Discrimination and Depressive Symptoms Among Black American Men: Moderated-Mediation Effects of Ethnicity and Self-Esteem.

Discrimination is related to depression and poor self-esteem among Black men. Poorer self-esteem is also associated with depression. However, there is limited research identifying how self-esteem may mediate the associations between discrimination and depressive symptoms for disparate ethnic groups of Black men. The purpose of this study was to examine ethnic groups as a moderator of the mediating effects of self-esteem on the relationship between discrimination and depressive symptoms among a nationally representative sample of African American (n = 1201) and Afro-Caribbean American men (n = 545) in the National Survey of American Life. Due to cultural socialization differences, we hypothesized that self-esteem would mediate the associations between discrimination and depressive symptoms only for African American men, but not Afro-Caribbean American men. Moderated-mediation regression analyses indicated that the conditional indirect effects of discrimination on depressive symptoms through self-esteem were significant for African American men, but not for Afro-Caribbean men. Our results highlight important ethnic differences among Black men.

Recent reliability reporting practices in Psychological Assessment: recognizing the people behind the data.

Helms, Henze, Sass, and Mifsud (2006) defined good practices for internal consistency reporting, interpretation, and analysis consistent with an alpha-as-data perspective. Their viewpoint (a) expands on previous arguments that reliability coefficients are group-level summary statistics of samples' responses rather than stable properties of scales or measures and (b) encourages researchers to investigate characteristics of reliability data for their own samples and subgroups within their samples. In Study 1, we reviewed past and current reliability reporting practices in a sample of Psychological Assessment articles published across 3 decades (i.e., from the years 1989, 1996, and 2006). Results suggested that contemporary and past researchers' reliability reporting practices have not improved over time and generally were not consistent with good practices. In Study 2, we analyzed an archival data set to illustrate the real-life repercussions of researchers' ongoing misconstrual and misuse of reliability data. Our analyses suggested that researchers should conduct preliminary analyses of their data to determine whether their data fit the assumptions of their reliability analyses. Also, the results indicated that reliability coefficients varied across racial or ethnic and gender subgroups, and these variations had implications for whether the same depression measure should be used across groups. We concluded that the alpha-as-data perspective has implications for one's choice of psychological measures and interpretation of results, which subsequently affect conclusions and recommendations. We encourage researchers to recognize the people behind their data by adopting better practices in internal consistency reporting, analysis, and interpretation.