| Literature DB >> 34831802 |
Julia Marie Christina Wenzing1, Nadya Gharaei1, Zeynep Demir2, Maja Katharina Schachner1.
Abstract
Applying a risk and protection perspective, this study paid special attention to the protective roles of parental and peer support in the face of perceived ethnic discrimination (PED) at school. Responding to the inconsistent findings of previous research, the survey study provides greater clarity regarding the interactions between PED at school, social support and positive adjustment (self-esteem, self-efficacy, optimism and school integration). The sample comprised 104 ethnic-minority youth (Mage = 17.73, SD = 3.29, 61% female), including refugee youth (n = 55) and second- and third-generation youth of immigrant descent (n = 49). Structural equation models across the whole sample confirmed peer support as a significant moderator, indicating that ethnic-minority youth who received low peer support were less optimistic when facing PED. In multi-group models, we tested whether results differ across refugee youth and youth of immigrant descent. Results revealed between-group differences concerning the moderating roles of parental and peer support: For youth of immigrant descent, while more PED was associated with lower self-esteem when receiving low parental support, we found a positive association between PED and optimism when receiving high parental support. Based on the findings that refugee youth were shown to be less optimistic when obtaining low peer support, the main interaction effect for peer support on optimism seemed to be driven by refugee youth. The results of our cross-sectional study highlight the importance of identifying specific social support factors for specific adjustment outcomes and also the importance of differentiating between minority groups. Further, the findings offer practical implications for the educational sector in terms of programs focusing on the development of peer-support networks to especially promote refugee youth resilience and resettlement in Germany.Entities:
Keywords: perceived ethnic discrimination; positive adjustment; refugee youth; social support; youth of immigrant descent
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34831802 PMCID: PMC8625724 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182212016
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Summary of expected relations.
Means and standard deviations of our main study variables (N = 104).
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
| Self-esteem | 2.80 | 0.63 |
| Self-efficacy (goals) | 2.89 | 0.66 |
| Self-efficacy (abilities) | 3.01 | 0.65 |
| Optimism | 2.93 | 0.58 |
| School integration | 3.01 | 0.62 |
| Perceived ethnic discrimination at school | 1.88 | 1.48 |
| Peer support | 3.10 | 0.53 |
| Parental support | 3.25 | 0.77 |
Note: All variables except for PED were measured on a scale from 1 to 4. PED represents a count variable, counting types of experienced ethnic discrimination at school from 0 to 5.
Correlations between main study variables (N = 104).
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Perceived ethnic discrimination at school | -- | |||||||
|
Self-esteem | −0.001 | -- | ||||||
|
Self-efficacy (goals) | 0.173 † | 0.440 *** | -- | |||||
|
Self-efficacy (abilities) | 0.062 | 0.428 *** | 0.377 *** | -- | ||||
|
Optimism | −0.103 | 0.440 *** | 0.409 *** | 0.384 *** | -- | |||
|
School integration | −0.292 ** | 0.403 *** | 0.023 | 0.187 † | 0.246 * | -- | ||
|
Peer support | −0.008 | 0.274 ** | 0.159 | 0.133 | 0.089 | 0.320 *** | -- | |
|
Parental support | −0.339 *** | 0.112 | −0.030 | 0.164 † | 0.274 ** | 0.426 *** | 0.232 * | -- |
Note: *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05 and † p < 0.10.
Results of the structural equation model (N = 104).
| Self-Esteem | Optimism | Self-Efficacy (Goals) | Self-Efficacy (Abilities) | School Integration | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perceived ethnic discrimination at school | 0.031 | −0.026 | 0.063 | 0.039 | −0.038 |
| Peer support | 0.477 *** | 0.163 | 0.299 ** | 0.276 † | 0.266 ** |
| Parental support | 0.120 | 0.232 ** | 0.053 | 0.281 ** | 0.171 * |
|
| |||||
| PED at school | 0 | 0.130 † | 0 | 0 | -- |
| PED at school | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -- |
|
| |||||
| Status (Refugee) | 0.262 * | 0.237 * | 0.039 | 0.060 | 0.307 ** |
| Age | −0.031 | −0.013 | 0.007 | −0.036 | −0.002 |
| Gender (Female) | −0.219 † | 0.147 | −0.065 | −0.251 * | 0.079 |
| School form (Secondary school) | −0.066 | −0.078 | 0.098 | −0.093 | −0.120 |
| Ethnic identification | −0.180 ** | 0.021 | −0.046 | −0.020 | −0.043 |
|
| |||||
| R2 | 0.300 | 0.192 | 0.089 | 0.207 | 0.218 |
|
| |||||
| RMSEA | 0.041 | ||||
| CFI | 0.960 | ||||
| TLI | 0.919 |
Note: Unstandardized coefficients are presented; *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05 and † p < 0.10.
Figure 2Effects of PED at school on ethnic-minority youth optimism dependent on the level of peer support. Note: † p < 0.10; ns = not significant.
Multi-group models comparing refugee youth (n = 55) and youth of immigrant descent (n = 49).
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-Esteem | Optimism | Self-Efficacy (Goals) | Self-Efficacy (Abilities) | School Integration | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Perceived ethnic discrimination at school | 0.210 *** | −0.013 | 0.124 † | 0.103 | 0.017 |
| Peer support | 0.760 *** | 0.034 | 0.234 | 0.410 * | 0.223 * |
| Parental support | −0.050 | 0.089 | 0.079 | 0.294 * | 0.264 * |
| Perceived ethnic discrimination at school X Peer support | 0 | 0.242 * | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perceived ethnic discrimination at school X Parental support | 0 | −0.117 * | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| |||||
| Perceived ethnic discrimination at school | −0.060 | 0.006 | 0.012 | 0.032 | −0.037 |
| Peer support | 0.312 * | 0.096 | 0.364 * | 0.048 | 0.251 † |
| Parental support | 0.185 | 0.369 * | 0.026 | 0.229 † | 0.055 |
| Perceived ethnic discrimination at school X Peer support | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perceived ethnic discrimination at school X Parental support | 0.165 * | 0.169 * | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Note: Unstandardized regression coefficients are reported. For simplicity, control variables are not shown, included as controls in the model are age, gender, school form and ethnic identification; *** p < 0.001, * p < 0.05 and † p < 0.10.
Figure 3Effects of PED on refugee youth optimism dependent on the level of peer support. Note: * p < 0.05; ns = not significant.
Figure 4Effects of PED on refugee youth optimism dependent on the level of parental support. Note: ns = not significant.
Figure 5Effects of PED on youth of immigrant descents’ optimism dependent on the level of parental support. Note: * p < 0.05; ns = not significant.
Figure 6Effects of PED on youth of immigrant descents’ self-esteem dependent on the level of parental support. Note: ** p < 0.01; ns = not significant.