui, Choi & Lim, 2011). Thus,
bicultural individuals may not only be able to successfully integrate into the dominant society,
but also possess the cognitive ability to detect and diffuse potentially hostile interactions (e.g.,
racial harassment) before they escalate. However, an alternative explanation for these findings
may reason that less acculturated individuals are more sensitive to racism leading them to report
more frequent racial harassment (Ying, Lee, & Tsai, 2000).
Surprisingly, racial harassment did not mediate the effects of the assimilation and
separation modes of acculturation. This is a particularly interesting finding because we would
expect assimilation (high mainstream culture orientation, low heritage culture orientation) to
represent individuals who actively seek to blend in with the dominant society. In fact, because
our measure of acculturation specifically taps into behavioral and attitudinal domains of
acculturation, we expected a strong main effect between assimilation and racial harassment.
However, the effect of assimilation and separation may not have been captured due to our small
sample size. Berry (2003) characterizes integration as the healthiest mode of acculturation,
marginalization as the unhealthiest, and assimilation and separation somewhere in between.
Because we were able to find significant mediation for the integration and marginalization
modes, it is possible that with greater statistical power we might be able to reveal significant
effects for assimilation and separation.
Contrary to the alternative rejection-identification model, solely increasing identification
with the heritage culture to the exclusion of mainstream culture, did not lead to better mental
health. Based on previous studies that suggest that disidentification with a discriminating
outgroup may serve as a buffer against racial discrimination (Awad, 2010; Branscombe et al.,
1999; McCoy & Major, 2003), we expected separation to mediate the relationship between racial

25

harassment and mental health. Because the acculturation modes were not linked to mental health
in the hypothesized direction, it follows that we would not find evidence to support the rejectionidentification hypothesis. The integration and assimilation modes of acculturation were
negatively related to mental health, whereas the separation and marginalization modes were
positively related to poor mental health. Further, our findings suggest that racial harassment is
related to disidentification with the mainstream culture and heritage culture (marginalization),
which is associated with poor mental health. Although inconsistent with the rejectionidentification model, this particular finding highlights the deleterious effects of marginalization.
Marginalized groups may be so removed from the dominant and heritage society that they lack
the social support system to cope with threatening situations.
Our current findings also highlight the importance of assessing behavioral experiences of
racial harassment. We were able to reveal a relationship between experiences of specific racerelated incidents, namely racial harassment, with acculturation and mental health among Asian
American college students. It is possible that our findings are a result of the use of a scale that
addressed the limitations of previous racial discrimination scales. As recommended by a number
of scholars who study sexual harassment (Arvey & Cavanaugh, 1995; Buchanan & Fitzgerald,
2008; Fitzgerald & Shullman, 1993), we utilized a scale that assessed specific types of racerelated incidents to ensure uniform interpretation across participants and specified the context
within which the experiences occurred to increase our understanding of racial harassment within
1

a college campus . In addition, we also followed the recommendation of past racial/ethnic
harassment researchers and narrowed our focus to racial harassment to further the scant research
on the phenomenon.
1

We acknowledge the possibility that similar results might have been obtained using a measure
of perceived racial discrimination; however our study questions focused on racial harassment.
26

Strengths and Limitations
The present study is the first to examine the relationships between racial harassment,
acculturation, and mental health among Asian American college students. By using a
multidimensional measure of acculturation and a behavioral measure of racial harassment, we
were able to reveal a relationship between acculturation and racial harassment where previous
studies using proxy or unidimensional measures of acculturation did not. We were also able to
demonstrate the importance of assessing acculturation in assessing the impact of racial
harassment.
It is also important to note that a number of limitations exist. First, all of the data
collected used self-report measures. As with many cross-sectional studies, the cause-effect
relationship of the mediation analyses must be interpreted with caution. We are unable make
definitive statements about the temporal nature of the rejection-identification model or the
minority stress model because racial harassment experiences occurring longer than a year ago
were not assessed. It is possible that our findings do not capture prior racial harassment
experiences that may have influenced the acculturation process. Future studies aiming to explore
the temporal relationship between acculturation and racial harassment should consider
longitudinal designs. Thus, the current study findings should be considered preliminary, but
informative for future directions. Furthermore, the use of self-report racial harassment measures
that assess retrospective experiences in the past year may be subjected to memory biases.
However, adequately reliable and valid measures are robust to these types of distortions (Miller,
Cardinal, & Glick, 1997) and the RACES (Bergman & Buchanan, 2008) is a measure developed
to address potential limitations of existing perceived discrimination scales. Future studies should
consider study designs that use daily journals or thought records to tap into instantaneous

