Effects of vicarious processing

Today, I address two studies that focus on vicarious experiences. First, ElTohamy, et al. (2023) published “Effect of Vicarious Discrimination on Race-Based Stress Symptoms among Asian American Young Adults during the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy. Here’s the edited abstract and impact statement:

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a rise in anti-Asian hate crimes in the United States. Previous work has established that experiencing racism increases one’s dysfunctional anxiety and avoidance actions—key symptoms of race-based stress symptoms. However, the psychological impact of vicarious, or secondhand, discrimination (witnessing racism targeting one’s own race group) remains less understood. We tested the hypothesis that higher reported vicarious discrimination would be associated with higher levels of race-based stress symptoms reported by Asian American young adults (n = 135) during the pandemic using a cross-sectional analysis of the COVID-19 Adult Resilience Experiences Study (CARES). Starting in April 2020, CARES assessed sociodemographic characteristics and key psychometric scales in young adults through three waves of online surveys. Our multiple regression analysis showed vicarious discrimination significantly predicted race-based stress symptoms, even after controlling for direct discrimination (p < .01). This association remained significant after controlling for age, gender, subjective childhood family social status, and preexisting psychiatric disorders (p < .01). Our results demonstrate that regardless of the effect that direct discrimination might have on race-based stress symptoms, witnessing discrimination against members of one’s own racial group is significantly associated with increased race-based stress symptoms (b = 2.68, p < .01). Social media was the most common source of vicarious discrimination, with one out of three participants in our sample reporting nearly daily exposure. 

This study shows that witnessing racial discrimination (vicarious discrimination) against others may predispose one to race-based stress symptoms. Social media was the most common source of vicarious discrimination. This study suggests that providers should strive to create a space within the therapeutic setting specifically to discuss this form of traumatic exposure, especially among racially minoritized groups that have been the target of increased hate crimes and widespread discrimination as Asian Americans. 

The second study looks at vicarious experiences at school. Del Toro & Wang (2023) published “Vicarious Severe School Discipline Predicts Racial Disparities among Non-Disciplined Black and White American Adolescents” in Child development. Here’s the edited abstract and article:

Racial disparities in school discipline may have collateral consequences on the larger non-suspended student population. The present study leveraged two longitudinal datasets with 1201 non-suspended adolescents (48% Black, 52% White; 55% females, 45% males; Mage: 12–13) enrolled in 84 classrooms in an urban mid-Atlantic city of the United States during the 2016–2017 and 2017–2018 academic years. Classmates' minor infraction suspensions predicted greater next year's defiant infractions among non-suspended Black adolescents, and this longitudinal relation was worse for Black youth enrolled in predominantly Black classrooms. For White youth, classmates' minor infraction suspensions predicted greater defiant infractions specifically when they were enrolled in predominantly non-White classrooms. Racial inequities in school discipline may have repercussions that disadvantage all adolescents regardless of race.

In the United States, 14% of public school students enrolled in grades 6 through 12 have received at least one suspension (National Center for Education Statistics, 2020). Minor infractions include behaviors that are prototypical of adolescents (e.g., using a cell phone or technology) or instrumental to adolescents' goals for seeking peers' approval (e.g., violating a dress code, inappropriate language, and horseplay). Unfortunately, partly due to role strain, educators make hasty decisions without carefully reflecting on their unconscious biases, including racial biases. Racial biases tinge school adults' perceptions of non-delinquent Black American youth as more troubling and menacing than their White American peers. When Black American youth engage in subjectively minor violations (e.g., talking out of turn), school adults are more likely to view these violations as serious offenses relative to minor infractions committed by White Americans.

Suspensions for minor infractions may have collateral consequences for non-disciplined adolescents' adherence to school rules and adults. When someone in the peer group is suspended for non-violent minor infractions, adolescents within the group may have witnessed the event or learned about the precedent of the suspension during informal settings (e.g., lunch time, after school). This exchange of information during and following suspensions for minor infractions may raise questions among the larger peer group about the legitimacy of school rules. Following witnessing or hearing about their peers' suspensions for minor infractions, adolescents who seek to freely express themselves may feel threatened and engage in more defiant behaviors as a means to re-assert their freedoms and challenge teachers' authorities.

Conversely, when classmates receive discipline for serious infractions, adolescents may find that the punishment is warranted and, as a result, may not develop a negative regard toward school rules. In the school context, students will less likely engage in a misbehavior when students are certain that the misbehavior will rightfully precede warranted punishment (i.e., a suspension for a serious infraction). 

