Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Jul 26.
Published in final edited form as: J Relig Health. 2018 Oct;57(5):1690–1701. doi: 10.1007/s10943-017-0550-6

Is Minority Stress in the Eye of the Beholder? A Test of Minority Stress Theory with Christians

Mike C Parent 1, Melanie E Brewster 2, Stephen W Cook 3, Kevin A Harmon 4
PMCID: PMC10371211  NIHMSID: NIHMS1913978  PMID: 29299788

Abstract

Studies using minority stress theory have focused on the experiences of numerical and social power minorities, though majority individuals may also perceive themselves to be minorities. We explored minority stress theory among a sample of members of a numerically and socially dominant group: Christians in the USA. Perceiving oneself to be a member of a minority as a Christian was associated with stress indirectly via perceived experiences of faith-based discrimination (i.e., harassment due to being Christian). Being more open about one’s religion moderated the relationship between experiences of faith-based discrimination and stress, such that those who were open about their faith reported a stronger relationship between experiences of faith-based discrimination and stress. These findings indicate that perceptions of minority status are important to understanding stress and have implications for minority/majority dialogues.

Keywords: Minority groups, Religious beliefs, Discrimination, Identity management, Moderated mediation

Introduction

Approximately 71% of Americans identify as Christian (Pew Research Center 2015). In the United States (USA), Christians are a numerical majority and hold the bulk of sociopolitical power; US presidential candidates and presidents publically identify as Christian, In God We Trust is printed on currency, and elected officials are expected to end speeches with “God Bless America” (Morone 2015). Despite their disproportionate cultural and political power, Christians report perceptions of marginalization and “Christianophobia” (i.e., stereotyping or disparagement that they are intellectually, socially, or morally inferior; Boucher and Kucinskas 2016; Hyers and Hyers 2008; Rosik and Smith 2009; Rosik et al. 2016; Yancey and Williamson 2014). Despite literature contending that perceptions of discrimination or prejudice are important to health and well-being (Gattis and Larson 2016; Kessler et al. 1999; Koskinen et al. 2015), literature on multiculturalism and social justice has not examined perceptions of marginalization among individuals who hold sociopolitical power and it is unknown how such perceptions may relate to stress. The goal of the present study was to examine the minority stress theory (MST) among Christians in the USA to better understand how perceptions of oneself to be a minority, perceptions of prejudice and discrimination, and integration of one’s religious identity may impact the well-being of Christians.

MST is a leading framework that integrates marginalization and stress. MST posits that individuals from socially stigmatized populations experience stress beyond the experiences of non-marginalized persons (Herek and Garnets 2007; Meyer 1995, 2003). MST has been explored in myriad studies, with results consistently supporting the model (Baams et al. 2015; Herek and Garnets 2007). Individuals with minority identities report higher levels of stress, with processes such as discrimination and harassment mediating the relationship between minority status and stress (Lehavot and Simoni 2011; Williams et al. 2005; Woodford et al. 2014). Further, MST posits that characteristics of minority identity, such as how prominent or integrated the identity is in one’s life, may moderate the link between minority stressors and felt stress (Hendricks and Testa 2012; Meyer 2003).

The MST has thus far been explored exclusively within populations that are both numerical and social power minorities (e.g., gender and sexual minority persons, racial/ethnic minorities). Individuals who are members of numerical or social power majorities may experience parallel stress, to the extent that they believe their identities situate them as members of a marginalized group. Identification as a minority can increase the likelihood of expecting rejection and interpreting events as discrimination (Mendoza-Denton et al. 2002) The analysis of perception of prejudice or discrimination has indeed been the focus of minority stress research (Carr and Friedman 2005; Kessler et al. 1999; Pascoe and Smart Richman 2009), though this lens has never been turned toward ostensibly majority populations, such as people identifying as Christians. Examining the impact of perceptions of discrimination or prejudice among majority groups is important to advancing research and advocacy on intergroup relations. Within the current US social and political climate, individuals from groups that have historically held dominant positions appear to increasingly feel threatened as other groups increase in visibility and access to institutional power (Allen 2016; Yancey 2015). Such perceived threats may even promote a “backlash” against the goals of inclusivity (Cha 2016; Fischer et al. 2016). To the extent that dominant groups perceive the benefits of greater inclusivity as exclusively interested in the well-being of groups other than their own, and even as potentially antagonistic toward their own group, they are unlikely to support social justice efforts. Social identity of religion theory suggests that when threatened by an outgroup (e.g., experiences of faith-based discrimination), identification with one’s own religious group may strengthen (Ysseldyk et al. 2010). In addition, because religious belief is often a salient part of one’s identity, experiences of faith-based discrimination could be particularly harmful to one’s health and well-being and may promote intergroup hostility. Thus, it is vital to understand the processes underlying dominant groups’ attitudes, including, as is often examined among minority groups, how perceived discrimination is related to well-being.

