Racial Microaggressions and Anti-Racism: A Review of the Literature with Implications for School-Based Interventions and School Psychologists

Abstract

Many racial-ethnic minoritized individuals are repeatedly exposed to subtle actions reflecting racial slights, termed racial microaggressions (RMAs), which are associated with adjustment problems in early adult and adult populations. Early adolescence represents a unique developmental period when minoritized youth begin their racial-ethnic identity exploration and are subjected to stereotypes and prejudice, thereby making them vulnerable to RMAs. Based upon the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist, a systematic literature search, screening and review of RMA literature focusing on high schoolers and younger youth was conducted and yielded 54 publications. This paper reviewed the publications and identified gaps in the field such as the need for systematic research on early adolescents including the frequency and severity of RMAs and the important contributions of peers, parents and teachers for RMA victims, and the need for more evidence-based programming for middle schoolers. Findings suggest that developing school-based microaggression anti-racism programs is clearly needed for minoritized and White youth.

Many racial-ethnic minoritized (hereafter minoritized) students face substantial discriminatory behaviors at school. In fact, overt racial discrimination (e.g., intentional negative treatment due to one’s minoritized status) has been recognized as a major social trauma that Black youth often face (e.g., Anderson et al., 2015). Further, Umaña-Taylor and Hill (2020) reviewed a number of studies related to racial-ethnic discrimination and found that perceived discrimination occurred across many racial-ethnic groups (e.g., Asian, Black, Latinx, Native American Indian¹) across different geographic areas, and that it increased in childhood, with especially high rates during adolescence. These explicit manifestations of racism are associated with a range of physical and social-emotional adjustment difficulties, mental health challenges, and academic declines (e.g., Wang & Atwal, 2015).

At the same time, there has been growing recognition over the past several decades that individuals from minoritized groups frequently encounter more subtle and pernicious expressions of racism on an ongoing basis, termed racial microaggressions (RMAs). First detailed by Psychiatrist Chester Pierce in the 1970s (Pierce, 1970), RMAs were considered subtle conscious or unconscious humiliations that members of a dominant group repeatedly direct towards more marginalized individuals of color which can contribute to decreased confidence, happiness, and mental health (Pierce, 1995). Currently, most modern scholars define RMAs as “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, and environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory or negative racial slights and insults, directed toward racial and ethnic minorities” (Sue et al., 2007). These actions, which are often tactless and disparaging, serve as a disturbing and constant reminder of one’s minority status (Carroll, 1998; Sue, 2010), and can create a hostile school environment that is not inclusive of and responsive to minoritized individuals (Kohli et al., 2018). Research has demonstrated that RMAs are harmful to young adults and adult victims and that they are strongly associated with negative outcomes including internalizing and externalizing symptoms, and high levels of stress and physical problems (Lui & Quezada, 2019). At the same time, it is clear that RMAs during early adolescence have not been adequately addressed (Steketee et al., 2021), despite the impact of these issues on one’s ability to live a happy and healthy life (Lui & Quezada, 2019). Notably, the experience of overt racism and discrimination appears to be exacerbated for youth’s school achievement and academic self-confidence when carried out in schools (Benner & Graham, 2013; Gale & Dorsey, 2020). As such, it is critical for researchers to study RMAs during early adolescence, particularly in school settings, when minoritized youth begin exploring racial-ethnic identity and are often subjected to stereotypes and prejudice (Brown & Bigler, 2005).

The impact of overt and covert racism was likely aggravated by COVID-19 and the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. For instance, the dual pandemic not only increased systemic disparities for minoritized groups overall, but also had a damaging impact on the health of minoritized youth’s school and social lives (e.g., Crutchfield et al., 2020). While it’s hard to know the ultimate effect, more research is needed to follow at-risk youth longitudinally to better understand how the learning and social needs of these minoritized youth were impacted.

For the purposes of this paper, we define racism as “the beliefs, attitudes, institutional arrangements, and acts that tend to denigrate individuals or groups because of phenotypic characteristics or group affiliation” (Hermosura et al., 2018), and we define anti-racism as “forms of thought and/or practice that seek to confront, eradicate and/or ameliorate racism” (Bonnet, 2000). The conceptualization of racism is generally considered to comprise the two broad categories of prejudice and discrimination (Williams, 2020). Prejudice entails irrational or unjustifiable negative attitudes toward people from marginalized groups (Fiske et al., 2010). It is a primary determinant of discrimination (e.g., Williams, 2020), which refers to differential treatment of people because of their marginalized group status and may be present in both overt and covert forms (e.g., Lui & Quezada, 2019). We refer to covert discrimination (behavioral manifestations of prejudice) toward minoritized people as RMAs. It is also important to recognize how RMAs are related to racial macroaggressions, which are conceptualized as the ideological foundation that justifies and perpetuates systemic racism (Huber & Solόrzano, 2015) and are mainly manifested in the broader policies, practices, and structures within our society (Sue et al., 2019). Examples include the absence of representation of minoritized groups in media, and denial of inequitable educational policies and practices (e.g., Compton-Lilly, 2020). Unlike RMAs that arise interpersonally and have a more limited impact on an individual level, racial macroaggressions arise on a systemic level and impact entire groups of people (e.g., Sue et al., 2019).

In the current paper, we reviewed the literature to identify gaps that are crucial to address, to better understand interpersonal-level RMAs, and to outline vital factors for RMA knowledge and skill-building programming among youth. Specifically, our first research question was: What are the deleterious effects of RMAs when experienced during adolescence? In other words, what negative outcomes are experienced by victims of RMAs? Our second question was: What role do parents, peers, and teachers play in the racial-ethnic socialization process and what impact does this have on youth RMAs? Finally, our third question was: What can we learn from racial prejudice interventions focused upon overt racism that can be applied to the burgeoning area of youth RMAs and related interventions? Based upon our review, we will outline implications for future youth RMA research and practice related to intervention programming.