Black American adolescents had more classmates receiving frequent suspensions relative to White American adolescents. At the student level, most Black American adolescents were enrolled in predominantly Black American, low-income, and remedial- or basic-level classrooms relative to White American adolescents who were enrolled in predominantly White American, middle- or high-socioeconomic status, and advanced-level classrooms due to structural racism. In these low-income and (likely) under-resourced classrooms, educators may have received less institutional support to develop productive classroom management practices and potentially relied on suspensions as mechanisms to maintain classroom order. However, our inclusion of classroom quality and behavioral management and our assessment of the temporal ordering between key constructs partially eliminate the possibility that unmeasured structural factors might have contributed to our results. As for the teacher level, our sample of educators was predominantly White American, suggesting that most student–teacher relationships were characterized as inter-group relationships. When Black American youth are the numerical majority, racial stereotypes of Black American youth as mischievous may have been more immediately available for White American educators and, in turn, may have lead White American school adults to administer suspensions toward Black American youth's same-race classmates for minor infractions. Therefore, because our sample of teachers was predominantly White American, the Black American students in our schools were more likely to experience interpersonal forms of racial discrimination, including unfair discipline practices linked to minor infraction suspensions.

Classmates' minor (but not serious) infraction suspensions longitudinally predicted greater engagement in defiant infractions among non-disciplined adolescents. One might be concerned that the consequence of classmates' suspensions is mainly driven by the underlying misbehavior that led to the suspension, and not the suspension itself. If this were the case, then similarities in the relations between defiant behaviors and classmates' suspensions should have emerged regardless of classmates' minor and serious infractions. Yet, the harm linked to suspensions was specific to minor infractions, suggesting that the relation is driven by the severity of the discipline followed by a minor infraction and not either a suspension or an infraction alone. In addition, minor infraction suspensions occurred less frequently than did serious infraction suspensions, suggesting that minor infractions are inconsistently enforced relative to serious offenses and that youth were likely uncertain that minor infractions will result in suspensions. When classmates received suspensions for serious offenses, adolescents likely supported their educators' decision and judgment. 

The negative consequences linked to classmates' minor infraction suspensions became worse for Black American adolescents with greater proportions of same-race classmates. The worldviews of Black American youth are shaped by their lived experiences with discrimination and the meanings they ascribe to such encounters. As such, Black American youth's knowledge about interpersonal and institutional racism may influence their theories about why Black American classmates' minor infractions are more prone to harsh discipline than their White American peers. Racial discrimination experiences with school discipline also have the potential to reify youth's developing worldviews. For instance, more same-race classmates receiving minor infraction suspensions may confirm Black American youth's beliefs and awareness of racism in the United States. In addition, at a structural level, the ecologies of classrooms may differ between Black American youth with more same-race classmates receiving minor infraction suspensions than Black American youth with fewer same-race classmates receiving such suspensions. In turn, Black American youth's engagement in more defiant infractions linked to more same-race classmates' minor infraction suspensions suggests that such youth are unequivocally questioning and challenging school rules' unfairness and infidelities.

[C]lassmates' minor infraction suspensions predicted more White American adolescents' defiant infractions when few same-race classmates were receiving minor infraction suspensions. In other words, White American adolescents engaged in more defiant infractions when they likely witnessed more minoritized classmates receiving minor infraction suspensions than White American adolescents who saw same-race classmates receiving minor infraction suspensions. 

It is noteworthy that youth's gender did not moderate our results. It is likely that measurement and contextual factors shaped the observed equivalent results between boys and girls. Recall that minor infraction suspensions included infractions that are likely shared experiences but are differentially expressed between Black girls and Black boys (e.g., dress code violations when boys walk around with hoods over their heads and girls wear above-the-knee skirts). Although the rationale for minor infractions may differ between Black boys and Black girls qualitatively, our quantitative data suggest that both genders are equally likely to experience comparable amounts of minor infraction suspensions and their consequences. According to extant studies, both Black American boys and Black American girls are overly represented in severe disciplinary practices relative to White American youth; therefore, the process through which minor infraction suspensions predict more Black Americans' engagement in defiant infractions might be comparable among Black American youth regardless of their gender.

I find both studies important in emphasizing the roles of social media and school-based discipline in shaping the worldviews of young people.