Though Christians are sociopolitically dominant in the USA, MST may still be one fruitful framework through which to examine the relationship between perceived discrimination and well-being. However, we would be remiss to not acknowledge that differences in cultural climates may shape how individuals experience minority stress. For example, a gay man who lives in the Castro district of San Francisco may not feel like a minority group member while in his neighborhood, but may feel differently if he lived in rural Georgia, just as an evangelical Christian in the Castro district may feel more like a minority group member compared to someone in rural Georgia. Simultaneously, it is important to note that Christians are not homogenous in their levels of devoutness; evangelical Christians represent roughly 25% of the US population, whereas other Christians may only nominally claim this identity as a part of their culture (Pew Research Center 2015). As such, a devout Christian in a liberal climate may feel marginalized. Indeed, Christians report self-censoring their beliefs to sidestep interpersonal difficulties with non-Christian colleagues (Rosik et al. 2016) and others argue that Christians face animosity from coworkers and peers and that such expressions of animosity are socially acceptable (Yancey and Williamson 2014). However, only one prior study with college students examined perceived Christian marginalization and mental health outcomes, finding that perceptions of religiously based prejudice were not associated with symptoms of depression or anxiety (Rosik and Smith 2009). Given this gap, the present study examined whether Christians’ perceptions of being a minority are associated indirectly with increased stress as mediated by perceived experiences of faith-based discrimination. To this end, we had the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1:

Perception of oneself to be a minority as a Christian would be indirectly associated with stress, via experiences of faith-based discrimination.

Hypothesis 2:

Integrating identity management strategies would moderate the relationship between experiences of faith-based discrimination and stress, such that at higher levels of identity integration, the relationship between perceived experiences of faith-based discrimination and stress would be stronger.

Methods

Participants

The sample consisted of 223 individuals. Participants identified as men (58%), women (40%), and transgender (2%). Participants ranged in age from 18 to 75 (M = 29.90, SD = 11.81, Mdn = 27.00). The largest religious denomination identifications were Catholic (23%), Mormon/LDS (18%), non-denominational (13%), Episcopalian (10%), and Baptist (8%). Regarding race/ethnicity, participants identified as White/Caucasian (76%), multiracial (9%), Hispanic/Latino/a (7%), African American/Black (6%), Asian/Asian American (1%), Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (1%), and another race/ethnicity (9%). A majority of participants (54%) reported that they were raised in the same denomination as they were currently affiliated with, and others reported that they were raised Christian but not within the denomination they currently affiliate with (37%), or that they were not raised Christian at all (9%). Most participants attended formal or informal religious meetings more than once a week (52%) or once a week (32%). Participants reported that they lived in suburban settings (49%), urban or city settings (39%), or rural settings (12%).

Measures

Perception of Minority Status

Perception of oneself to be a minority was assessed using the item, “Christians in general are a minority in the USA” Responses were made on a 7-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree).