27

experiences of racial harassment. Second, we did not assess nativity or language ability.
However, given that the participants attend a large mid-western university, it is possible that they
may have similar English language proficiencies.
Second, our sample consisted of various Asian subgroups, which may not capture the
unique racial harassment experiences of particular populations. For instance, refugee
populations with unique immigration histories may have additional stressors. Thus, future
studies should attempt to study Asian subgroups and other ethnic minority populations due to
potential differences in how they are perceived by the dominant society. Third, our findings may
not be generalizable to Asian Americans in different geographical regions because we examined
the experiences of Asian Americans at a predominantly White, large, mid-western university. It
is possible that experiences of racial harassment may differ on ethnically diverse college
campuses. Future studies should consider recruiting from community samples, as rates of racial
harassment within college campuses may be a conservative estimate of race-related stressors
minority individuals’ experience.
Finally, we used a multidimensional measure of acculturation that may not tap into all
four modes of Berry’s (2003) model of acculturation. One limitation of the EAAM is the
potential for responders to fall within different groups. Because the scale uses four subscales to
measure acculturation, it assumes responders will score high on one subscale and low on others
to determine membership in one of the four modes. However, it is possible that responders may
score high or low on multiple subscales, thus creating difficulty in interpreting the results. A
second limitation is that the EAAM may only be measuring one dimension of acculturation
rather than two. Our findings were somewhat similar to Barry (2001) such that we found
significant patterns of negative associations between integration and marginalization, and

28

integration and separation; however, we did not find a significant negative relationship between
assimilation and separation. Thus, our findings may only provide insight into the relationship
between racial harassment, mainstream culture orientation, and mental health. Future studies
should consider further validating the psychometric properties of the EAAM.
Future Directions
In addition to the previously mentioned recommendations for future research, we propose
two directions to extend our knowledge of acculturation and racism among Asian American
populations. A number of previous studies examine the coping process among Asians who
experience racial discrimination (Liang, Alvaraez, Juang, & Liang, 2007; Noh et al., 1999; Yoo,
2005); however, little is known about the coping process with regard to racial harassment among
immigrant Asian Americans. It is possible that the use of coping styles incongruent with an
individual’s cultural orientation may exacerbate experiences of racism. Thus, future research
endeavors should seek to study this phenomenon. Second, the acculturation literature is fraught
with various acculturation scales, yet consensus and consistent use of a single measure is lacking.
Given the overwhelming number of measures, future studies should seek to validate or identify
psychometrically sound measures that allow for better cross study comparisons.
Conclusion
The current racism-related literature with Asian Americans focuses on racial
discrimination or racial microaggressions, but rarely examines the deleterious effects of racial
harassment. The present study is the first to examine the Asian American experience of racial
harassment through an acculturative lens. Our results were able to highlight disparate treatment
due to the acculturation process and the deleterious effects of racial harassment. Testing two
alternative hypotheses, we were able to provide partial support for the minority stress model, but

29

not the rejection-identification model. In summary, our findings underscore the mental health
implications of racial harassment and the importance of successful adaptation and adjustment in
new cultural settings.

