Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Prim Prev. 2014 Oct;35(5):357–369. doi: 10.1007/s10935-014-0356-1

Celebrating the Strengths of Black Youth: Increasing Self-esteem and Implications for Prevention

Naidi Okeke-Adeyanju 1, Lorraine C Taylor 1, Ashley B Craig 1, Rachel E Smith 1, Aqiyla Thomas 1, Alaina E Boyle 1, Melissa E DeRosier 1
PMCID: PMC4152398  NIHMSID: NIHMS615785  PMID: 25053261

Decades of research link African American youths’ high self-esteem and positive racial identity with their academic success, behavioral adjustment, and positive emotional functioning (Chavous, Rivas-Drake, Smalls, Griffin, & Cogburn, 2008; Prinz, 2009; Smith, Levine, Smith, Dumas, &). Given the race-related disparities for health and well-being found in children of color in the United States, it is particularly critical to understand the protective function of self-esteem and positive racial identity among these youth. Recent data highlight disparities in health and well-being experienced by children based on their race/ethnicity (Hernandez & Napierala, 2013). We found that African American children with U.S.-born parents faced the highest overall levels of risk, compared to all other ethnic/racial and immigrant groups, on indicators including poverty, health status, educational performance and attainment, and family risk factors (Hernandez & Napierala, 2013). Despite improvements in race relations in the U.S. in recent years (Bobo, 2001), there remains significant work to be done to improve the development of these youth.

In addition to contending with significant economic and contextual risk factors, African American youth also contend with negative social regard. Research demonstrates that negative attitudes towards African Americans persist (Gibbons, Gerrard, Cleveland, Wills, & Brody, 2004; Prelow, Danoff-Burg, Swenson, & Pulgiano, 2004) and that African American youth are aware of these attitudes (Brody et al., 2006; Okeke, Howard, Kurtz-Costes, & Rowley, 2009). A majority of these youth frequently report discrimination in a variety of social contexts (e.g., school, community; DuBois, Burk-Braxton, Swenson, Tevendale, & Hardesty, 2002; Fisher, Wallace, & Fenton, 2000). In one study, 75% of African American youth reported being hassled by a store clerk or guard because of their race (Fisher et al., 2000), and in another study, 77% experienced at least one discriminatory event in the previous three months (Prelow et al., 2004). Perceptions of discrimination relate to decreased levels of self-esteem among African American youth (Dotterer, McHale, & Crouter, 2009; DuBois et al., 2002; Neblett, Smalls, Ford, Nguyên, & Sellers, 2009). To promote adjustment and well-being for these youth, it is important to identify protective mechanisms that buffer the negative impact of discrimination experiences and bolster self-esteem.

Racial Socialization and African American Youth

Racial socialization is the process by which society transmits messages to youth about the significance and meaning of their race and ethnicity and associated values and norms (Hughes, Hagelskamp, Way, & Foust, 2009; Hughes et al., 2006; Neblett et al., 2009). Racial socialization is a strategy for raising healthy children in a society where being Black often has negative connotations (Hughes et al., 2009; Smalls, 2010; White-Johnson, Ford, & Sellers, 2010). Primary racial socialization themes include cultural pride, preparation for bias, egalitarianism, self-worth, and responding appropriately to negative messages (Bowman & Howard, 1985; Hughes et al., 2006). Cultural pride messages are those that emphasize the history and accomplishments of African Americans, whereas preparation for bias messages prepare youth for racial discrimination experiences and provide strategies for coping with them. Egalitarian messages stress interracial equality, while self-worth messages emphasize positive views of oneself. Finally, negative messages focus on stereotypical views of African Americans. A growing body of research on racial socialization dimensions and practices shows that the racial socialization of African American children is an important part of preventing the negative effects of living in a society where racist experiences and discrimination may occur (Johnson, 2001; McMahon & Watts, 2002). Racial socialization plays an important role in promoting positive identity development for African American youth (Seaton, Yip, Morgan-Lopez, & Sellers, 2012).

Although researchers have identified several racial socialization themes, empirical studies demonstrate that socialization messages related to cultural pride and preparation for bias relate most consistently to youth outcomes (see Hughes et al., 2006, for a review). For example, cultural pride racial socialization messages correspond to increased self-esteem (Constantine & Blackmon, 2002; Murray, Berkel, Brody, Miller, & Chen, 2009), positive ethnic identity (Hughes et al., 2009; Murray et al., 2009; Neblett et al., 2009; Stevenson & Arrington, 2009), decreased rates of depression and anger (Stevenson, Reed, Bodison & Bishop, 1997), better racial coping and cultural competence (Johnson, 2001), and socio-emotional and behavioral functioning (Caughy, O’Campo, Randolph, & Nickerson, 2002; McAdoo, 1985; Spencer, 1983). In addition, cultural pride messages are associated with positive youth academic and cognitive outcomes, including increased classroom engagement (Cooper & Smalls, 2010; Smalls, 2009), cognitive competence (Banerjee, Harrell, & Johnson, 2011; Caughy et al., 2002), GPA, and educational aspirations (Bowman & Howard, 1985; Sanders, 1997; Wang & Huguley, 2012). Research shows that preparation for bias socialization is linked to more highly developed ethnic identity (Stevenson, 1995), better coping behaviors (Johnson, 1994; Phinney & Chavira, 1995; Scott, 2003), and more positive mother/child interactions (Frabutt, Walker, & MacKinnon-Lewis, 2002). Additionally, both cultural pride and preparation for bias messages affect youth outcomes indirectly by buffering against the negative impact of discrimination and stereotypes on various outcomes related to academic achievement (Harris-Britt, Valrie, Kurtz-Costes, & Rowley, 2007; Hughes et al., 2006; Neblett et al., 2008; Seaton, 2009; Sellers & Shelton, 2003; Wang & Huguley, 2012). This strong research foundation demonstrating the positive influence of racial socialization, especially for cultural pride and preparation for bias, constitutes a critical starting point for the development of youth intervention programs. Developing intervention programs that incorporate cultural pride and preparation for bias themes into meaningful, interactive experiences for African American youth is an important prevention strategy, as well as a way to promote positive their functioning and well-being.