Method

Search Strategy

Based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, we conducted a literature search, screening, and review using the following procedures. The original literature search included all publications through 2021 in PsycINFO, ERIC, PubMed, JSTOR, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Sociological Abstracts, using the terms adoles* or youth or child* combined with racial/ethnic microaggression*. The search included studies published in English through August 2021 and was conducted separately in each of the above targeted databases. As shown in the PRISMA flow diagram in Figure 1, this search resulted in 1,352 articles in peer-reviewed journals, book chapters, reports, and theses/dissertations. After taking into account duplication and accessibility of records, abstracts were screened for 1,114 publications.

Figure 1:

PRISMA Flowchart Summarizing Processes Used in Literature Review of RMAs

Inclusion Criteria and Quality Appraisal

Two members of the research team reviewed the 1,114 abstracts to identify those meeting the following criteria: a) used racial/ethnic microaggressions as a main construct², and b) included children or adolescents (i.e., high schoolers and younger), and c) were theoretically and/or empirically based. In total, 54 publications met the inclusion criteria and were then reviewed following Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal guidelines (2022) and Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (Hong et al., 2018).

Coding and Analysis

For each included study, the research team coded qualitative and numeric information on several aspects including the first author and year of publication, nature of article (i.e., theory, data-driven), methods (i.e., qualitative, quantitative), sample characteristics (i.e., N, age group, percentage of females, race-ethnicity), RMA informants and assessments (e.g., youth interview, parent interview, youth self-report, youth focus group), context/setting (i.e., school, community), primary construct, primary contribution, RMA definition used (i.e., Pierce’s, Sue et al’s, Solorzano et al’s), contextual factors and influence upon RMAs (i.e., teacher and/other school staff as the perpetrator, parental racial-ethnic socialization practices; parental support, teacher/school support), and intersectionality. Another author read and coded these 54 publications and a random sample of the studies (20%) was selected and double coded by a third author; the inter-rater agreement for all studies was 96%. Any discrepancies between the two coders were resolved through discussion after which a total agreement was achieved.

Results

A summary of all 54 publications is presented in Supplementary Table 1³. Organizing and summarizing the published literature not only allowed our team to identify specific themes relating to RMAs in children and adolescents, but also helped us evaluate gaps in this body of research. Some of the resulting themes which are illustrated in Supplementary Table 1 and presented below, include that there is clearly a need for more systematic research for early adolescents in order to obtain an in-depth understanding of the prevalence of RMAs and contextual factors (i.e., parents, teachers, and other school staff) and how these contextual factors may influence severity and impact of the RMAs on youth and their classroom or school settings.

Discussion

The Importance of Identifying and Addressing RMAs During Adolescence

Despite the call for more evidence on the effects of RMAs on minoritized groups (e.g., Lui & Quezada, 2019; Williams, 2020), research has been largely limited to early adult and adult populations (e.g., Hermosura et al., 2018; Huynh et al., 2017) with a dearth of studies on understanding this phenomenon among youth (e.g., Huynh, 2012; Kohli et al., 2018). Among the few available studies (three as reviewed in Supplementary Table 1), there is initial evidence suggesting that minoritized high schoolers who are victims of RMAs are likely to internalize racial biases, which in turn negatively affect their psychological and physiological well-being (Ayala, 2019; Donaldson, 2017; Huynh & Gillen-O’Neel, 2016). Other research with high school students suggested that both frequency of and reactivity to RMAs are important to consider when trying to understand its impact on heightened depressive and somatic symptoms (Huynh, 2012), and sleep problems (Huynh & Gillen-O’Neel, 2016) among adolescents of different racial and ethnic backgrounds. This argument is consistent with one longitudinal study which found that although not termed as RMAs, “subtle racial-ethnic discrimination” (e.g., other students treat you like you’re NOT as smart because of your race or ethnicity) was associated with suicidal ideation even after controlling for experiences of overt discrimination (Madubata et al., 2019).

Even less scholarship has examined RMAs among early adolescents and this line of research is critically needed because the middle school years, in particular, mark the pivotal intersection of the beginning of racial-ethnic identity exploration and a heightened awareness of stereotypes and prejudice among minoritized youth (e.g., Umaña-Taylor & Guimond, 2010; Wang et al., 2020). This is supported by our literature review findings which indicate that very few studies were primarily conducted with middle schoolers (five out of 54 studies).

An additional type of covert racial discrimination in this age group was documented in Kohli and colleagues’ qualitative studies, which have examined minoritized youth’s experiences of race-and ethnicity-based compliments and jokes in middle school settings (Kohli & Solorzano, 2012; Kohli et al., 2018).⁴ As shown in the relevant literature in this review (three out of 54; e.g., Marrun, 2017; Zalaznick, 2019), those who were targets of these comments (e.g., “you’re not ghetto”, “you are not as loud as other Black people I know”) tend to accept the racial stereotyping messages and to subconsciously or consciously adapt to the ideologies of White superiority behind the messages, suggesting that the experiences of race-and ethnicity-based humor may impact not only minoritized youths’ physical and mental health, but also the formation of their racial-ethnic identity. These findings were in line with research conducted in adult populations which indicates that from the lens of minoritized individuals, race- and ethnicity-based compliments and jokes communicate denigrating, discriminatory messages about one’s racial and/or ethnic group membership and are likely to take a toll on one’s psychological well-being (e.g., Heard-Garris et al., 2018). Further, more nuanced research is needed to examine how repeated exposure to race-and ethnicity-based compliments or jokes may contribute to a hostile school racial climate that tolerates and normalizes these racially charged communications (Call-Cummings & Martinez, 2017; Kohli et al., 2017).