Experiences of Faith-Based Discrimination

Such experiences were assessed using an adaptation of the Racism and Discrimination Stresses subscale of the Minority Status Stress Scale (Smedley et al. 1993). The original subscale contains five items pertaining to perceptions of experiences of personal stresses related to racial discrimination (e.g., “Being treated rudely or unfairly because of my race”). Items were revised to pertain to faith (e.g., “Being treated rudely or unfairly because of my faith”). Responses were made on a 6-point scale from 1 (did not happen/not applicable to me) to 6 (It happened, and it bothered me extremely). Mean scores were calculated, with higher scores indicating more perceived experiences of faith-based discrimination. In prior research using a modification of the original measure, scores on the corresponding original subscale were associated with academic, emotional, and financial stress, and depression, among a sample of Latina/o college women in the USA, and Cronbach’s alpha for responses to this modified measure was .91 (Arbona and Jimenez 2014). The Cronbach’s alpha internal reliability coefficient for responses to the experiences of faith-based discrimination scale was .86 in the present study.

Identity Integration

Identity integration was assessed using an adaptation of the Identity Management Scale Integration subscale (Button 2014). The original measure contains ten items pertaining to degree of integration of sexual orientation identity with everyday life at work or school (e.g., “Most of my coworkers/fellow students know that I am LGB”). Items were revised to pertain to faith (e.g., “Most of my coworkers/fellow students know that I am Christian”). Responses were made on a 7-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Mean scores were calculated, with higher scores indicating more openness about one’s faith. In a sample of sexual orientation minority individuals collected online, scores on the original Integrating subscale were correlated positively with job satisfaction and negatively with psychological distress, and Cronbach’s alpha for responses to the original measure was .92 (Velez et al. 2013). The Cronbach’s alpha internal reliability coefficient for responses to the Integration subscale was .85 in the present study.

Stress

Stress was measured with the Stress subscale of the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale-21 (Lovibond and Lovibond 1995). The Stress subscale contains seven items (e.g., “I found myself getting agitated”). Responses were made on a 4-point scale from 0 (did not apply to me at all—never) to 3 (applied to me very much—almost always). Mean scores were calculated, with higher scores indicating more stress. Evidence for reliability, validity, and the factor structure for the scales scores has been provided by several studies (e.g., Antony et al. 1998; Crawford and Henry 2003; Norton 2007). The Cronbach’s alpha internal reliability coefficient for responses to the Stress subscale was .87 in this sample.

Procedure

The Institutional Review Board at the fourth author’s institution approved this study. With the approval of group moderators, recruitment notices for the study were posted on Christian group pages on social media and online forums/message boards (e.g., Facebook, Tumblr, Reddit). We sampled from general social media sites available to members of the denominations and did not collect data from sites with specific political purposes (e.g., prolife site). Christians of all denominations were invited to participate. Measures were completed online in randomized order. Participants were able to enter a drawing to win one of 20 $15 gift cards as an incentive for participation.

Results

Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations are presented in Table 1. As a first step, we tested to see if any of the four variables in the analyses (perception of minority status, experiences of faith-based discrimination, identity integration, and stress) were different within the sample across denomination of Christianity, gender, or race. For denomination, we assessed differences across the five largest denomination identifications in the sample (other denominations excluded due to small cell sizes); for gender, we tested across those who identified as men versus women; and for race, we tested those who identified as White against those who identified as racial/ethnic minorities. Results of a series of Bonferroni-corrected group difference tests indicated that there were no group differences by any of these three demographic variables on any of the variables used in the analyses, and thus, we did not control for any of these variables in the analyses.

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations

Variable 2 3 4 M (SD)
1. Christians as a minority .23* .27* .11 3.44 (1.91)
2. Experiences of Faith-based discrimination .22* .30* 2.12 (1.17)
3. Identity integration .10 5.02 (1.08)
4. Stress .81 (.65)
Open in a new tab
*

p < .001

Results of the modified measures fell close to values obtained in other studies. Belief that Christians are a minority group in the USA was also endorsed by a substantial number of participants, with the mean falling just below the mid-point of the response interval. For experiences of faith-based discrimination, scores on the measure as applied to experiences of faith-based discrimination were only slightly lower than scores on the modification of the original measure as applied to racism and completed by Latina/o college students (d = .17; Arbona and Jimenez 2014). For identity integration, scores on the measure as applied to Christian identity were very similar to scores on the original measure as applied to sexual orientation identity and completed among a sample of sexual orientation minority persons (d = .05; Arbona and Jimenez 2014; Velez et al. 2013). For stress, participants in the present study reported somewhat higher stress (d = .38) than a sample of 499 US adults obtained via random sampling (Sinclair et al. 2012).