Evidence-Based Prevention/Intervention Programs for African American Youth

There remains a growing need for evidence-based programs that promote the well-being and success of African American youth. Very few programs exist to counteract the impact of issues such as negative peer influences, random violence, feelings of isolation from the cultural mainstream (Beachum & McCray, 2004), and negative images in television media and music (Martin, 2008). Moreover, recent high-profile attention to racial inequities in social justice raised by the Trayvon Martin case (see Pope, 2013), and how these inequities impact Black boys in particular, underscores the need for programs focused on positive youth development and the promotion of psychosocial adjustment. The majority of extant prevention and intervention programs for African American youth target maladjustment and problem behaviors, including violence (Carswell, Hanlon, O’Grady, Watts, & Pothong, 2009; Flay, Graumlich, Segawa, Burns, & Holliday, 2004), substance use (Gil, Wagner, & Tubman, 2004; Hanlon, Simon, O’Grady, Carswell, & Callaman, 2009), and delinquency (Flay et al., 2004; Okwumabua, Wong, Duryea, Okwumabua, & Howell, 1999). While many of these programs benefit African American youth (Brody et al., 2006; Hammond & Yung, 1991; Hanlon et al., 2009; Rodney, Johnson, & Srivastava, 2005), they are not specifically focused on promoting positive youth outcomes. There is a demonstrated need to emphasize strengths-based approaches when creating interventions and focusing on positive youth development (Larson, 2000; Lerner, Almerigi, Theokas, & Lerner, 2005; Porter, 2010).

One example of an evidence-based intervention program specifically targeting the needs of African American youth is the Strong African American Families (SAAF; Brody, Murry, Gerrard, et al., 2004), which has been used successfully with rural African American families with older adolescents and was designed specifically to prevent substance abuse and adolescent risk behaviors. Despite its merits, SAAF was not developed specifically from a strengths-based perspective, nor does it include content related to African American culture and history. In constrast, the Celebrating the Strengths of Black Youth (CSBY) program was developed from a strengths- based perspective. CSBY is a small group intervention program focuses on promoting positive racial identity and increasing self-esteem among African American children. Grounded in the tenets of the Positive Youth Development perspective (see Catalano, Berglund, Ryan, Lonczak, & Hawkins, 2004), CSBY emphasizes the strengths of African American children and families and helps students build skills to handle the typical challenges that Black students encounter. CSBY provides students with tools to help them deal with issues related to race using a variety of activities in the group sessions as well as information for family members.

The goal of the present study was to test the effectiveness of the CSBY program with a sample of African American youth and their parents. African American children ages 7–11 years and their parents participated in the efficacy trial, which tested the impact of the CSBY intervention on self-esteem, racial identity, and parent-child communication about race. We hypothesized that the CSBY intervention would be associated with significant increases in child self-esteem, racial identity, and parent-child communications about race.

Method

Participants

We recruited participants for the CSBY program through flyers sent to guidance counselors at local schools, web advertisements (e.g., Craigslist), and local community centers serving primarily African American youth and their families. Recruitment took place in a moderate-sized city in the southeastern United States. The final sample consisted of 73 African American children ages 7 to 11 (mean = 8 years). This age range included students in the early elementary school and middle school, capturing several levels of children’s social, emotional, and cognitive development. Some parents directly selected enrolling their child in CSBY, whereas others were enrolled as part of their afterschool program. Table 1 presents descriptive information on the child sample.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics for Child Categorical Variables (N=73)

N Percentage
Sex
  Male 43 59%
  Female 30 41%
Grade in School
  1st Grade 5 7%
  2nd Grade 25 34%
  3rd Grade 25 34%
  4th Grade 18 25%
Open in a new tab

The parent sample was entirely female and consisted primarily of mothers (89%), whose mean age was 37.5 years (SD = 6.5 years). The majority of mothers had earned a college degree and/or had completed some advanced post-graduate training, and the majority were employed full-time. Just under half of the mothers were married. Table 2 presents descriptive information on the parent sample.

Table 2.

Descriptive Statistics for Parent Categorical Variables (N=73)

n Percentage
Relationship to Child
  Biological Mother 63 90%
  Adoptive Mother 3 4%
  Biological Grandmother (missing =3) 4 6%
Maternal Marital Status
  Married 35 49%
  Cohabitating 3 4%
  Committed Relationship 5 7%
  Single 11 15%
  Divorced 9 13%
  Separated 5 7%
  Widowed (missing =1) 4 5%
Maternal Occupational Status
  Employed full-time 39 58%
  Employed part-time 6 9%
  Homemaker 6 9%
  Student 5 8%
  Medical leave of absence 2 3%
  Unemployed or Other (missing =6) 9 13%
Maternal Education
  Some High School 3 4%
  High School graduate/GED 6 8%
  Technical/Trade School 6 8%
  Some college 10 14%
  Associate degree 2 3%
  College graduate 13 18%
  Some graduate school 5 7%
  Graduate degree (missing =1) 10 38%
Open in a new tab

Eligible for participation in the study were children between the ages of 7 and 11 years at study entry who self-identified as African American and had no significant clinical aggression or attention issues that might interfere with participation in the group or negatively affect the learning process of other group members (Dishion, McCord, & Poulin, 1999). To confirm eligibility, parents completed a screening questionnaire regarding family demographics and the child’s cognitive and behavioral functioning. We used the Behavioral Assessment System for Children, 2nd edition (BASC-2; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004) to detect the presence of significant emotional and behavioral problems. This system assesses a variety of problem behaviors, including aggression and attention problems. Participants were eligible for the study if they scored less than two standard deviations above the mean on the attention and aggression subscales of the BASC-2. If families did not meet study criteria, we gave them a list of more appropriate community resources. We randomly assigned eligible families to either a treatment group (TX, n = 33) or a waitlist control (WLC, n = 40) group. Preliminary analyses indicated that, at study entry, participants in the TX and WLC groups did not significantly differ on any demographic factors or outcome variables.