Examining RMAs: Type and Impact

As described in the classic work of Sue and colleagues (2007), there are three subcategories of microaggressions, including microinsults, microinvalidations, and microassaults. Microinsults are often unconscious behaviors or verbal remarks that “convey rudeness, insensitivity and demean a person’s racial heritage or identity” (Sue et al., 2007). An example of a microinsult would be to express surprise that an individual is so articulate given their minoritized background. Microinvalidations are the often-unconscious verbal comments or behaviors “that exclude, negate, or nullify the psychological thoughts, feelings, or experiential reality of a person of color” (Sue et al., 2007). An example of a microinvalidation would be denying that another could have acted in a racially insensitive manner because they are a good person and have friends from minoritized backgrounds. In contrast, microassaults are often conscious and are “explicit racial derogations characterized primarily by a violent verbal or nonverbal attack meant to hurt the intended victim through name-calling, avoidant behavior or purposeful discriminatory actions” (Sue et al., 2007). Although microassaults appear to share some similarities to overt racism, microinsults and microinvalidations are more subtle behaviors and verbalizations that are often perpetuated by those of non-minoritized backgrounds without recognition of how they may impact minoritized group members who are repeatedly exposed to these disrespectful and denigrating comments and behaviors. Despite the classifications of the types of RMAs in the literature, it remains largely unknown whether and if so, to what extent, one type of microaggression is more detrimental to adjustment outcomes in victims than the other types, and this line of research has been explored only in early adult and adult populations (Lui & Quezada, 2019). As shown in Supplementary Table 1, the majority of the reviewed publications (44 out of 54) used Sue et al. (2007)’s conceptualization. However, three fourth of those publications did not examine RMAs by type (i.e., microassaults, microinsults, microinvalidations). Among the remaining 11 studies, eight revealed the verbal and physical manifestations of racial microinsults and/or microinvalidations, respectively (e.g., Allen, 2013; Steketee et al., 2021). In addition, Zhang and colleagues (2019) indicated more accounts of racial microinvalidations and microinsults in a sample of Asian adoptees in the age range of six to nine, while Donaldson (2017) found that in a sample of African American youth, more incidents of racial microinsults were reported than of microinvalidations. These mixed findings are likely attributable to a lack of relevant studies in samples with similar demographic characteristics (e.g., age, race, and ethnicity) which would allow a more comprehensive understanding of possible differences in minoritized youth’s experience and awareness of microinvalidations and microinsults. In another sample of older African American higher schoolers and college students, racial microinsults but not racial microinvalidations were significantly and positively associated with depressive symptoms. Given limited studies differentiating the impact of racial microinsults and microinvalidations, more research is needed, similar to within early adult and adult populations Lui and Quezada (2019).

Regardless of type, adult-based research has demonstrated that RMAs are enormously detrimental to victims with RMAs being related to negative outcomes including a range of internalizing and externalizing behaviors, and high levels of physical symptoms and stress (Lui & Quezada, 2019). Even more striking are studies demonstrating the deleterious effects of RMAs even after controlling for the effects of overt racism (e.g., Madubata et al., 2019). For instance, research has demonstrated that regularly experiencing RMAs significantly contributes to trauma, above, and beyond, general ethnic discrimination over one’s entire lifespan (Williams, 2020). The fact that the more subtle manifestations of racism are meaningful contributors to the model even after accounting for overt lifetime experiences of discrimination makes it clear that RMAs have a powerful, negative effect in their own right. Further, daily experiences of RMAs have been shown to have a greater impact on self-esteem than the more overt forms of racism and discrimination (Sue et al., 2007). In sum, it is clear that RMAs are quite harmful and need to be addressed in a manner that recognizes the insidious nature of the behaviors, including how to help identify and support early adolescent victims of this mistreatment throughout their lifetime.

Moreover, it should be noted that upon reviewing the existing literature on adolescents, 20 out of 54 studies reviewed in Supplementary Table 1 measured RMAs using youth self-reports whereas 24 out of 54 used youth and/or adult one-on-one interviews and/or focus groups. These two main methods complement each other: the former is typically used to assess the frequency and perceived severity of personal experiences of RMAs by asking youth to respond to items generated based on relevant manifestations of RMAs derived from prior research among adults (e.g., Nadal, 2011; Sue et al., 2007). In contrast, the latter captures individual participant voices (not only from youth themselves but also parents) to gain a deeper perspective about their lived, racialized experiences that may not be fully captured in the existing RMA surveys (e.g., Black girls’ unique experiences of RMAs relating to their hair, Essien & Wood, 2021; a generalized ignorance and/or invalidation of historical trauma that Native American youth experienced, Johnston-Goodstar & Roholt, 2017). Moreover, interview and focus group methods allow researchers to better understand how youth make sense of their RMA experiences within and across multiple contexts (e.g., school, home, community), above and beyond the frequency of occurrence which is often obtained from self-report methods. A mixed method approach that uses quantitative and qualitative data allows researchers to obtain a thorough understanding of the perceived prevalence of RMAs and the associations between the prevalence and the deleterious effects of RMAs among youth.