30

References

31

References
Arvey, R. D., & Cavanaugh, M. A. (1995). Using surveys to assess the prevalence of sexual
harassment: Some methodological problems. Journal of Social Issues, 51(1), 39-52.
Association, A. P. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.).
Washington, DC: Author.
Awad, G.H. (2010). The impact of acculturation and religious identification on perceived
discrimination for Arab/Middle Eastern Americans. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic
Minority Psychology, 16(1), 59-67.
Balls Organista, P., Marin, G., & Chun, K. M. (2010). The psychology of ethnic groups in the
United States. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Barnes, L. L., Mendes de Leon, C. F., Lewis, T. T., Bienias, J. L., Wilson, R. S., & Evans, D.
A. (2008). Perceived discrimination and mortality in a population-based study of older
adults. American Journal of Public Health, 98, 1241-1247.
Barry, D. T. (2001). Development of a new scale for measuring acculturation: The East Asian
acculturation measure (EAAM). Journal of Immigrant Health, 3(4), 193-197.
Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). Beck Depression Inventory manual (2nd
ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Bergman, M. E., & Buchanan, N. T. (2008). Development of the Racial Acts, Crimes, and
Experiences Survey (RACES).
Bergman, M.E., Palmieri, P.A., Drasgow, F., & Omerod, A.J., (2007). Racial and ethnic
harassment and discrimination: In the eye of the beholder? Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, 12(2), 144-160.
Berry, J. W. (2003). Conceptual approaches to acculturation. In K. M. Chun, P. B. Organista &
G. Marin (Eds.), Acculturation: Advances in theory, measurement, and applied research
(pp.17-37). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Branscombe, N.R., Schmitt, M.T., & Harvey, R.D. (1999). Perceiving pervasive discrimination
among African Americans: Implications for group identification and well-being. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology. 77(1), 135-149.
Brondolo, E., Rieppi, R., Kelly, K. P., & Gerin, W. (2003). Perceived racism and blood
pressure: A review of the literature and conceptual and methodological critique. Annals
of Behavioral Medicine, 25(1), 55-65.
Buchanan, N. T., Bergman, M. E., Bruce, T. A., Woods, K. C., & Lichty, L. L. (2009).
Unique and joint effects of sexual and racial harassment on college students' well-being.
Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 31, 267-285.

32

Buchanan, N. T., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (2008). Effects of racial and sexual harassment on work and
the psychological well-being of African American women. Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, 13(2), 137-151.
Byrne, D. E. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
Carter, R., & Forsyth, J. (2010). Reactions to racial discrimination: Emotional stress and helpseeking behaviors. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 2(3),
183-191.
Chae, D.H., Takeuchi, D.T., Barbeau, E.M., Bennett, G.G., Lindsey, J., & Krieger, N. (2008).
Unfair treatment, racial/ethnic discrimination, ethnic identification, and smoking among
Asian Americans in the National Latino and Asian American study. American Journal of
Public Health, 98(3), 485-492.
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Pub. L. No. 88-352, Title VI, § 601, 78 Stat. 252 (codified as amended
by 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d et seq.) (2000).
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Pub. L. No. 88-352, Title VII, § 701, 78 Stat. 253 (codified as amended
by 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq.) (2000).
Clark, R., Anderson, N. B., Clark, V. R., & Williams, D. R. (1999). Racism as a stressor for
African Americans: A biopsychosocial model. American Psychologist, 54(10), 805-816.
Contrada, R. J., Ashmore, R. D., Gary, M. L., Coups, E., Egeth, J. D., Sewell, A., . . .
Chasse, V. (2000). Ethnicity-related sources of stress and their effects on well-being.
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(4), 136-139.
Darity, W. A. (2003). Employment discrimination, segregation, and health. American Journal
of Public Health, 93(226-231).
de Castro, A.B., Gee, G.C., & Takeuchi, D.T. (2008). Job-related stress and chronic health
conditions among Filipino immigrants. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 10(6),
551-558.
Derogatis, L. R. (1993). BSI Brief Symptom Inventory. Administration, Scoring, and
Procedures Manual (4 ed.). Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems.
Derogatis, L. R., & Melisaratos, N. (1983). The Brief Symptom Inventory: An introductory
report. Psychological Medicine, 13, 595-605.
Dion, K. L. (2002). The social psychology of perceived prejudice and discrimination.
Canadian Psychology, 43(1), 1-10.
Dion, K. L., Dion, K. K., & Pak, A. W. (1992). Personality-based hardiness as a buffer for
discrimination-related stress in members of Toronto's Chinese community. Canadian
Journal of Behavioural Science, 24(4), 517-536.
Finch, B. K., Hummer, R. A., Kolody, B., & Vega, W. A. (2001). The role of discrimination
33