Intervention description

CSBY is a ten-session, small group (average of eight children), strengths-based preventive intervention designed to boost the self-esteem and racial identity of African American youth (Lambert, Lloyd, Spann, Greenblatt, & Thomas, 2012). Each session of CSBY includes a range of developmentally appropriate interactive activities, including group discussions and hands-on activities. Each session emphasizes the strengths of African Americans through activities about family cohesion, the accomplishments of Blacks, and racial pride. The program also focuses on respecting others’ differences and being responsible members of society.

CSBY includes opportunities to integrate and practice concepts through in-session and at-home activities. Parents participate in the program through at-home activities and attendance at three sessions, the purpose of which is to provide orientation to the group (Session 1), to emphasize the importance of cohesion, support, and cooperation (Session 7), and to celebrate their child’s successful completion of the program (Session 10). Each week, parents received handouts that described session activities. Also included in the handouts were suggested topics of home discussion, such as what being Black means and celebrating community traditions.

Children in the CSBY TX condition participated in ten 60-minute group sessions that met either once or twice per week (depending on the community sites’ calendar and availability). Children in the WLC condition also participated in ten 60-minute group sessions; however, their groups met in the weeks following the TX condition group meetings and after all data collection was completed.

One group leader and one co-leader experienced in working with children led each group. The program developers trained all group leaders regarding program procedures and materials. We monitored treatment integrity using standardized progress notes on individual participation and fidelity measures on adherence to the intervention curriculum, which group leaders completed after each group session. Group leaders and co-leaders reported a high level of adherence to the treatment manual, and they covered an average of 99% of the planned intervention topics and activities. Trained research assistants conducted separate fidelity checks by listening to audio recordings of the CSBY sessions and completing fidelity measures.

Data Collection Procedure

Prior to the start of the intervention, we collected self-report data about children’s self-esteem and racial identity, as well as parents’ racial socialization practices, from both parents and children in the TX and WLC groups. Within two weeks following the tenth session of the treatment, we collected post-intervention data on these same constructs from all participants in both groups, at which point we offered participants in the WLC condition the option to participate in CSBY.

Pre- and Post-Measures

Children attended a 45-minute assessment session to complete measures with trained research assistants, who read all questions aloud to the children.

Self-esteem

We used the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965) to measure children’s overall self-concept. This measure contains ten items that participants rated using a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). We asked children how they felt about themselves (e.g., “I wish I could have more respect for myself.” and “I feel that I am a person of worth, at least equal with others.”). Higher scores on the items indicated more positive self-views. Cronbach’s alpha in the current sample was .67 and .69 at Times 1 and 2, respectively.

Racial Identity

Two subscales from the Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity (MIBI; Sellers, Rowley, Chavous, Shelton, & Smith, 1997) measured racial identity. The MIBI measures four dimensions (centrality, salience, regard, and ideology) of Black identity. Six items from the centrality subscale were used. These items measured the extent to which being Black is central to the participants’ self-definition. We also used six items from the private regard subscale, which measured how the participant felt about other Blacks. Subscale items were rated using a five-point Likert scale indicating the degree to which participants agreed with each item. Example of items on the centrality and regard subscales, respectively, included “Being Black is an important part of my self-image.” and “I have a strong sense of belonging with Black people.” (α = .56 and .76 at Times 1 and 2, respectively); and “I feel close to other Black people” and “I am not proud to be Black” (α = .66 and .74 at Times 1 and 2, respectively). Alpha tests of reliability are consistent with other studies on racial identity in children (e.g., Seaton, Yip, & Sellers, 2009). We reverse-coded some items so that higher scores on this scale indicated that race was a more central aspect of an individual’s identity.

Demographic Questionnaire

Parents reported age, race, education, employment, and income information.

Racial Socialization

To assess indirect and direct messages parents send to their children about race, we used items from Hughes and Chen’s (1997) Racial Socialization scale and the Racial Socialization Questionnaire-teen measure (Lesane-Brown, Scottham, Nguyên, & Sellers, 2006), which consisted of four subscales: Cultural Pride, Preparation for Bias, Egalitarian, and Self-worth. Previous studies report strong reliability and validity of these subscales (e.g., Lesane-Brown et al., 2006; Neblett et al., 2008). For all items, we asked parents how often in the past month they engaged in certain behaviors (1 = Never; 5 = More than 10 times). The Cultural Pride Socialization Subscale included six items (e.g., “Taken my child to a Black cultural event” and “Done things to celebrate Black history”) and yielded an alpha reliability of .88 and .87 at Times 1 and 2, respectively. The Preparation for Bbias Subscale included six items (e.g., “Told my child that people might treat them badly due to their race.” and “Told my child that Black kids must be better than White kids to get the same rewards.”) and had an alpha reliability of .87 and .85 at Times 1 and 2, respectively. The Egalitarian Subscale included four items that measure the extent to which racial equality is emphasized (e.g., “Told my child that Blacks and Whites should try to understand each other so they can get along.”), α = .82 and .85 at Times 1 and 2, respectively. The Self-Worth Subscale included five items that measure messages stressing the positive characteristics of the child (e.g., “Told my child that they are somebody special, no matter what anyone says.”), α = .94 at Time 1 and .94 at Time 2. Previous studies report strong reliability and validity of these subscales (e.g., Lesane-Brown et al., 2006; Neblett et al., 2008).