Contextual Factors and Influence Upon RMAs

The Role of Parents in the Context of Racial-Ethnic Socialization With Their Children

During the critical developmental period of early adolescence, parents are an important influence in their child’s racial-ethnic socialization. Parental racial-ethnic socialization is defined as “the mechanisms through which parents transmit information, values, and perspectives about ethnicity and race to their children” (Hughes et al., 2006, p. 747). This line of research has been largely conducted with parents of minoritized backgrounds as they try to assist their youth in making meaning of racial-ethnic membership, shape beliefs about in-and out-group members, and foster resilience in the face of racism and positive development (Huguley et al., 2019). Four principal dimensions of racial-ethnic socialization have been identified and examined (e.g., See Simon, 2021; Wang et al., 2020 for review), including: (a) cultural socialization, in which messages of cultural pride are transmitted by engaging youth in cultural tradition and history learning; (b) preparation for bias, which involves discussing with minoritized youth the possibilities of racial discrimination and strategies in navigating racist encounters; (c) promotion of mistrust, which warns minoritized youth to be cautious, distrustful, and avoidant during inter-racial interactions; and (d) egalitarianism, which emphasizes the equality and shared similarities of all individuals. Among these practices, minoritized parents tend to use cultural socialization most often (Juang et al., 2018; Simon, 2021), and this dimension of racial-ethnic socialization has the strongest and most consistent positive associations with youth’s adjustment in academic, social, and psychological domains. The impact of the other three practices remains inconclusive (see Huguley et al., 2019).

Among the reviewed publications in the present study, seven out of 54 studies examined the contributions of parent racial-ethnic socialization, specifically, cultural socialization and preparation for bias, to alleviating the impact of RMAs on minoritized youth (Allen, 2010, 2013; Richardson, 2015) and promoting their positive coping with RMAs (Id-Deen, 2020; Norman, 2019), while two studies did not endorse this positive role of parent socialization (Bozo et al., 2018; Cunningham, 2012). On the other hand, although not explicitly tapping parental racial-ethnic socialization, there were four studies demonstrating the importance of parental support for minoritized youth who were targets of RMAs (Berger et al., 2020; Cavanaugh, 2015; Donaldson, 2017; Rodriguez-Operana, 2017). Taken together, these findings suggest that more research is needed to validate existing literature and examine the contributions of the two much less studied dimensions of parental racial-ethnic socialization, promotion of mistrust and egalitarianism.

Researchers have indicated that the impact of parental racial-ethnic socialization on minoritized youth’s adjustment varies as a function of youth’s individual characteristics such as their developmental stage and the race-ethnicity of the target child (See Wang et al., 2020). It should be noted that among the seven studies that examined parental racial-ethnic socialization in the context of RMAs, only two sampled elementary and middle school students (Id-Deen, 2020; Norman, 2019). Clearly, more research among early adolescents (middle schoolers) is greatly needed to validate findings from the two existing studies. Further, little research has examined how parental characteristics may shape parent-child dynamics in addition to parental behaviors (where parental racial-ethnic socialization is categorized) and may worsen or alleviate the harm of racial discrimination (overt or covert such as RMAs) on early adolescent adjustment outcomes. This is greatly needed because, in the context of RMAs, parent-child dynamics are shaped by not only parent ethnic-racial socialization, but also individual parental characteristics. Among the studies included in the review, there were only four that examined parents’ perspectives of RMAs, which indicated the importance of parents’ own discriminatory experiences in recognizing their child’s RMAs, especially among parents of minoritized backgrounds (e.g., Compton-Lilly, 2020). Also, the contribution of parental racial-ethnic socialization appears to be particularly pronounced in middle school compared to elementary and high school and among Black and Latinx youth (Huguley et al. 2019; Wang et al., 2020). However, these results support the belief that the middle school years are an extremely important developmental window for supporting youth with RMAs in the context of their own racial-ethnic identity maturation.

Finally, research examining parental racial-ethnic socialization among White adolescents is more limited, despite their role as potential perpetrators of overt and covert racial discrimination and as bystanders who can encourage, tolerate, and/or challenge racial inequality (Abaied & Perry, 2021). The few available studies found that the majority of White parents either did not have race-related discussions with their children (Abaied & Perry, 2021; Underhill, 2018) or focused on messages of color-blindness (Vittrup, 2018; Zucker & Patterson, 2018), which conceptually overlaps with the practice of egalitarianism. Although the motivations and content of racial discussions may differ between White and minoritized parents, White parents play a crucial role in shaping their youth’s understanding of overt and subtle racial discrimination. Thus, there is a need to expand research on parental racial-ethnic socialization among White adolescents to create a wholistic picture across groups of parental practices that may be linked to youth experiences of RMAs and to the relations between RMAs and developmental outcomes, which have not been examined in any of the 54 reviewed publications.

The Role of Teachers in the Context of Racial-Ethnic Socialization and RMAs

In addition to parents serving as critical racial socialization agents for their children, teachers can also play an important role in shaping minoritized children’s racial-ethnic identities, although this has been less frequently studied in the literature, as reflected in Supplementary Table 1 (only one study examined teachers’ narratives of school-based RMAs experienced by students; Johnston-Goodstar & Roholt, 2017). For instance, teachers in particular, and schools more generally, can formally and/or informally play a role in the racial-ethnic socialization process based upon their incorporation of a multi-cultural curriculum, integration of culturally relevant materials in classroom education, use of prejudice reduction interventions, and practice of engaging students in critical reading and discussions about the history of different minoritized groups (see Aldana & Byrd, 2015). In short, teachers can work to develop an environment in which they demonstrate an interest in, understanding for, and/or honor of the cultural background and practices of their diverse students. Within this context it will be easier for teachers to support minoritized youth in better understanding and processing race-and ethnicity-based stereotypes and more importantly, in recognizing how their own (teachers’) behaviors may be perceived and/or interpreted in a broader society that is grounded in structural racism. This important role of teachers (and other school adults) as a supportive, racial-ethnic socialization agent for minoritized youth when encountering RMAs has also been argued in seven out of the 54 studies included in the review. For example, Steketee and colleagues (2021) pointed out that teachers can model embracing a multicultural, culturally responsive approach in their classrooms, which may reduce RMA occurrences. Another study highlighted the importance of collaboration and cooperation between teachers and parents in contributing to the fostering of resilience for minoritized young targets of RMAs (Lee, 2018).