and acculturative stress in the physical health of Mexican-origin adults. Hispanic
Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 23(4), 399-429.
Fitzgerald, L. F., Gelfand, M. J., & Drasgow, F. (1995). Measuring sexual harassment:
Theoretical and psychometric advances. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 425445.
Fitzgerald, L. F., & Shullman, S. L. (1993). Sexual harassment: A research analysis and agenda
for the 1900s. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 5-27.
Fitzgerald, L. F., Shullman, S. L., Bailey, N., Richards, M., Swecker, J., Gold, Y., Ormerod, A.
J., & Weitzman, L. (1988). The dimensions and extent of sexual harassment in higher
education and the workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 32, 152-175.
Forman, T. A. (2003). The social psychological costs of racial segmentation in the workplace:
A study of African Americans' well-being. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 44,
332-352.
Fox, S., & Stallworth, L.E. (2005). Racial/ethnic bullying: Exploring links between bullying
and racism in the US workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 438-456.
Garrod, A., & Kilkenny, R. (2007). Balancing two words: Asian American college students tell
their life Stories. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Gee, G. C. (2002). A multilevel analysis of the relationship between institutional and
individual racial discrimination and health status. American Journal of Public Health,
92, 615-623.
Gee, G.C., Ro, A., Shariff-Marco, S., & Chae, D. (2009). Racial discrimination and health
among Asian Americans: Evidence, assessment, and directions for future research.
Epidemiologic Reviews, 31, 130-151.
Gee, G. C., Spencer, M., Chen, J., Yip, T., & Takeuchi, D. T. (2007). The association between
self-reported racial discrimination and 12-month DSM-IV mental disorders among Asian
Americans nationwide. Social Science & Medicine, 64, 1984-1996.
Goto, S. G., Gee, G. C., & Takeuchi, D. T. (2002). Strangers still? The experience of
discrimination among Chinese Americans. Journal of Community Psychology, 30(2),
211-224.
Harrell, S. P. (2000). A multidimensional conceptualization of racism-related stress:
Implications for the well-being of people of color. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,
70, 42-57.
Harrick, E. J., & Sullivan, G. M. (1995). Racial harassment: Case characteristics and employer
responsibilities. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 8(2), 81-95.
Hayes, A.F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis for the new
34

millennium. Communication Monographs, 76(4), 408-420.
Hurtado, S. (1992). The campus racial climate: Contexts of conflict. Journal of Higher
Education, 63, 539-569.
Jackson, J. S., Brown, K. T., & Kirby, D. C. (1998). International perspectives on prejudice
and racism. In J. S. Jackson, K. T. Brown & D. C. Kirby (Eds.), Confronting racism:
The problem and the response. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Jackson, J. S., Brown, T. N., Williams, D. R., Torres, M., Sellers, S., & Brown, K. (1996).
Racism and the physical and mental health status of African Americans: A thirteen year
national panel study. Ethnicity and Disease, 6, 132-147.
Juang, L. P., & Cookston, J. T. (2009). Acculturation, discrimination, and depressive
symptoms among Chinese American adolescents: A longitudinal study. Journal of
Primary Prevention, 30(3-4), 475-496.
Kessler, R. C., Mickelson, K. D., & Williams, D. R. (1999). The prevalence, distribution, and
mental health correlates of perceived discrimination in the United States. Journal of
Health and Social Behavior, 40, 208-230.
Kim, B.S.K., & Omizo, M.M., 2010. Behavioral enculturation and acculturation, psychological
functioning, and help-seeking attitudes among Asian American adolescents. Asian
American Journal of Psychology, 1(3), 175-185.
Klonoff, E. A., Landrine, H., & Ullman, J. B. (1999). Racial discrimination and psychiatric
symptoms among Blacks. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 5, 329339.
Kuo, W.H. (1995). Coping with racial discrimination: The case of Asian Americans. Ethnic
and Racial Studies, 18(1),109–127.
Landrine, H., Klonoff, E. A., Corral, I., Fernandez, S., & Roesch, S. (2006). Conceptualizing
and measuring ethnic discrimination in health research. Journal of Behavioral Medicine,
29(1), 79-94.
Liang, C.T.H., Alvarez, A., Juang, L.P., & Liang, M.X. (2007). The role of coping in the
relationship between perceived racism and racism-related stress for Asian Americans:
Gender differences. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(2), 132-141.
Loo, C. M., Fairbank, J. A., Scurfield, R. M., Ruch, L. O., King, D. W., Adams, L. J., &
Chemtob, C. M. (2001). Measuring exposure to racism: Development and validation of
a race-related stressor scale (RRSS) for Asian American Vietnam veterans.
Psychological Assessment, 13(4), 503-520.
McCoy, S.K., & Major, B. (2003). Group identification moderates emotional responses to
perceived prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1005-1017.