Results

The Results section is divided into two parts: 1) analyses regarding covariates, and 2) results of the CSBY treatment on both the TX and WLC groups for children and parents.

Covariates

Before exploring the major hypotheses, we examined demographics and study-related variables as possible covariates, as these constructs may have affected participants’ responsiveness to the intervention. Specifically, we expected that both child age and treatment adherence have an impact on both children’s and parents’ response to the intervention. This was a particularly important concern for children’s age not only because of the social and cognitive differences across the age range studied (i.e., 7 to 11 years), but also because we expected that children and mothers would integrate the information from the CSBY curriculum based on the child’s developmental maturity. Because of variability within the treatment group on adherence and attendance, both of these variables were used as covariates to reduce their impact.

We considered the location in which children received the intervention. For students already involved in an afterschool program, parents consented to their child’s participation in CSBY during the afterschool program time. We expected parents who actively enrolled their child in CSBY to be more involved (e.g., attend parent sessions, make sure their children completed home assignments) than parents whose children were enrolled in CSBY through the afterschool program.

T-tests for continuous variables and chi-square analyses for categorical variables revealed that, as expected, each of these variables was significantly different across conditions: child age (MTX = 9 years and 2 mos, SD = 11.54 mos); MWLC = 8 years and 5 mos, SD = 10.62 mos), F (df, df) = 11.74, p = .001), and intervention site (χ2 = 75.00, p < .001).

We also used T-tests and chi-square analyses to determine if children and parents varied at the time of the pre-assessment across demographic and outcome variables. These analyses revealed no significant difference between groups at baseline on demographic factors or outcome assessments (i.e., child-reported racial identity and self-esteem or parent-reported racial socialization). However, given the relatively small sample size, as well as the variation between groups, we elected to utilize ANCOVA analyses to test our study hypotheses in order to control for baseline scores when analyzing intervention effects (Maxwell, Cole, Arvey, & Salas, 1991; Vickers & Altman, 2001; see Tables 3 and 4).

Table 3.

Summary of Relevant ANCOVA Statistics, Effect Sizes, and Descriptive Information for Child Outcomes

Self-Esteem
 Centrality
 Private Regard
M(SE)
 F (1,70) η2 M (SE)
 F (1,70) η2 M (SE)
 F (1,70) η2
Predictor TX WLC TX WLC TX WLC
Covariates
  Time 1 3.80 (.12) 3.84 (.10) 34.78** .35 3.55 (.12) 3.53 (.12) 13.68** .17 4.52 (.10) 4.28 (.11) 12.47** .16
  Child Age 9.23 (11.04) 8.54 (10.83) 1.40 .02 9.23 (11.04) 8.54 (10.83) .32 .01 9.23 (11.04) 8.54 (10.83) 3.34† .05
  Fidelity 4.75 (.10) --- 2.82† .04 4.75 (.10) --- .02 .00 4.75 (.10) --- 2.12 .03
  Attendance 8.78 (1.23) --- 1.44 .02 8.78 (1.23) --- 2.28 .03 8.78 (1.23) --- .17 .01
Condition 3.95 (.12) 3.78 (.13) 4.88* .07 3.64 (.14) 3.19 (.15) .50 .01 4.52 (.11) 4.26 (.12) 1.16 .02
Open in a new tab
†

p < .10.

*

p < .05.

**

p < .01.

Table 4.

Summary of Relevant ANCOVA Statistics, Effect Sizes, and Descriptive Information for Parent Outcomes

Cultural Pride
 Preparation for Bias
M (SE)
 F (1,70) η2 M (SE)
 F (1,70) η2
Predictor TX WLC TX WLC
Covariates
  Time 1 1.53 (.16) 1.51 (.18) 16.47** .24 1.15 (.17) 1.12 (.17) 16.43** .23
  Child Age 9.23 (11.04) 8.54 (10.83) .16 .01 9.23 (11.04) 8.54 (10.83) .92 .02
  Fidelity 4.75 (.10) --- 2.42 .04 4.75 (.10) --- 2.55 .05
  Site --- --- 1.37 .03 --- --- 1.27 .02
Condition 1.85 (.19) 1.70 (.22) .18 .01 1.27 (.17) 1.23 (.20) .02 .00
Egalitarian
 Self-Worth
M (SE)
 F η2 M (SE)
 F η2
TX WLC TX WLC
Covariates
  Time 1 2.13 (.20) 2.17 (.20) 13.22* .20 2.97 (.16) 2.83 (.22) 18.76** .29
  Child Age 9.23 (11.04) 8.54 (10.83) .89 .02 9.23 (11.04) 8.54 (10.83) .14 .01
  Fidelity 4.75 (.10) --- 1.26 .02 4.75 (.10) 3.47 .07
  Site --- --- 15.26** .22 --- --- 5.15* .10
Condition 2.79 (.23) 1.31 (.27) 10.97* .17 3.13 (.26) 2.45 (.29) 1.94 .04
Open in a new tab
*

p < .05.

**

p < .01.

Intervention effects

Child-reported variables

We conducted ANCOVA analyses to compare both groups on all intervention post-assessments. Analyses revealed that children in the treatment group reported higher self-esteem at post-assessment than those in the wait-list control. Although the ANCOVA showed that the means were significantly different, the effect size was small. Specifically, the partial Eta squared was .07, indicating that treatment accounted for 7% of the overall variance (effect + error) in children’s self-esteem at the time of the post-assessment1. We found no intervention effect for children’s self-reported racial identity. See Table 4 for relevant statistics and effect sizes.

