Framing and source effects on White college students' reactions to racial inequity information.

OBJECTIVES: This study addressed: (a) Do professors' race/ethnicity and the race-related inequity information they present influence students' evaluations of the professors, acknowledgment of racial inequity, or motivation to respond without prejudice (MRWP)? (b) Do collective guilt and students' evaluations of professors mediate these relationships? METHOD: White American undergraduate students (N = 614, 66.3% females, 64.7% first year, mean age of 19.3 years [age SD = 1.5]) completed an anonymous online survey. Students imagined they were taking a racial diversity course with either a Black or a White male professor who presented either White privilege or Black disadvantage statements. Participants then completed surveys that assessed their evaluations of the professor, collective guilt, beliefs regarding racial inequity, and MRWP. RESULTS: Students evaluated White professors as having lower expertise, learning conduciveness, and warmth/intelligence but rated Black professors as more biased. Consistent with the inequality-framing model, intergroup sensitivity effect (ISE), and findings from prejudice confrontation research, White professors induced greater acknowledgment of racial inequity when they discussed White privilege rather than Black disadvantage. But, Black professors induced more external MRWP when they presented White privilege rather than Black disadvantage. Students' perceptions of the professors' warmth/intelligence determined the effectiveness of the inequity message while perceptions of the professors' expertise, judgmental, and conduciveness to learning determined students' concerns about appearing prejudiced. CONCLUSIONS: The presenters' race/ethnicity and how they frame racial inequity information affect students' evaluation of the presenters, the message effectiveness, and students' external MRWP. (PsycINFO Database Record

Findings from mental health screening of newly arrived refugees in Colorado.

States are required to provide a public health screening for all newly arrived refugees in the United States. In 1997, a comprehensive program was created to include both a physical examination and a mental health screening. This article provides a complete description of the mental health screening process, including two illustrative cases, and reports information about the refugees who participated in the program. Ten percent of screened refugees were offered mental health referrals; of those, 37% followed up. Refugees who presented for treatment reported a higher number of symptoms upon screening compared with those who were offered referrals but did not follow up. Psychiatric evaluation confirmed that those who screened positive and presented for treatment were experiencing a high level of suffering and qualified for mental health diagnoses. The findings support inclusion of a mental health screening as part of the public health screening.