The primary analysis method undertaken was a moderated mediation. Mediation examines how a third variable influences the relationship between two other variables in such a way as to aim to explain the relationship. Moderation, in contrast, examined how a third variable influences the strength of the relationship between two other variables. In the present study, we hypothesized that experiences of faith-based discrimination would mediate the relationship between identification as a minority group and stress. That is, we expected that the relationship between identification as a minority and stress is explained, conceptually and statistically, by experiences of faith-based discrimination. Although the zero-order correlation between identification as a minority group and stress was not statistically significant, an indirect effect can still exist between identification as a minority and stress via experiences of faith-based discrimination That is, mediation can still be present even when the zero-order relationship between variable X and variable Y is not statistically significant (Hayes 2009). At the same time, we expected that openness about one’s faith would moderate the relationship between experiences of faith-based discrimination and stress. That is, we expected openness about one’s religion to impact the strength of the relationship between experiences of faith-based discrimination and stress, such that the relationship would be stronger among those who reported more openness about their faith. To undertake these analyses, we used Hayes’ PROCESS macro for SPSS (Hayes 2012), corresponding to model #14 (i.e., moderation of path b) with 5000 bootstrapped samples. The conceptual model is displayed in Fig. 1. The analysis of the moderated mediation effect, at alpha = .05, power = .80, predictors = 4, and with an effect size of f2 = .06 (representing a small-to-medium-sized effect) would require a sample size of 164 to detect, according to analyses conducted in G*power v3 (Faul et al. 2007). A small-to-medium-sized effect was chosen based on past research (Brewster et al. 2017; Frost and Meyer 2009; Velez et al. 2013).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

PROCESS model

Results of the PROCESS modeling are presented in Fig. 1. The overall model was significant [F (4, 218) = 8.186, p < .001, R2 = .131], indicating that the set of predictors was significantly associated with stress, corresponding to a medium-sized effect. Consistent with hypothesis 1, perception of oneself to be a minority as a Christian was associated with stress indirectly via perceived experiences of faith-based discrimination. Consistent with hypothesis 2, the index of moderated mediation indicated that the moderated mediation hypothesis was supported; Index = .015, SE = .09, 95% CI = .003, .039. The simple slopes for the interaction term are presented in Fig. 2. Analyses of the simple slopes indicated that for individuals who reported low integration (i.e., those who were not vocal or open about their faith at work or school), the relationship between experiences of faith-based discrimination and stress was not significant; the conditional indirect effect of faith-based discrimination on stress at – 1 SD from the mean of integration was B = −.001, SE = .011, 95% CI = − .029, .015. However, for individuals who were higher on integration (i.e., those who were vocal or open about their faith at work or school), the relationship between experiences of faith-based discrimination and stress was significant; conditional indirect effect of faith-based discrimination on stress at the mean of integration was B = .015, SE = .015, 95% CI = .005, .035, and at + 1 SD from the mean of integration was B = .032, SE = .013, 95% CI = .011, .064. Thus, the relationship between experiences of faith-based discrimination and stress held only for individuals in this sample who were vocal or open about their faith at work or school.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Simple slopes for the moderation of the relationship between faith-based discrimination and stress by integration

Discussion

The current research aimed to explore MST in a context of perception of minority status among a majority group (i.e., Christians in the USA). The results suggest that tenets of MST hold among Christians. Belief that Christians are a minority in the USA was indirectly associated with stress via perceived experiences of faith-based discrimination. Consistent with MST, the extent to which one is open about one’s faith moderated the relationship between experiences of faith-based discrimination and stress. Specifically, the association between experiences of faith-based discrimination and stress was strongest for those who were open about their faith.

