Explore the vast range of titles available.

In the current decade, the U.S. population reached historically high levels of ethnic-racial diversity and reelected the nation's first Black-White biracial President. Simultaneously, scholars also documented significant ethnic-racial inequities in education, increased xenophobia, and a racial climate that revealed deep-seated ethnic-racial tensions. Given this backdrop and acknowledging the significant role that families play in youths' abilities to navigate their social contexts, the current review focused on the literature on families' ethnic-racial socialization efforts with youth from the 2010 decade. Our review of 259 empirical articles revealed that there has been an exponential increase in research on family ethnic-racial socialization in this decade. Furthermore, although it is clear that family ethnic-racial socialization is a robust predictor of youths' adjustment, the associations between socialization and adjustment must be considered with attention to specific socialization strategies, the confluence of strategies used, and the unique contexts within which families' lives are embedded.

On March 8, 2020, there was a 650% increase in Twitter retweets using the term “Chinese virus” and related terms. On March 9, there was an 800% increase in the use of these terms in conservative news media articles. Using data from non-Asian respondents of the Project Implicit “Asian Implicit Association Test” from 2007–2020 (n = 339,063), we sought to ascertain if this change in media tone increased bias against Asian Americans. Local polynomial regression and interrupted time-series analyses revealed that Implicit Americanness Bias—or the subconscious belief that European American individuals are more “American” than Asian American individuals—declined steadily from 2007 through early 2020 but reversed trend and began to increase on March 8, following the increase in stigmatizing language in conservative media outlets. The trend reversal in bias was more pronounced among conservative individuals. This research provides evidence that the use of stigmatizing language increased subconscious beliefs that Asian Americans are “perpetual foreigners.” Given research that perpetual foreigner bias can beget discriminatory behavior and that experiencing discrimination is associated with adverse mental and physical health outcomes, this research sounds an alarm about the effects of stigmatizing media on the health and welfare of Asian Americans.

This study investigated the motivational and social-cognitive foundations (i.e., inequality aversion, in-group bias, and theory of mind) that underlie the development of sharing behavior among 3-to 9-year-old Chinese children (N = 122). Each child played two mini-dictator games against an in-group member (friend) and an outgroup member (stranger) to divide four stickers. Results indicated that there was a small to moderate agerelated increase in children's egalitarian sharing with strangers, whereas the age effect was moderate to large in interactions with friends. Moreover, 3-to 4-year-olds did not treat strangers and friends differently, but 5-to 6-year-old and older children showed strong in-group favoritism. Finally, theory of mind was an essential prerequisite for children's sharing behavior toward strangers, but not a unique predictor of their sharing with friends.

Asians and Asian Americans in the USA have long been a part of a contentious racial history, yet the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted discriminatory stereotypes and beliefs. As revealed through this discourse analysis, Asian international students were simultaneously positioned as scapegoats, bearers of disease, cash cows, and political pawns, all within the context of the pandemic. Asian international students navigated their shifting social positionings within a national context that was heavily influenced by racist nativism. Findings indicated that during a health pandemic, Asian international students were positioned as both the Yellow Peril and cash cows within U.S. higher education.

Objective: This study examines perceptions of change in intimate relationships among partnered, immigrant women in New York City during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. We pay close attention to how structural oppression, particularly related to undocumented immigration status, shaped women's experiences with their intimate partners during a period of social upheaval. Background: COVID-19 has exacerbated many existing structural inequities and subsequent stressors that have been shown to have an adverse effect on intimate relationships, including increased economic instability and mental health distress. Immigrant women may be particularly vulnerable to relationship strain because of intersecting social and structural inequities. Methods: We draw on in-depth, semi-structured interviews among a heterogenous sample of 22 women with varied legal status from Latin America, South and East Asia, and the Middle East. Results: Findings reveal three primary pathways through which structural inequities shaped women's experiences with intimate partnership strain, including financial and material scarcity; uneven caregiving burdens; and constrained access to support in situations of violence and abuse. Conclusion: Our analysis demonstrates ways that structural oppression, particularly driven by exclusionary immigration laws, influences intimate partner relationships through the legal status of immigrant women. Understanding how structural oppression shapes immigrant partnerships is essential for the field of family demography and for family-serving professionals in referring clients to resources and services, as well as helping women explore sources of resilience and coping within their families and communities.

This article argues that national border crossings act as focal points for xenophobia. Two mechanisms converge to produce this pattern. First, when the nation-state is under pressure, border crossings make cross-national differences salient, producing a perceived link between international forces and socioeconomic problems of vulnerable social classes. Second, border crossings come to symbolize international threats and attract aggressive nationalist mobilization by radical movements who frame ethnic outsiders as an international evil. In this distinct spatial landscape, ethnic outsiders become scapegoats for broader social problems among individuals losing social status. I develop my argument through the study of local variation in antisemitism in Weimar Germany before the Holocaust. Statistical analysis of Jewish bogeymen and an in-depth exploration of local reports on antisemitism reveal how pluralism in the Weimar Republic started eroding among members of the lower-middle class living at the margins of the state. In doing so, I draw attention to the spatial sources of xenophobia and demonstrate that borders between nations activate borders within nations, shedding new light on the complicated relationship between pluralism and state formation.

Racist rhetoric blaming the Asian, Asian American, and Pacific Islander (AAAPI) community for the COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated a surge of violence against the AAAPI community in the United States, including the Atlanta mass shooting on March 16, 2021. These incidents resurfaced the ongoing racism against AAAPIs that has largely been unaddressed despite lasting almost 2 centuries. The erasure of AAAPIs' historical oppression, unique cultures, languages, immigration experiences, and contributions to scientific and social justice advancement in the United States has hindered AAAPI voices from being heard. School psychologists are ethically bound to promote equity and dismantle racism; it is imperative to increase visibility of AAAPIs' experiences across training levels (P-12 and graduate programs), settings, and systems. In this unified statement, school psychology organizations have come together to reaffirm the field's commitment to anti-racism by offering proactive strategies to effectively promote visibility and equity for AAAPI students, families, and communities. Impact Statement Although there has been a complete absence of discussion of anti-AAAPI racism and anti-racism in school psychology, the field is actively committed to dismantling systemic racism and inequalities in P-12 schools, institutions of higher education, and communities across our nation. This statements seeks to address this absence by providing (a) a much-needed starting point for school psychologists to learn about the history of discrimination, racism, and violence targeting AAAPIs in the United States that has been virtually unaddressed; (b) a critical context for the recent rise in COVID-19-related anti-AAAPI violence while shedding critical light on the deep-seated racism that has oppressed AAAPIs for centuries in America; and (c) beginning strategies that school psychology faculty members, practitioners, and students can engage in to dismantle anti-AAAPI racism across individual and systems levels.

Statistics show that the increase in the number of refugees to Germany since 2015 was accompanied by an increase in xenophobic hate crimes. We deduced rivaling predictions from intergroup contact and intergroup threat theories that could explain the occurrence of xenophobic hate crimes. By combining structural data of the 402 German districts with the 2015 police crime statistics, we found evidence to support our predictions that aligns with intergroup contact theory: the higher the proportion of foreigners in a district, the lower the prevalence of xenophobic hate crimes. Our analyses further show that the prevalence of xenophobic hate crime attacks was positively related to the total prevalence of registered criminal offenses in a district and was higher in eastern German districts.

This article explores the impact of intra-African migration on constructions and performances of masculinities in Yvonne Maphosa's 2018 novel, The Y in yOUR Man is Silent. The novel was released in the wake of deadly xenophobic attacks against black African migrants in South African. These, understandably, were reflected in international and regional narratives that portrayed South Africa as a hostile environment for black migrants from other African countries. In Maphosa's novel, the depiction of two of her male characters, Elik, a Ghanaian and Lumka, a South African, goes against the grain as the men find mutual strength and commeradarie in a warm friendship. Their friendship cuts across a personal and professional relationship. This article interrogates this friendship to highlight its impact of the personal and professional development of both men in their positions as migrants across Johannesburg and Cape Town. The patterns of both their migration highlight the importance of male-to-male friendships in diasporic spaces. Furthermore, the article explores how Maphosa distabilises discourses of trauma among black male migrants in South Africa, a phenomenon that has influenced their experience and articulation of masculinity. The article highlights the ways in which the nuanced portrayal of Elik and Lumka's friendship suggests an inclusive rather than exclusionary Johannesburg environment as the two characters migrated from elsewhere to Joburg.