Parent-reported variables

ANCOVA analyses comparing treatment and waitlist control groups revealed a significant difference between groups for parents’ egalitarian messages. Specifically, parents whose children were in the treatment group reported providing more egalitarian messages to their children than parents of children in the wait-list control group. We found no intervention effects for other parent socialization messages. Table 4 provides relevant statistics and effect sizes.

Discussion

We designed CSBY to promote self-esteem, enhance positive racial identity, and increase racial socialization practices. Emphasizing the strengths and the rich cultural heritage and history of African Americans as a way to promote psychosocial adjustment and well-being among African American youth were key tenets of this preventive intervention. In contrast to universal programs with a broader target audience that may fail to address the needs of specific cultures (Alvy, 1994), we created CSBY with concepts and skills that are specifically applicable to African American children and their families. From specific cultural pride messages to handling discrimination experiences, CSBY offers African American youth a variety of activities designed to promote positive development in a warm, supportive, entertaining group experience. Research suggests the positive impact of CSBY on enhancing youth self-esteem and parental racial socialization messages. These data contribute to the growing body of support for strengths-based, culturally relevant preventive interventions for African American youth (Lerner et al., 2005; Spencer, 1983).

Child Outcomes

Results demonstrate that children in the TX group reported higher levels of self-esteem at post-assessment than children in the WLC group. It is important to note that, consistent with the literature (Twenge & Crocker, 2002), children in this study reported high levels of self-esteem before participating in the intervention. Thus, even though the levels of self-esteem among youth in this sample were high, CSBY was associated with additional positive impacts on self-esteem. That self-esteem increased as a function of CSBY is important given that African American youths’ self-esteem correlates with their behavioral adjustment, academic success, and positive emotional functioning (Chavous et al., 2008; Smith et al., 2009).

Contrary to our predictions, racial centrality did not increase as a result of the CSBY intervention. It is possible that, although we emphasize racial pride in the curriculum, the messages of racial equality and general self-esteem were more salient to youth in the intervention. For example, results showed a significant increase in egalitarian messages, or those that emphasize racial equality, from parents post-intervention. As a result, the most prominent messages children received from the intervention and from their parents may have been feeling positive about themselves and embracing the importance of all races. Thus, their levels of racial centrality remained high throughout the study period, but were not changed by the intervention. It is also likely that as children age, their exposure to discriminatory experiences as well as normative identity exploration may elicit other types of parental racial socialization. Whereas the present study focused on proactive racial socialization, reactive racial socialization may occur in response to the child’s experiences during adolescence. Another possibility is that changes in racial centrality may have appeared after we collected our follow-up data, perhaps as a function of the increasing importance of identity development during the adolescent years. Other work testing the influence of social-emotional interventions on child outcomes suggests that treatment effects may emerge over time as children apply skills and concepts learned in the intervention in life (DeRosier & Marcus, 2005). If this is the case, follow-up assessment at a longer time period than immediately post-treatment might pick up additional possible benefits. Future research is needed to further examine this finding.

Parent Outcomes

Results indicated that parents in the CSBY treatment group reported higher levels of egalitarian messages post-intervention than parents in the wait list control group. Researchers describe racial socialization as a bi-directional relationship in which parents communicate messages about race both on their own and following prompting from their children. In this case, it is likely that as a result of CSBY, children began asking more questions about race, and parents were prompted to provide racial socialization messages. Parental involvement in the CSBY program is another likely factor in the increased use of egalitarian messages. We invited parents to attend three CSBY sessions, one of which focused specifically on building a sense of community and cooperation - themes strongly aligned with messages of egalitarian ideals.

We investigated three other parental racial socialization messages in this study: cultural pride, preparation for bias, and self-worth. We were surprised to find that there were no significant changes in any of these messages post-intervention. Cultural pride messages emphasize the history and accomplishments of African Americans. Past research has shown that cultural socialization is one of the most prevalent messages passed to children, with one study finding close to 90% of parents reporting messages of racial pride (Caughy et al., 2002). One possible explanation for the lack of change in cultural pride messages is that they are instilled often in children and usually introduced at a young age (Caughy et. al., 2002); if so, the intervention did not have as much of an effect on this outcome. Preparation for bias messages seek to reduce the effects on youth of racial discrimination and provides suggestions on how to deal with those experiences. It is possible that parents did not see a need to provide those messages during the intervention period given that the purpose of CSBY is to instill an appreciation and understanding of children’s strengths. The final racial socialization message we examined was that of self-worth, which encourages positive views of one’s self. It is possible that parents focused on equality as a whole and not on individual self-worth throughout the program, which may explain why self-worth messages did not increase over the course of the intervention. Treatment fidelity indices should also be included in future studies.

Future Directions

This study demonstrated the positive impact of the CSBY program on African American children’s self-esteem and parent socialization messages. Despite these positive results, there were important limitations to this study. Because of a small sample size, power to detect change across time was low2. We would need to implement CSBY with a larger sample of children in order to fully explore effects on our various outcomes of interest. Still, the increased self-esteem and egalitarian messages we found for the treatment group underscore the value of this program in promoting positive outcomes.

The participants in this efficacy trial were mostly middle class African Americans. Mothers in this study were generally well-educated and were mostly employed. To date, most studies on African American families have focused on those living in poverty, though there has been significant growth in the Black middle class during the 21st century (Atwell, Lavin, Domina, & Levey, 2006). Our study provides important information for understanding the developmental experiences of middle class, not-at-risk families, expanding our understanding of normative development within this understudied and often overlooked niche of African American families (Smetana, 2000). Also, children with significant clinical issues (e.g., severe aggression, depression, anxiety, etc.) were excluded from participating in the CSBY program, thus providing a snapshot of youth not experiencing serious developmental problems or challenges. Expanding this program to focus on at-risk youth African American youth is an important future direction, since evidence suggests the protective function of positive racial identity and racial socialization such youth (Harris-Brit et al., 2007; Neblett et al., 2008).