The results of the present study are important in several ways. Investigations of discrimination and harassment have nearly universally focused on individuals who are numerical and/or social power minorities. Christians in the USA are neither, broadly speaking, though the MST held in this sample. A substantial proportion of the sample did endorse the belief that Christians are a minority in the USA, and Christians in this sample reported a frequency of experiences of faith-based discrimination at only slightly lower rates than a sample of Latina/o college students reported experiences of racism in another study (Arbona and Jimenez 2014). Further, associations among variables that have been demonstrated in prior work with minority samples were replicated here. Perceived minority status was associated with both reported experiences of faith-based discrimination and with stress, as has been observed in numerous samples of minority individuals and corresponding assessments of minority status and discrimination, prejudice, or victimization, including samples of sexual orientation minority men and women and Arab American adolescents (Ahmed et al. 2011; Fingerhut et al. 2010; Michaels et al. 2016; Waldo 1999). Perceived experiences of faith-based discrimination were related to stress and served as a mediator between minority status and stress, as has been observed in numerous samples of minority individuals, including sexual orientation minority women and Latina/o persons (Lehavot and Simoni 2011; Torres et al. 2012). Finally, identity integration moderated the relationship between experiences of faith-based discrimination and stress. Such a moderation was hypothesized in some minority stress theory research, though it was not well-supported (Ragins and Cornwell 2001; Velez et al. 2013). However, few studies have directly assessed this moderation hypothesis, and the present study did find support for integrating identity management strategies moderating the relationship between perceived experiences of faith-based discrimination and stress, such that at higher levels of perceived experiences of faith-based discrimination, integrating identity management (i.e., being vocal about one’s faith) was positively associated with stress.

This finding lends credence to work that suggests that perception of oppression, rather than objective events, forms the nexus of minority stress processes (Carr and Friedman 2005; Kessler et al. 1999; Pascoe and Smart Richman 2009). Extensions of this work may examine similar processes as they pertain to other specific health-related variables that have been supported in other samples using MST, and in other socially/numerically dominant groups such as White Americans or heterosexuals. Indeed, contemporary authors have noted a growing sense of alienation among individuals in majority groups (Taub 2016). To further the understanding of links between stress and health, social justice efforts, and efforts better understand experiences of clients with majority identities, is important to understand how such a sense of oppression or alienation may contribute to or exacerbate stress and intergroup conflicts. Methods advocated to make individuals aware of majority status or privilege largely focus on attempting to convince majority individuals of their social power relative to other groups (Case 2007; Case et al. 2014). However, such efforts are likely to be unsuccessful at personal and social levels insomuch as they rely on a manifestation of descriptive norms (i.e., by attempting to appeal to what are considered to be objective markers of oppression or privilege) and may also be seen as negatively valenced and thus threatening to one’s identity (Cialdini et al. 2006). Such attempts at persuasion may elicit negative responses, including denial of one’s own privileges or comparing oneself to others in terms of personal histories of oppression or stigma. Rather than adopt such a potentially oppositional model, the present study suggests it may be useful to first acknowledge the sense that many individuals in majority cultures have that they, too, are stigmatized or oppressed by others.

The present study also has numerous implications for future research. Application of MST in terms of perceived minority status may be a potential means by which intergroup attitudes may be understood and may facilitate the integration of MST, perceived minority status, and social psychological research on intergroup conflict. For example, such work may apply perceived minority status and aspects of MST to understanding attitudes toward immigrants, religious minority populations, women, sexual orientation minorities, or others. Such work may be fruitful ground for novel measurement and instrumentalization research, theory-driven research, intervention research, and advocacy research. Additionally, this project is among the first to respond to calls for research on broader ranges of ideological diversity within organized psychology such as understudied politically and socially conservative groups (Duarte et al. 2015). Rather than propagating assumptions about members of conservative groups (i.e., some Christians) via only positioning them as enactors of discrimination in psychological research, understanding that these groups may see themselves as targets of discrimination can lend a more nuanced look at intergroup relations and conflicts (Brandt et al. 2014; Chambers et al. 2013).