35

Meyer, I. (2003a). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual
populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5),
674-697.
Miller, C. C., Cardinal, L. B., & Glick, W. H. (1997). Retrospective Reports in Organizational
Research: A Reexamination of Recent Evidence. Academy of Management Journal, 40,
189–204.
Miller, M.J., Yang, M., Hui, K., Choi, N.-Y., & Lim, R.H. (2011). Acculturation, enculturation,
and Asian American college students’ mental health and attitudes toward seeking
professional psychological help. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58(3), 346-357.
Mossakowski, K. N. (2003). Coping with perceived discrimination: Does ethnic identity
protect mental health? Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 44(1), 318-330.
Neville, H. A., Hepner, P. P., & Wang, L. (1997). Relationship among racial identity attitudes
perceived stressors, and coping styles for African American college students. Journal of
Counseling & Development, 75, 303-311.
Noh, S., Beiser, M., Kaspar, V., Hou, F., & Rummens, J. (1999). Perceived racial
discrimination, depression, and coping: A study of Southeast Asian refugees in Canada.
Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 40(3), 193-207.
Noh, S., & Kaspar, V. (2003). Perceived discrimination and depression: Moderating effects of
coping, acculturation, and ethnic support. Racial/Ethnic Bias and Health, 93(2), 232238.
Pernice, R., & Brook, J. (1996). Refugees' and immigrants' mental health: association of
demographic and post-immigration factors. The Journal of Social Psychology, 136(4),
511-519.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and
comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40,
879-891.
Raver, J.L., & Nishii, L.H. (2010). Once, twice, or three times as harmful? Ethnic harassment,
gender harassment, and generalized workplace harassment. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 95(2), 236-254.
Sanchez, D. T., & Chavez, G. (2010). Are you minority enough? Language ability affects
targets' and perceivers' assessments of a candidate’s appropriateness for affirmative
action. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 32, 99-107.
Schneider K.T., Hitlan R.T., & Radhakrishnan P., (2000). An examination of the nature and
correlates of ethnic harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 3-12.
Sellers, R. M., Caldwell, C. H., Schmeelk-Cone, K. H., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2003). Racial
identity, racial discrimination, perceived stress, and psychological distress among African
36

American young adults. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 44, 302-317.
Shrout, P.E., Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies:
Recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7(4), 422-445.
Swim, J. K., Hyers, L. L., Cohen, L. L., Fitzgerald, D. C., & Bylsma, W. H. (2003). African
American college student's experiences with everyday racism: Characteristics of and
responses to these incidents. Journal of Black Psychology, 29, 38-67.
Thurnwald, R. (1932). The psychology of acculturation. American Anthropologist, 34(4), 557569.
Wang, J., Leu, J., & Shoda, Y. (2011). When the seemingly innocuous “Stings”: Racial
microaggressions and their emotional consequences. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin.
Weathers, F., & Ford, J. (1996). Measurement of stress, trauma, and adaptation. Psychometric
Review of PTSD Checklist (PCL-C, PCL-S, PCL-M, PCL-PR). Lutherville, MD: Sidran
Press.
Wei, M., Ku, T-Y., & Liao, K.Y.-H. (2011). Minority stress and college persistence attitudes
among African American, Asian American, and Latino students: Perception of university
environment as a mediator. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17(2),
195-203.
Wei, M., Liao, K. Y.-H., Chao, R. C.-L., Mallinckrodt, B., Tsai, P.-C., & Botello-Zamarron, R.
(2010). Minority stress, perceived bicultural competence, and depressive symptoms
among ethnic minority college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57(4), 411422.
Williams, D. R., Neighbors, H. W., & Jackson, J. S. (2003). Racial/ethnic discrimination and
health: Findings from community studies. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 200208.
Ying, Y.-W., Lee, P. A., & Tsai, J. L. (2000). Cultural orientation and racial discrimination:
Predictors of coherence in Chinese American young adults. Journal of Community
Psychology, 28(4), 427-442.
Yoo, HC. (2005). Ethnic identity and approach-type coping as moderators of the racial
discrimination/well-being relation in Asian Americans. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 52(4), 497-506.
Yoo, H. C., & Lee, R. M. (2009). Does ethnic identity buffer or exacerbate the effects of
frequent racial discrimination on situational well-being of Asian Americans? Asian
American Journal of Psychology, 1, 70-87.
Yoo, H.C., Steger, M.F., & Lee, R.M., (2010). Validation of the Subtle and Blatant Racism
Scale for Asian American College Students (SABR-A2). Cultural Diversity and Ethnic
37

Minority Psychology, 16(3), 323-334.

38