The CSBY child participants ranged in age from 7 to 11. Although the present study contributes to our understanding of the development of African American children in the elementary and middle school years, identity development in general, as well as racial identity in particular, become particularly salient during the transition to middle school. During the adolescent years, African American adolescents face increased exposure to discrimination experiences (Seaton et al., 2012), making the adolescent years an ideal time to introduce interventions aimed at enhancing adjustment and well-being. The CSBY curriculum was developed for a younger sample, but future work on this program should focus on modifying it for use with older adolescents and focusing more specifically on how this tool could be used to buffer the impact of discrimination experiences. As we depict in our conceptual model, racial socialization and identity are important protective factors for survival in a broader social context where discrimination experiences and other risk factors are realities for many African American youth.

Supporting self-esteem development and promoting positive racial identity for African American youth remains an important issue. African American youth remain at risk for less optimal social and emotional development. Despite examples of high-profile, highly visible successful African Americans who may be considered salient role models for African American youth (see Marx, Ko, & Friedman, 2009), examples of social injustices that highlight the vulnerability of these youth are also prevalent. CSBY is a promising tool that could be used to help youth navigate through the difficult process of identity development and bolstering self-esteem. Including parents in this intervention appeared to be associated with positive effects for parents as well as youth. The CSBY program clearly warrants continued exploration and development.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Conceptual Model: Protective Function of Racial Socialization and Racial Identity on Youth Well-Being

Footnotes

1

Even though treatment condition (i.e., treatment vs. wait-list control) explained relatively little of the variance in child-reported self-esteem at the time of post-assessment, it did account for more variance than the other covariates included in the model, with the exception of child-reported self-esteem at pre-assessment, which accounted for 35% of the variance in post-assessment self-esteem.

2

A power analysis was conducted using the G*Power software, which estimated that a sample of at least 250 participants across the TX and WLC groups would be required in order to detect a medium effect size.