The implications of this study must be interpreted in light of its limitations. First, we used cross-sectional data and causality cannot be inferred. Further longitudinal and experimental work in this area is needed to better elucidate the relationships among these variables. Second, the data were limited to those with internet access; data collection from churches or from more broad community samples is needed to replicate these findings. Third, we used measures adapted from other investigations of minority stress. It was not our goal in this project to undertake measurement development, but rather to broadly assess constructs parallel to those typically assessed in MST research as an initial approach to this research area. Future work may undertake the construction of assessments of perception of minority identity, perceived experiences of discrimination, and identity management that pertain to Christians or other numerical/sociopolitical majority groups. This study appears to support the basic tenets of MST among Christians, but it is possible that Christians or other majority groups experience unique manifestations of prejudice/discrimination or identity management not captured in prior operationalizations of those constructs. Fourth, our sampling method relied on convenience sampling of individuals involved in online communities for their faith groups. This strategy resulted in a sample that was somewhat disproportionate with regard to the population of the USA; specifically, we had more individuals who identified as Mormon and fewer who identified as Baptist than would be desired in a representative US sample. In addition, this sampling method resulted in collection of data from persons for whom religious identity is sufficiently salient that they join and regularly view internet forums for persons of their faith group. Additional research may explore these relationships among more generalizable samples.

Fifth, it is important to note that Christians are not a homogenous religious group and experiences of discrimination may be experienced differently for those who are more devout, and/or from less common denominations, and/or from areas of the country where evangelical Christianity is less common (i.e., diverse urban centers). Finally, in this initial and novel investigation we sample with the intention to undertake complex analyses of multiple forms of diversity that may have impacted minority identification within an intersectional context. For example, non-heterosexual individuals or persons whose racial/ethnic background is not one in which Christianity is a dominant religion, and who identify as Christian, may face greater experiences of faith-based discrimination from within their own communities. Following this foundational study, additional work on populations such as these may be useful to fully understanding how perception of minority status may affect mental health and well-being, especially for persons with multiple minority statuses.

The present investigation found support for MST within a majority (US Christian) sample. Within this sample, the sets of relations posited by MST held, insomuch as some of those sampled perceived themselves to be members of a minority. Future studies may continue to explore MST among majority populations, and it may be especially beneficial to assess how perceptions of minority status among dominant group members may influence intergroup relations with members of groups with less social power.

Footnotes

Conflicts of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical Approval The present study involves the use of human participants and was approved by the Texas Tech Institutional Review Board, IRB2016-524.

Informed Consent All participants viewed an informed consent page and consented to participation in the study.