At the same time, subtle beliefs and actions from teachers also greatly impact the classroom racial-ethnic atmosphere (Sue et al., 2009). For instance, research has found that school staff may inadvertently reinforce racial inequities when treating youth of different racial or ethnic backgrounds differently (Kholi & Solorzano, 2012). Kholi and Solorzano (2012) found that many White teachers working with minoritized youth often mispronounce students’ names which subtly reinforces a White majority culture (e.g., that it is ok for a teacher not to learn a child’s name if it is not a typical American name). Research has also addressed teacher favoritism as a type of unintentional, subtle discrimination which can result in increased racial tensions between different ethnic groups with youth in some groups being bullied more frequently by others. In one study, the preferential treatment of Asian students by teachers and subsequent feelings of frustration by Latinx and Black students toward Asian students contributed to high levels of discrimination by Latinx and Black students toward their Asian peers (e.g., Rosenbloom & Way, 2004). Thus, it is clear that school staff such as teachers play a large role in shaping the racial-ethnic atmosphere in school classrooms, regardless of whether or not they are aware of the power of their actions. A large number of the reviewed publications (41 out of 54) have suggested that teachers and other school staff are possible perpetrators of school-based RMAs, as demonstrated in behaviors such as mispronouncing students’ names, making assumptions of deviance and unintelligence, and projecting hurtful stereotypes.

Given that discussions of racism often evoke strong emotions in students as well as in teachers, the ways in which school staff handle these discussions play a determining role in either reinforcing a negatively-charged racial school environment or a more inclusive and accepting environment. Teachers tend to address racism reactively (Priest et al., 2016) and as a function of their own characteristics and comfort level. For instance, in one study, the extent to which teachers integrated important discussions about racism was dependent upon factors such as their own awareness of racism, their self-confidence in addressing racism, and how supported they perceived their school and community were in addressing anti-racist actions (Priest et al., 2016). As described in several of the reviewed studies (e.g., Darvin, 2018; Gadson & Lewis, 2021; Lee, 2018), school psychologists are in a unique position as they can serve as a valuable consultant and support to teachers, helping them to become more aware of how their own behaviors, actions, and attitudes play a large role in setting up and maintaining inclusive classrooms that elevate the diverse opinions of all children, especially those from minoritized backgrounds.

The Role of Teachers in Detecting RMAs and Peer Bullying

The fact that the majority of reviewed studies (41 out of 54) revealed teachers (and other school staff) as potential RMA perpetrators suggests that teachers and other school staff should regularly self-assess for biases in order to detect subtle and overt expressions of racial discrimination in the classroom, which would promote teachers’ role being a positive racial-ethnic socialization agent for minoritized youth as explicitly argued in seven out of the 54 studies. Some researchers have suggested that RMAs should be viewed within the broader context of children’s social skills including the use of relationally aggressive behaviors and peer bullying (e.g., Wintner, 2017). Relational aggression is a type of aggression in which one harms another’s social standing or reputation through gossip and social exclusion (Crick & Grotpeter, 1995; Leff et al., 2015). Although the definition for constructs of aggression typically includes “intent to harm,” this is different from the definition for microaggressions, in which the focus is not on the intent to harm but rather on the “impact that the behavior has” on a victim or target. Regardless, several researchers have begun to investigate how knowledgeable teachers are about RMAs, and, what relation these behaviors may have to more traditional forms of aggression and bullying. A qualitative study with teachers recently suggested that teachers may not typically differentiate microaggressive behaviors from bullying (Burleigh & Wilson, 2021). Nevertheless, they believed that knowing how to identify and handle RMAs effectively would curb the escalation of these behaviors to ongoing aggression incidents. In this same study, teachers indicated an interest in receiving professional development specific to microaggressions so that they could proactively identify and address RMAs within the context of their own school’s discipline framework, thereby ensuring that RMAs do not lead to ongoing social challenges and peer bullying.

The Role of Peers in the Context of Racial-Ethnic Socialization

Relative to the roles of parents and teachers discussed above, there has been less research on ways that peers may shape RMA experiences for their minoritized classmates. A large number of the reviewed publications (38 out of 54) documented peers as one main source of RMA perpetration (school staff being the other source) in the school settings. Yet none of the reviewed studies examined the manifestations of peer interactions and their role in alleviating or worsening the impact of RMAs on minoritized youth, making this an important future direction.

