Toward a moral reckoning on structural racism: Examining structural factors, encouraging structural thinking, and supporting structural intervention.

The racial reckoning of 2020 involved the largest social movement protest in U.S. history, but support for the Black Lives Matter movement declined shortly after. To advance a moral reckoning on structural racism that dismantles racialized structures and redresses racial inequities, we call on scholar activists within the field of community psychology to realign their own practices by (a) examining structural factors; (b) encouraging structural thinking; and (c) supporting structural intervention for racial justice. Two structural factors-political determinants and commercial determinants-maintain the status quo of structural racism, undermining efforts for racial equity. As a result, we encourage the development of structural thinking, which provides a structural analysis of racism and leads to support for structural intervention. With an intersectional race and class perspective, we detail how structural thinking could be developed among the professional managerial class (through structural competency) and among the oppressed class (through critical consciousness). Finally, we discuss structural intervention factors and approaches that can redress racial inequities and produce structural change. Ultimately, we provide a pathway for community psychologists to support activists building a multiracial, multiclass coalition to eliminate structures and systems of racial, political, and economic injustice.

Evaluating an integrated promotion and prevention bystander approach: Early evidence of intervention benefits and moderators.

Bullying victimization remains a pressing concern to the health and development of U.S. adolescents. Victims of bullying face threats to their safety and education. Hence, interventions are needed to prevent bullying and equip others to intervene in bullying situations. Prior research has examined preventive interventions with little consideration of promotion-tailored, peace-encouraging, interventions. Further, there is a need to test whether people's motives toward preventive and promotive actions may fit with certain intervention tracks. Here, we tested an upstander approach consisting of a universal assembly presentation with promotion-oriented education (Promote Caring) and prevention-oriented education (Say Something), as well as a tailored 150-minute workshop (Upstanding for Promotion-Prevention). High school students (n = 388; 53.9% girls) participated in the study with a control group (n = 335) and intervention group who self-selected to experience upstanding for peace promotion (n = 15) or upstanding for bullying prevention (n = 35). Students in the prevention-tailored track reported stronger safety beliefs (violence prevention beliefs and care promotion beliefs) than students in the control group and endorsed using more defending actions than control-group students. Students' gain, non-gain, and loss motivations moderated ties between upstanding track involvement and post-test safety beliefs, barriers to upstanding, and defending behaviors.