References

  1. Ahmed SR, Kia-Keating M, & Tsai KH (2011). A structural model of racial discrimination, acculturative stress, and cultural resources among Arab American adolescents. American Journal of Community Psychology, 48(3–4), 181–192. 10.1007/s10464-011-9424-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Allen JL (2016). The global war on Christians: dispatches from the front lines of anti-Christian persecution. New York: Image. [Google Scholar]
  3. Antony MM, Bieling PJ, Cox BJ, Enns MW, & Swinson RP (1998). Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychological Assessment, 10, 176–181. [Google Scholar]
  4. Arbona C, & Jimenez C (2014). Minority stress, ethnic identity, and depression among Latino/a college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 61(1), 162–168. 10.1037/a0034914. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Baams L, Grossman AH, & Russell ST (2015). Minority stress and mechanisms of risk for depression and suicidal ideation among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. Developmental Psychology, 51, 688–696. 10.1037/a0038994. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Boucher K, & Kucinskas J (2016). “Too smart to be religious?” Discreet seeking amidst religious stigma at an elite college. Social Inclusion, 4, 40–51. 10.17645/si.v4i2.491. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Brandt MJ, Reyna C, Chambers JR, Crawford JT, & Wetherell G (2014). The ideological-conflict hypothesis: Intolerance among both liberals and conservatives. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 27–34. [Google Scholar]
  8. Brewster ME, Sandil R, DeBlaere C, Breslow A, & Eklund A (2017). “Do you even lift, bro?” Objectification, minority stress, and body image concerns for sexual minority men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity. 10.1037/men0000043. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Button SB (2014). Identity management strategies utilized by lesbian and gay employees: A quantitative investigation. Group and Organization Management, 29, 470–494. 10.1177/1059601103257417. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Carr D, & Friedman MA (2005). Is obesity stigmatizing? Body weight, perceived discrimination, and psychological well-being in the United States. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 46, 244–259. 10.1177/002214650504600303. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Case KA (2007). Raising White privilege awareness and reducing racial prejudice: Assessing diversity course effectiveness. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 231–235. 10.1080/00986280701700250. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Case KA, Hensley R, & Anderson A (2014). Reflecting on heterosexual and male privilege: Interventions to raise awareness. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 722–740. 10.1111/josi.12088. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Cha T (2016). The return of Jacksonianism: The international implications of the Trump phenomenon. The Washington Quarterly, 39, 83–97. 10.1080/0163660X.2016.1261562. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Chambers JR, Schlenker BR, & Collisson B (2013). Ideology and prejudice: The role of value conflicts. Psychological Sciences, 24, 140–149. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Cialdini RB, Demaine LJ, Sagarin BJ, Barrett DW, Rhoads K, & Winter PL (2006). Managing social norms for persuasive impact. Social Influence, 1, 3–15. 10.1080/15534510500181459. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Crawford JR, & Henry JD (2003). The Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS): Normative data and latent structure in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 42, 111–131. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Duarte JL, Crawford JT, Haidt J, Jussim L, & Tetlock PE (2015). Political diversity will improve social psycholgical sciences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 38, 1–58. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang A-G, & Buchner A (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. 10.3758/BF03193146. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Fingerhut AW, Peplau LA, & Gable SL (2010). Identity, minority stress and psychological well-being among gay men and lesbians. Psychology & Sexuality, 1, 101–114. 10.1080/19419899.2010.484592. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Fischer D, Bellinger LB, Horn SS, & Sullivan SL (2016). Advocacy to support gender identity development in schools in the face of organized backlash. In Russell ST & Horn SS (Eds.), Sexual orientation, gender identity, and schooling: The nexus of research, practice, and policy (pp. 219–237). New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  21. Frost DM, & Meyer IH (2009). Internalized homophobia and relationship quality among lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56, 97–109. 10.1037/a0012844. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Gattis MN, & Larson A (2016). Perceived racial, sexual identity, and homeless status-related discrimination among Black adolescents and young adults experiencing homelessness: Relations with depressive symptoms and suicidality. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 86, 79–90. 10.1037/ort0000096. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Hayes AF (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76, 408–420. 10.1080/03637750903310360. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Hayes AF (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf . [Google Scholar]
  25. Hendricks ML, & Testa RJ (2012). A conceptual framework for clinical work with transgender and gender nonconforming clients: An adaptation of the Minority Stress Model. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 43, 460–467. 10.1037/a0029597. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Herek GM, & Garnets LD (2007). Sexual orientation and mental health. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 3, 353–375. 10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.3.022806.091510. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Hyers LL, & Hyers C (2008). Everyday discrimination experienced by conservative Christians at the secular university. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 8, 113–137. [Google Scholar]