Implications for Future Interventions

Prejudice-Reduction Interventions: Gaps in the Field

There have been several recent systematic reviews and position papers related to the impact of school-based prejudice-reduction interventions (e.g., Grapin et al., 2019; Paluck et al., 2021; Ülger et al., 2018). These reviews have found that first, theoretically grounded, prejudice-reduction interventions are often associated with positive impacts (small-to-moderate effects) on the racial attitudes of White youth (Beelmann & Heinemann, 2014; Ülger et al., 2018). In contrast, these interventions are not usually effective in reducing the harm of racial-ethnic prejudice on developmental outcomes among minoritized youth (see Grapin et al., 2019 for review). Second, it should be noted that most racial-ethnic prejudice interventions were conducted in early adult and adult samples and less than 3% were in middle school/early adolescence, which highlights the strong, and timely need for developing school-based programming that addresses not only overt, but also subtle, expressions of racial discriminations (Paluck et al., 2021). Third, the majority of prejudice reduction interventions focused upon changing an individual’s cognition or perception (93% according to Paluck et al., 2021), which yet failed to successfully translate into changes in discriminatory behaviors (Grapin et al., 2019).

Findings synthesized from the prejudice literature indicate that interventions related to racial-ethnic behavioral changes for school-age youth are sorely needed. More importantly, they can be used to guide the development of youth-based microaggression intervention efforts. These efforts may benefit from targeting the reduction of prejudice and microaggressive behaviors in White groups. Yet it is worthwhile to note that behavioral change interventions (e.g., RMA interventions) when successful may not maintain without concomitant changes in individuals’ cognitions. Also, when developing youth-based microaggression interventions, one needs to take into account the added burden and stress that many minoritized youth may be struggling with the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic and heightened sensitivity to the BLM movement. For instance, any programming that is developed needs to be implemented in a sensitive manner, providing space, safety, and additional resources for minoritized youth when needed. In addition, it is important that the focus on RMA programming does not place the burden for change on those of minoritized backgrounds.

School-Based Programming and Suggestions for Future Practice

Given that there have been no empirically-based RMA reduction programs for middle school youth based upon our literature review, we also explored whether more traditional school-based aggression and bullying prevention programming had been expanded to include concepts of RMAs. It appears that while some well-established programs may have recently begun incorporating anti-racism training, to the best of our knowledge there have not been any studies evaluating this programming. As such, this is a crucial area of future research, as RMAs are clearly an extremely important area to focus upon within school-based settings. For instance, as outlined previously, addressing RMAs for middle school students within school settings is needed because: (1) This represents a developmentally sensitive period of time in early adolescence when racial-ethnic identity exploration is occurring amidst a growing recognition of stereotypes and prejudices among minoritized youth (e.g., Wang et al., 2020); (2) The negative impact of RMAs upon minoritized middle schoolers is clear, as many begin to internalize the messages reinforced in the racial biases which impacts these students’ psychological and physical health (Huynh & Gillen-O’Neel, 2016); (3) Teachers and peers can unknowingly perpetuate racial tensions in the classroom if they are not sensitive to the traumas and systemic racism that many minoritized youth encounter on a frequent basis; and (4) Parents and teachers play a crucial role as the main socialization agents within the lives of most minoritized youth, which are promising factors (parental, teacher, whole school) that could be used to develop RMA interventions based on our review. For all of these reasons, addressing RMAs within school settings for middle school students is a crucial area of future programming.

Based upon our review of the literature we offer a number of suggestions for further research and practice, highlighting the critical role of school psychologists, teachers, and parents in this process. First, it is extremely important to help school staff become more aware of the daily experiences of RMAs among minoritized youth and the negative impact of these experiences on their overall well-being. In order to do this, it is recommended that school psychologists partner closely with teachers to remind them to be cognizant of any of their students who seem more withdrawn, less social, and/or have missed more classes than typical. Demonstrations of support and caring from teachers can help students who are struggling and help set up a more racially inclusive and responsive classroom climate (Steketee et al., 2021). One caveat to this suggestion, is that it relies upon school psychologists being well-versed in RMAs (e.g., attune to identifying incidents of RMAs and/or addressing them) and racial-ethnic socialization practices. Given that the school psychology field is largely composed of White individuals, this may mean that individual psychologists need insight and awareness as to whether they possess strengths in these areas, what additional coaching and support they may require, and/or whether outside support and trainers are needed to help them become more comfortable and skilled in providing culturally sensitive consultations to teachers.

Second, some research suggests that school-level reforms and interventions are needed to disaggregate school discipline and better recognize strategies that may feed into microaggression situations. In order to do this, school staff would need training on how to make decisions at vulnerable decision points (e.g., McIntosh et al., 2014); for instance, staff can be trained in using self-review procedures so that when they are facing challenging and quick judgements, they do not rely upon implicit biases that could lead to disproportionate discipline practices.

Third, it is critical to help school staff explore microintervention strategies and assist students who are targets of RMAs develop these strategies. Microinterventions are the everyday words or deeds, that communicate to targets of microaggressions “(a) validation of their experiential reality, (b) value as a person, (c) affirmation of their racial or group identity, (d) support and encouragement, and (e) reassurance that they are not alone” (Sue et al., 2019). One subtype of microintervention, racial microaffirmations (strategies that affirm each other’s dignity, integrity, and shared humanity), have been shown to buffer the negative impact of RMAs on minoritized early adults and adults (e.g., Huber et al., 2021; Rowe, 2008). In the daily interactions between school staff and students, these strategies and skills in utilizing them need to be learned, practices, and rehearsed.

