Lauren L Brown1, Uchechi A Mitchell2, Jennifer A Ailshire1. 1. Leonard Davis School of Gerontology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles. 2. Division of Community Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Exposure to stressors is differentially distributed by race/ethnicity with minority groups reporting a higher stress burden than their white counterparts. However, to really understand the extent to which some groups bear a disproportionate stress burden, we need to consider race/ethnic differences in stress appraisal, specifically how upsetting stressors may be, in addition to stress exposure. We examine racial/ethnic differences in both the number of reported chronic stressors across five domains (health, financial, residential, relationship, and caregiving) and their appraised stressfulness among a diverse sample of older adults. METHOD: Data come from 6,567 adults ages 52+ from the 2006 Health and Retirement Study. RESULTS: Results show older blacks, U.S. and foreign-born Hispanics report more chronic stress exposure than whites and are two to three times as likely to experience financial strain and housing-related stress. Socioeconomic factors fully explain the Hispanic-white difference in stress exposure, but black-white differences remain. Despite experiencing a greater number of stressors, blacks and U.S.-born Hispanics are less likely to be upset by exposure to stressors than whites. U.S.-born Hispanics are less upset by relationship-based stressors specifically, while blacks are less upset across all stress domains in fully-adjusted models. Foreign-born Hispanics are only less upset by caregiving strain. DISCUSSION: The distinction between exposure and appraisal-based measures of stress may shed light on important pathways that differentially contribute to race/ethnic physical and mental health disparities.
OBJECTIVES: Exposure to stressors is differentially distributed by race/ethnicity with minority groups reporting a higher stress burden than their white counterparts. However, to really understand the extent to which some groups bear a disproportionate stress burden, we need to consider race/ethnic differences in stress appraisal, specifically how upsetting stressors may be, in addition to stress exposure. We examine racial/ethnic differences in both the number of reported chronic stressors across five domains (health, financial, residential, relationship, and caregiving) and their appraised stressfulness among a diverse sample of older adults. METHOD: Data come from 6,567 adults ages 52+ from the 2006 Health and Retirement Study. RESULTS: Results show older blacks, U.S. and foreign-born Hispanics report more chronic stress exposure than whites and are two to three times as likely to experience financial strain and housing-related stress. Socioeconomic factors fully explain the Hispanic-white difference in stress exposure, but black-white differences remain. Despite experiencing a greater number of stressors, blacks and U.S.-born Hispanics are less likely to be upset by exposure to stressors than whites. U.S.-born Hispanics are less upset by relationship-based stressors specifically, while blacks are less upset across all stress domains in fully-adjusted models. Foreign-born Hispanics are only less upset by caregiving strain. DISCUSSION: The distinction between exposure and appraisal-based measures of stress may shed light on important pathways that differentially contribute to race/ethnic physical and mental health disparities.
Authors: David L Roth; Peggye Dilworth-Anderson; Jin Huang; Alden L Gross; Laura N Gitlin Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2015-06-01 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: Briana Mezuk; Cleopatra M Abdou; Darrell Hudson; Kiarri N Kershaw; Jane A Rafferty; Hedwig Lee; James S Jackson Journal: Soc Ment Health Date: 2013-07-01
Authors: Therri Usher; Brian Buta; Roland J Thorpe; Jin Huang; Laura J Samuel; Judith D Kasper; Karen Bandeen-Roche Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2021-01-01 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Megan Zuelsdorff; Ozioma C Okonkwo; Derek Norton; Lisa L Barnes; Karen L Graham; Lindsay R Clark; Mary F Wyman; Susan F Benton; Alexander Gee; Nickolas Lambrou; Sterling C Johnson; Carey E Gleason Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2020 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Alyna T Khan; Stephanie M Gogarten; Caitlin P McHugh; Adrienne M Stilp; Tamar Sofer; Michael L Bowers; Quenna Wong; L Adrienne Cupples; Bertha Hidalgo; Andrew D Johnson; Merry-Lynn N McDonald; Stephen T McGarvey; Matthew R G Taylor; Stephanie M Fullerton; Matthew P Conomos; Sarah C Nelson Journal: Cell Genom Date: 2022-07-26
Authors: Jessica R Fernandez; Francisco A Montiel Ishino; Faustine Williams; Natalie Slopen; Allana T Forde Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2022-06-14 Impact factor: 6.106
Authors: Kenzie Latham-Mintus; Tess D Weathers; Silvia M Bigatti; Amy Irby-Shasanmi; Brittney-Shea Herbert; Hiromi Tanaka; Lisa Robison; Anna Maria Storniolo Journal: Health Equity Date: 2022-06-15
Authors: Laura B Zahodne; Neika Sharifian; A Zarina Kraal; Afsara B Zaheed; Ketlyne Sol; Emily P Morris; Nicole Schupf; Jennifer J Manly; Adam M Brickman Journal: Neuropsychology Date: 2021-03 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Melissa Flores; John M Ruiz; Emily A Butler; David A Sbarra; David O Garcia; Lindsay Kohler; Tracy E Crane; Giselle Corbie-Smith; Viola Benavente; Candyce H Kroenke; Nazmus Saquib; Cynthia A Thomson Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2021-06-28