References

  1. Alvy KT. Parent training today: A social necessity. Studio City, CA: Center for the Improvement of Child Caring; 1994. [Google Scholar]
  2. Atwell P, Lavin D, Domina T, Levey T. New evidence on college remediation. Journal of Higher Education. 2006;77:886–924. [Google Scholar]
  3. Banerjee M, Harrell ZAT, Johnson DJ. Racial/ethnic socialization and parental involvement in education as predictors of cognitive ability and achievement in African American children. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2011;40:595–605. doi: 10.1007/s10964-010-9559-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Beachum F, McCray C. Cultural collision in urban schools. Current Issues in Education. 2004;7(5):1–5. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bobo L. Racial attitudes and relations at the close of the twentieth century. In: Smelser NJ, Wilson WJ, Mitchell F, editors. America becoming: Racial trends and their consequences. Washington DC: National Academic Press; 2001. pp. 264–301. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bowman PJ, Howard C. Race-related socialization, motivation, and academic achievement: A study of Black youths in three-generation families. Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry. 1985;24:134–141. doi: 10.1016/s0002-7138(09)60438-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Brody GH, Murry VB, Gerrard M, Gibbons FX, Molgaard V, McNair L, Brown AC, Wills TA, Spoth RL, Luo Z, Chen Y, Neubaum-Carlan E. The Strong African American Families Program: Translating research into prevention programming. Child Development. 2004;75(3):900–917. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00713.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Brody GH, Murry VB, Gerrard M, Gibbons FX, McNair L, Brown AC, Wills TA, Molgaard V, Spoth RL, Luo Z, Chen Y. The strong African American families program: Prevention of youths’ high-risk behavior and a test of a model of change. Journal of Family Psychology. 2006;20:1–11. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.20.1.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Carswell SB, Hanlon TE, O’Grady KE, Watts AM, Pothong P. A preventive intervention program for urban African American youth attending an alternative education program: Background, implementation, and feasibility. Education and Treatment of Children. 2009;32:445–469. doi: 10.1353/etc.0.0060. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Catalano RF, Berglund ML, Ryan JAM, Lonczak HS, Hawkins JD. Positive Youth Development in the United States: Research findings on evaluations of Positive Youth Development programs. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 2004;591:98–124. [Google Scholar]
  11. Caughy MO, O’Campo PJ, Randolph SM, Nickerson K. The influence of racial socialization practices on the cognitive and behavioral competence of African American preschoolers. Child Development. 2002;73:1611–1625. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00493. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Chavous TM, Rivas-Drake D, Smalls C, Griffin T, Cogburn C. Gender matters, too: The influences of school racial discrimination and racial identity on academic engagement outcomes among African American adolescents. Developmental Psychology. 2008;44:637–654. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.44.3.637. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Constantine MG, Blackmon SM. Black adolescents’ racial socialization experiences: Their relations to home, school, and peer self-esteem. Journal of Black Studies. 2002;32:322–335. [Google Scholar]
  14. Cooper SM, Smalls C. Culturally distinctive and academic socialization: Direct and interactive relationships with African American adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2010;39:199–212. doi: 10.1007/s10964-009-9404-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. DeRosier ME, Marcus SR. Building friendships and combating bullying: Effectiveness of S.S.GRIN at one year follow-up. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology. 2005;34:140–150. doi: 10.1207/s15374424jccp3401_13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Dishion TJ, McCord J, Poulin F. When interventions harm: Peer groups and problem behavior. American Psychologist. 1999;54:755–765. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.54.9.755. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Dotterer AM, McHale SM, Crouter AC. Sociocultural factors and school engagement among African American youth: The roles of racial discrimination, racial socialization, and ethnic identity. Applied Developmental Science. 2009;13:61–73. doi: 10.1080/10888690902801442. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. DuBois DL, Burk-Braxton C, Swenson LP, Tevendale HD, Hardesty JL. Race and gender influences on adjustment in early adolescence: Investigation of an integrative model. Child Development. 2002;73:1573–1592. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00491. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Fisher CB, Wallace SA, Fenton RE. Discrimination distress during adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2000;29:679–695. [Google Scholar]
  20. Flay BR, Graumlich S, Segawa E, Burns JL, Holliday MY. Effects of two prevention programs on high-risk behaviors among African American youth: A randomized trial. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. 2004;158:377–384. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.158.4.377. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Frabutt JM, Walker AM, MacKinnon-Lewis C. Racial socialization messages and the quality of mother/child interactions in African American families. The Journal of Early Adolescence. 2002;22:200–217. [Google Scholar]
  22. Gibbons FX, Gerrard M, Cleveland MJ, Wills TA, Brody G. Perceived discrimination and substance use in African American patents and their children: A panel study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2004;86:517–529. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.86.4.517. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Gil AG, Wagner EF, Tubman JG. Culturally sensitive substance abuse intervention for Hispanic and African American adolescents: Empirical examples form the Alcohol Treatment Targeting Adolescents in Need (ATTAIN) project. Addiction. 2004;99:140–150. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2004.00861.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Hammond WR, Yung BR. Preventing violence in at-risk African-American youth. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved. 1991;2:359–373. doi: 10.1353/hpu.2010.0341. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Hanlon TE, Simon BD, O’Grady KE, Carswell SB, Callaman JM. The effectiveness of an after-school program targeting urban African American youth. Education and Urban Society. 2009;42:96–118. doi: 10.1177/0013124509343144. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Harris-Britt A, Valrie CR, Kurtz-Costes B, Rowley SJ. Perceived racial discrimination and self-esteem in African American youth: Racial socialization as a protective factor. Journal of Research on Adolescence. 2007;17:669–682. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2007.00540.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Hernandez DJ, Napierala JS. Diverse Children: Race, Ethnicity, and Immigration in America's New Non-Majority Generation, Disparities among America's Children. New York, New York: Foundation for Child Development; 2013. Retrieved from http://fcd-us.org/sites/default/files/DiverseChildren%20-%20Full%20Report.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  28. Hughes D, Chen L. When and what parents tell children about race: An examination of race-related socialization among African American families. Applied Developmental Science. 1997;1:200–214. [Google Scholar]
  29. Hughes D, Hagelskamp C, Way N, Foust MD. The role of mothers’ and adolescents’ perceptions of ethnic-racial socialization in shaping ethnic-racial identity among early adolescent boys and girls. Journal of Youth Adolescence. 2009;38:605–626. doi: 10.1007/s10964-009-9399-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Hughes D, Rodriguez J, Smith EP, Johnson DJ, Stevenson HC, Spicer P. Parents’ ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of research and directions for future study. Developmental Psychology. 2006;42:747–770. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.747. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Johnson DJ. Parental racial socialization and racial coping among middle class Black children. In: McAdoo J, editor. XIII Empirical Conference in Black Psychology. East Lansing: Michigan State University; 1994. pp. 17–38. [Google Scholar]
  32. Johnson DJ. A multidimensional approach to racial identity: Implications for African American children. In: Neal-Barnett AM, Contreras JM, Kerns KA, editors. Parental characteristics, racial stress, and racial socialization processes as predictors of racial coping in middle childhood. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers; 2001. pp. 57–74. [Google Scholar]
  33. Lambert MC, Lloyd S, Spann L, Greenblatt A, Thomas A. Celebrating the Strengths of Black Youth. Cary, NC: 3-C Institute for Social Development; 2012. [Google Scholar]