Fourth, it is important that school staff become more aware of how their own racial and ethnic biases can be extremely important in cultivating a school climate in which youth can comfortably and safely discuss their concerns (Priest et al., 2016). This is supported in a recent study by Whaley (2018) showing that addressing school staff’s racial bias and promoting their cultural competence is important in increasing the internal and external validity of measuring stereotype threat surrounding minoritized youths and in reducing the achievement gap. For this to be successful, there needs to be openness at the school-wide level to explore these important constructs. For instance, principals and school district leaders need to endorse the importance of helping their staff become more aware of how their own background and life experiences may impact the way in which they see the world, teach, and interact with their students. This will be especially important for White teachers working with students from minoritized backgrounds. School staff will likely need professional development and/or coaching from school psychologists who have specialized training in this area, which would help teachers pay particular attention to how their words and actions may impact diverse groups of youth differently (e.g., Priest et al., 2016; Sue et al, 2009). For instance, race- and ethnicity-based compliments and jokes are typically framed as well-intentioned, positive expressions to evoke praise or laughter but they represent an example of RMAs that can be consistent with and reinforce systemic racism. Recent studies (e.g., Kohli et al., 2017) suggest that these comments are likely to have a deleterious impact on minorized youth’s well-being. This impact is likely to be worse when these comments are overlooked or even delivered by school staff, because they contribute to the build-up of racial tension in the classroom and race-related stress for minoritized students. Given that microaggressions focus on the impact of actions, as opposed to the intent, it is extremely important for teachers, with support and coaching from trained school psychologists and guidance counselors, to expand social-emotional learning to include more discussions on how the history of minoritized groups impacts the way in which they see and interpret the world, including their potential history of and/or ongoing racial traumas (Anderson & Stevenson, 2019).

Fifth, given the important role that parents play in the racial-ethnic socialization of their children (e.g., Hughes et al., 2006; Stevenson & Arrington, 2009), it is essential that programming be designed to integrate the voices of both parents as well as teachers. As previously reviewed, parents of minoritized youth are often well attuned to the racial traumas and stressors that their children have been through. Providing a forum for engaged parents to talk about their concerns with school psychologists can help bridge the gap that sometimes exists between parents and teachers around racially divisive issues. School psychologists can set up community forums for parents to express their concerns about their children’s racial traumas and stressors, and then work with teachers through professional development to help bridge gaps between home and school in this critical area. It is important to note that community forums for parents to express these types of issues can only be successful if trainings are based in a trauma-informed and culturally-sensitive manner (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2014). As such, it is critical that school psychologists helping to facilitate these sessions have the needed resources and professional development opportunities themselves in order to be most effective.

Sixth, the development of school-based microaggression anti-racism programs is badly needed, especially programming that impacts both minoritized and White youth. However, it is clear that programming will be most successful when firmly rooted in theory (Grapin et al., 2019). The use of a developmental-ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006) that has been extended into a social-ecological diathesis-stress framework to explain, in part, bullying behaviors (Swearer & Hymel, 2015) may be a strong paradigm for this work. The proposition is that the interaction between one’s biological vulnerabilities and stressful traumatic life events (e.g., aggression, racial discrimination) results in an increase in psychological and behavioral difficulties (Ferguson & Dyck, 2012). Further, the use of a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach (e.g., Arora et al., 2017; Israel et al., 2019), in which the voices of youth, parents, and community leaders are integrated with psychological theory and evidence-based techniques likely holds much promise for the development of programming. Programs developed through CBPR are responsive to the needs of the targeted community, viewed as meaningful, and more likely to be impactful and sustained (see Arora et al., 2017; Leff et al., 2010). In addition, creating programming in this manner helps to ensure that the programming is responsive to and meets the needs of all parties (Leff et al., 2010).

Seventh, a crucial unanswered question is whether school-based RMA programming should serve as an additional or complementary module for a well-established aggression and bullying prevention program or whether RMA programs should be self-contained. Regardless, once programming is developed, there will be a need for strong research designs to test the effectiveness of these interventions both on their own, and, when used in conjunction with ongoing aggression and bullying prevention programming. One important aspect of this work will be to decide what outcome metrics to use to determine program effectiveness. This is challenging given that measures of implicit bias, such as the Implicit Association Test (IAT), while potentially helpful to individuals in better understanding some of their own inherent biases, have not been found to be reliable, sensitive to change over time, or associated with behavioral change (e.g., Meissner et al., 2019). As such, we recommend that the development of RMA programming be accompanied by the development and use of culturally sensitive instruments for this work. Helping youth and teachers increase their self-awareness of and self-efficacy for handling RMA situations seems to be important outcome metrics.

Finally, there is a need for program development to address RMA prevention among diverse groups of youth. At present, most of the prejudice intervention work has focused upon and/or been more successful with White youth. It is important that programming address all youth and that relevant outcomes be examined for both minoritized and White youth. Again, the use of a CBPR type of approach to include the perspectives of both minoritized and White youth in the development of interventions is crucially needed.

Limitations

There were several considerations to highlight related to the current study. First, we synthesized publications that used the term “racial/ethnic microaggression*” yet acknowledge that some theorists have suggested other terms to better reflect the severe impact of this form of covert racial motivated behaviors on others (e.g., “harm-based account” in Freeman & Stewart, 2021; “racist abuse” in Kendi, 2019). Future research needs to continue exploring the best way to characterize this covert form of discriminatory behaviors and to put forth a robust conceptual groundwork for the field. Second, although intersectional microaggressions are known to cause additional stressors and traumas to targets of these behaviors based on the extant literature, the focus of the present study was on racial/ethnic microaggressions and as such, we did not discuss existing empirical studies or intervention research on intersectional microaggressions. Additional review that synthesizes research findings on intersectionality in racism is necessary.