  28. Kessler RC, Mickelson KD, & Williams DR (1999). The prevalence, distribution, and mental health correlates of perceived discrimination in the United States. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 40, 208–230. 10.2307/2676349. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Koskinen M, Elovainio M, Raaska H, Sinkkonen J, Matomäki J, & Lapinleimu H (2015). Perceived racial/ethnic discrimination and psychological outcomes among adult international adoptees in Finland: Moderating effects of social support and sense of coherence. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 85, 550–564. 10.1037/ort0000099. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Lehavot K, & Simoni JM (2011). The impact of minority stress on mental health and substance use among sexual minority women. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79, 159–170. 10.1037/a0022839. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Lovibond SH, & Lovibond PF (1995). Manual for the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (2nd ed.). Sydney: Psychology Foundation. [Google Scholar]
  32. Mendoza-Denton R, Downey G, Purdie VJ, Davis A, & Pietrzak J (2002). Sensitivity to status-based rejection: Implications for African American students’ college experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 896–918. 10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.896. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Meyer IH (1995). Minority stress and mental health in gay men. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 36, 38–56. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Meyer IH (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 674–697. 10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.674. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Michaels MS, Parent MC, & Torrey CL (2016). A minority stress model for suicidal ideation in gay men. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 46(1), 23–34. 10.1111/sltb.12169. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Morone J (2015). Holier than thou: Politics and the pulpit in America. Foreign Affairs, 94, 156–162. [Google Scholar]
  37. Norton PJ (2007). Depression Anxiety and Stress Scales (DASS-21): Psychometric analysis across four racial groups. Anxiety Stress and Coping, 20, 253–265. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Pascoe EA, & Smart Richman L (2009). Perceived discrimination and health: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 531–554. 10.1037/a0016059. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Pew Research Center. (2015). America’s changing religious landscape. Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/files/2015/05/RLS-08-26-full-report.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  40. Ragins BR, & Cornwell JM (2001). Pink triangles: Antecedents and consequences of perceived workplace discrimination against gay and lesbian employees. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(6), 1244–1261. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Rosik CH, & Smith LL (2009). Perceptions of religiously based discrimination among Christian students in secular and Christian university settings. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 1, 207–217. [Google Scholar]
  42. Rosik CH, Teraoka NK, & Moretto JD (2016). Religiously-based prejudice and self-censorship: Perceptions and experiences among Christian therapists and educators. Journal of Psychology & Christianity, 35, 52–67. [Google Scholar]
  43. Sinclair SJ, Siefert CJ, Slavin-Mulford JM, Stein MB, Renna M, & Blais MA (2012). Psychometric evaluation and normative data for the depression, anxiety, and stress scales-21 (DASS-21) in a nonclinical sample of U.S. adults. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 35(3), 259–279. 10.1177/0163278711424282. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Smedley BD, Myers HF, & Harrell SP (1993). Minority-status stresses and the college adjustment of ethnic minority freshmen. Journal of Higher Education, 64(4), 434–452. [Google Scholar]
  45. Taub A (2016). Behind 2016’s turmoil, a crisis of white identity. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/02/world/americas/brexit-donald-trump-whites.html. [Google Scholar]
  46. Torres L, Driscoll MW, & Voell M (2012). Discrimination, acculturation, acculturative stress, and Latino psychological distress: A moderated mediational model. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 18, 17–25. 10.1037/a0026710. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Velez BL, Moradi B, & Brewster ME (2013). Testing the tenets of minority stress theory in workplace contexts. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60(4), 532–542. 10.1037/a0033346. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Waldo CR (1999). Working in a majority context: A structural model of heterosexism as minority stress in the workplace. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46(2), 218–232. 10.1037/0022-0167.46.2.218. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Williams T, Connolly J, Pepler D, & Craig W (2005). Peer victimization, social support, and psychosocial adjustment of sexual minority adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34, 471–482. 10.1007/s10964-005-7264-x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. Woodford MR, Han Y, Craig S, Lim C, & Matney MM (2014). Discrimination and mental health among sexual minority college students: The type and form of discrimination does matter. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health, 18(2), 142–163. 10.1080/19359705.2013.833882. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  51. Yancey G (2015). Hostile environment: Understanding and responding to anti-Christian bias. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. [Google Scholar]
  52. Yancey G, & Williamson DA (2014). So many Christians, so few lions: Is there Christianophobia in the United States?. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. [Google Scholar]
  53. Ysseldyk R, Matheson K, & Anisman H (2010). Religiosity as identity: Toward an understanding of religion from a social identity perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Review: An Official Journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc, 14, 60–71. 10.1177/1088868309349693. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES