OBJECTIVES: This study assesses socioeconomic status (SES) and race-ethnic differences in the extent to which coping resources (social support and self-esteem) buffer the negative impact of chronic stress on depressive symptoms. DESIGN: We analyze data from a large community-based sample of young adults (ages 18-23) living in Miami-Dade County, Florida, USA (N = 1411). RESULTS: Study findings indicate that the stress-buffering effects of social support or self-esteem do not vary by SES. However, independent of SES and other study controls, non-Hispanic whites experience greater stress-buffering effects from social support than African-Americans and African-Americans experience greater stress-buffering effects from self-esteem than Cubans and Nicaraguans. CONCLUSION: In light of these results, we conclude that a greater understanding of racial and ethnic differences in mental health requires close attention to cultural transmissions of coping strategies within groups, which may be partly responsible for these differences in buffering effects.
OBJECTIVES: This study assesses socioeconomic status (SES) and race-ethnic differences in the extent to which coping resources (social support and self-esteem) buffer the negative impact of chronic stress on depressive symptoms. DESIGN: We analyze data from a large community-based sample of young adults (ages 18-23) living in Miami-Dade County, Florida, USA (N = 1411). RESULTS: Study findings indicate that the stress-buffering effects of social support or self-esteem do not vary by SES. However, independent of SES and other study controls, non-Hispanic whites experience greater stress-buffering effects from social support than African-Americans and African-Americans experience greater stress-buffering effects from self-esteem than Cubans and Nicaraguans. CONCLUSION: In light of these results, we conclude that a greater understanding of racial and ethnic differences in mental health requires close attention to cultural transmissions of coping strategies within groups, which may be partly responsible for these differences in buffering effects.
Authors: Mathew D Gayman; Ben Lennox Kail; Amy Spring; George R Greenidge Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2018-01-11 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: Patricia Louie; Laura Upenieks; Arjumand Siddiqi; David R Williams; David T Takeuchi Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2021-09-01 Impact factor: 5.363