Also, notably, there were a few shortcomings in the methodology of the included studies. First, all of the data-driven studies were cross-sectional which did not allow for conclusions of causality. Longitudinal research is urgently needed because it can help us better understand the impact and change pattern of RMAs on youth adjustment over time. Second, the included studies predominately regarded youth as an informant yet the importance of other informants cannot be neglected. One understudied area, both through quantitative and qualitative means, is whether there are similarities or discrepancies between teachers’, peers’, and parents’ perspectives of RMAs (one qualitative study has gathered information from youth, parents, and community partners, see Johnston-Goodstar & Roholt, 2017). Such information is particularly important in addressing the question of whether and how parents and teachers help minoritized youth cope with RMA experiences and the impact of these practices on youth. Although RMAs are personal and subjective experiences (e.g., how I interpret your behavior), identifying important discrepancies between these informants, if any, may reveal potential ways for enhancing awareness and effectiveness in addressing minoritized youth’s RMA experiences. Third, although a significant number of the studies (42 out of 54) specified peers and/or school staff as RMA perpetrators, researchers rarely tapped into whether and how the associations between RMAs and youth adjustment may differ by the source of RMA perpetration. Considering previous findings that school-based discrimination from teachers was more strongly related to school achievement than discrimination from peers (e.g., Benner & Graham, 2013), it is critical to account for the identity of the source of RMAs (e.g., same or other-ethnic peers, school staff) and its unique contribution when unpacking the consequences of RMAs for minoritized youth.

Conclusion

In summary, the role of school psychologists has been made clear through a number of recent statements (Grapin & Shriberg, 2020; Jimerson et al., 2021) including the School Psychology Unified Anti-Racism Statement and Call to Action (García-Vázquez et al., 2020), and more broadly through how Psychology has historically been a field contributing to long-standing systemic and structural racism (APA, 2021). From these statements, it is clear that school psychologists have an ethical responsibility to lead and/or actively participate in the promotion of social and racial justice activities that address the long-standing systemic inequities that disproportionately impact Black and Latinx children and their families. One way for school psychologists to accomplish this is to serve as a valuable consultant and support to teachers, helping them to become more aware of how their own behaviors, actions, and attitudes play a large role in setting up and maintaining inclusive classrooms that elevate the diverse opinions and voices of all children, especially those from minoritized backgrounds. Psychologists can use CBPR techniques to work collaboratively across diverse groups of students, teachers, and community members to design and evaluate programming that recognizes RMA situations and anti-racist behavior so that students feel safe and supported in all of their social interactions. Given how challenging it is for teachers to increase academic skills, promote social-emotional health, and provide a racially inclusive classroom setting, the role of school psychologists will be needed in the coming years to help teachers, schools, and communities address and reinforce positive and inclusive behaviors and intervention programming.

Impact Statement:

Racial microaggressions are harmful to minoritized youth’s well-being, including higher rates of suicidal ideation even after accounting for experiences of overt discrimination. The current systematic review suggests a great need for helping school staff provide an inclusive, equitable classroom and for empowering other adults to better support minoritized youth in handling racial microaggressions. The authors propose that school psychologists can fill this critical gap given their important role in providing socio-emotional support to both students and staff.

Biographies

*Rui Fu, PhD, is currently a Research Scientist at the Research Institute of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP). Her research has focused on children’s and adolescents’ social behaviors (e.g., peer bullying involvement, prosocial behaviors, social withdrawal), adjustment and their social relationships, particularly from a cross-cultural perspective. She is particularly interested in how diversity in race and ethnicities and immigration background, cultural values, and life experience contributes to children’s and adolescents’ socialization experiences and development.

*Stephen S. Leff, PhD, is the Co-Director of the Center for Violence Prevention at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, a licensed Psychologist, and the William H. Bennett Professor of Psychology in Pediatrics at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. His research focuses on aggression and bullying prevention programming, relational aggression (use of rumors and social exclusion to harm others), microaggression (daily conscious or unconscious humiliations that members of a dominant group repeatedly direct towards more marginalized individuals), the community-based participatory research process (working with community stakeholders to integrate their voices and perspectives into best practice empirically-supported programming), and Scientific Edutainment which integrates empirical science with the latest entertainment technology in order to make educational programming evidence-based, engaging and relevant to youth. He is strongly committed to issues of diversity, equity, inclusion, and anti-racism.

Ian Carroll, MS is a clinical psychology PhD student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison currently on clinical internship at The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. His research uses twin designs to identify biological and cognitive mechanisms linking peer victimization to adverse mental health outcomes. His most recent research program investigates how chronic peer victimization across childhood and adolescence disrupts neuroendocrine function across the HPA and HPG axes. Clinically, Ian provides equitable mental health care in a pediatric primary care setting to diverse children and families. He currently serves as a board member for The Rainbow Project, a community mental health provider in Madison, Wisconsin.

Shelby Brizzolara-Dove, BS is a research coordinator the Research Institute of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP). She assists in the coordination of studies on school-based interventions for aggression and bullying prevention, Tier 2 group therapies for anxiety, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Additionally, Shelby is a member of the Respect4ALL@CHOP team, working to develop a skill based microaggression training curriculum.

Kenisha Campbell, MD, MPH is a pediatrician, clinical leader and educator. She is an Associate Professor of Pediatrics at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania who leads the robust subspecialty and primary care outpatient practices in Adolescent Medicine at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. She provides high quality care for adolescents with a variety of medical and behavioral health conditions in both the outpatient and inpatient settings. She provides care that incorporates the social determinants of health and is adolescent-centered and trauma-informed. She also works to improve the care of adolescents through her quality improvement work. She is dedicated to the professional development of trainees and faculty who are underrepresented in Medicine and seeks to contribute to an environment at CHOP that is anti-racist, diverse, inclusive and equitable through her diversity curriculum and work with the Alliance of Minority Physicians.