  34. Larson RW. Toward a psychology of positive youth development. American Psychologist. 2000;55:170–183. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.170. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Lerner RM, Almerigi JB, Theokas C, Lerner JV. Positive youth development a view of the issues. The Journal of Early Adolescence. 2005;25:10–16. [Google Scholar]
  36. Lesane-Brown CL, Scottham KM, Nguyên HX, Sellers RM. The Racial Socialization Questionnaire-teen (RSQ-t): A new measure for use with African American adolescents. 2006 Unpublished manuscript. [Google Scholar]
  37. Martin AC. Television media as a potential negative factor in the racial identity development of African American youth. Academic Psychiatry. 2008;32(4):338–342. doi: 10.1176/appi.ap.32.4.338. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Marx DM, Ko SJ, Friedman RA. The ‘‘Obama Effect”: How a salient role model reduces race-based performance differences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2009;45:953–956. [Google Scholar]
  39. Maxwell SE, Cole DA, Arvey RD, Salas E. A comparison of methods for increasing power in randomized between-subjects designs. Psychological Bulletin. 1991;110:328–337. [Google Scholar]
  40. McAdoo HP. Racial attitudes and self-concept of young Black children over time. In: McAdoo HP, McAdoo JL, editors. Black children: Social, educational, and parental environments. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications; 1985. pp. 213–242. [Google Scholar]
  41. McMahon SD, Watts RJ. Ethnic identity in urban African American youth: Exploring links with self-worth, aggression, and other psychosocial variables. Journal of Community Psychology. 2002;30(4):411–431. [Google Scholar]
  42. Murry VM, Berkel C, Brody GH, Miller SJ, Chen Y. Linking parental socialization to interpersonal protective processes, academic self-presentation, and expectations among rural African American youth. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. 2009;15:1–10. doi: 10.1037/a0013180. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Neblett E, Smalls C, Ford K, Nguyên H, Sellers R. Racial socialization and racial identity: African American parents’ messages about race as precursors to identity. Journal of Youth & Adolescence. 2009;38:189–203. doi: 10.1007/s10964-008-9359-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Neblett E, White R, Ford K, Philip C, Nguyên H, Sellers R. Patterns of racial socialization and psychological adjustment: Can parental communications about race reduce the impact of racial discrimination? Journal of Research on Adolescence. 2008;18:477–515. [Google Scholar]
  45. Okeke NA, Howard LC, Kurtz-Costes B, Rowley SJ. Academic race stereotypes, academic self-concept, and racial centrality in African American youth. Journal of Black Psychology. 2009;35:366–387. doi: 10.1177/0095798409333615. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Okwumabua JO, Wong SP, Duryea EJ, Okwumabua TM, Howell S. Building self-esteem through social skills training and cultural awareness: A communitybased approach for preventing violence among African American youth. The Journal of Primary Prevention. 1999;20:61–74. [Google Scholar]
  47. Phinney JS, Chavira V. Parental ethnic socialization and adolescent coping with problems related to ethnicity. Journal of Research on Adolescence. 1995;5:31–54. [Google Scholar]
  48. Pope RJ. Reflections of a Black male counseling psychology doctoral student: Lessons learned from APA Division 45 Commentary and the Role of Social Justice for Counseling Psychologists. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology. 2013;5(1):103–115. [Google Scholar]
  49. Porter RL. Invited commentary: The positive youth development perspective is an exciting direction for adolescent and family policies and programs. Journal of Youth Adolescence. 2010;39:839–842. doi: 10.1007/s10964-010-9554-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Prelow HM, Danoff-Burg S, Swenson RR, Pulgiano D. The impact of ecological risk and perceived discrimination on the psychological adjustment of African American and European American youth. Journal of Community Psychology. 2004;32:375–389. [Google Scholar]
  51. Reynolds CR, Kamphaus RW. Behavior assessment system for children. Circle Pines, MN: AGS Publishing; 2004. [Google Scholar]
  52. Rodney LW, Johnson DL, Srivastava RP. The impact of culturally relevant violence prevention models on school-age youth. The Journal of Primary Prevention. 2005;26:439–454. doi: 10.1007/s10935-005-0003-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Rosenberg M. Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1965. [Google Scholar]
  54. Sanders MG. Overcoming obstacles: Academic achievement as a response to racism and discrimination. The Journal of Negro Education. 1997;66:83–93. [Google Scholar]
  55. Scott LD. The relation of racial identity and racial socialization to coping with discrimination among African Americans. Journal of Black Studies. 2003;33:520–538. [Google Scholar]
  56. Seaton EK. Perceived racial discrimination and racial identity profiles among African American adolescents. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. 2009;15:137–144. doi: 10.1037/a0015506. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Seaton EK, Yip T, Morgan-Lopez A, Sellers RM. Racial discrimination and racial socialization as predictors of African American adolescents’ racial identity development using latent transition analysis. Developmental Psychology. 2012 doi: 10.1037/a0025328. Advance online publication. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Seaton EK, Yip T, Sellers RM. A longitudinal examination of racial identity and racial discrimination among African American adolescents. Child Development. 2009;80:406–417. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01268.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Sellers RM, Rowley SA, Chavous TM, Shelton JN, Smith MA. Multidimensional inventory of Black identity: A preliminary investigation of reliability and construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1997;73:805–815. [Google Scholar]
  60. Sellers RM, Shelton JN. The role of racial identity in perceived racial discrimination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2003;84:1079–1092. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.5.1079. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Smalls C. African American adolescent engagement in the classroom and beyond: The roles of mother’s racial socialization and democratic-involved parenting. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2009;38:204–213. doi: 10.1007/s10964-008-9316-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Smalls C. Effects of mothers’ racial socialization and relationship quality on African American youth’s school engagement: A profile approach. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. 2010;16:476–484. doi: 10.1037/a0020653. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Smetan JG. Middle-class African American adolescents’ and parents’ conceptions of parental authority and parenting practices: A longitudinal investigation. Child Development. 2000;71:1672–1686. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00257. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Smith CO, Levine DW, Smith EP, Dumas J, Prinz RJ. A developmental perspective of the relationship of racial-ethic identity to self-construct, achievement, and behavior in African American children. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. 2009;15:145–157. doi: 10.1037/a0015538. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Spencer MB. Children’s cultural values and parental child rearing strategies. Developmental Review. 1983;3:351–370. [Google Scholar]
  66. Stevenson HC. Relationship of adolescent perceptions of racial socialization to racial identity. Journal of Black Psychology. 1995;21:49–70. [Google Scholar]
  67. Stevenson HC, Arrington EG. Racial/ethnic socialization mediates perceived racism and the racial identity of African American adolescents. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. 2009;15:125–136. doi: 10.1037/a0015500. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Stevenson HC, Reed J, Bodison P, Bishop A. Racism stress management: Racial socialization beliefs and the experience of depression and anger in African American youth. Youth Society. 1997;29:197–222. [Google Scholar]
  69. Twenge JM, Crocker J. Race and self-esteem: Meta-analyses comparing Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and American Indians and comment on Gray-Little and Hafdahl 2000. Psychological Bulletin. 2002;128:371–408. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.3.371. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Vickers AJ, Altman DG. Analyzing controlled trails with baseline and follow up measurements. Education and Debate. 2001;323:1123–1124. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7321.1123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Wang M, Huguley JP. Parental racial socialization as a moderator of the effects of racial discrimination on educational success among African American adolescents. Child Development. 2012;83:1716–1731. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01808.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. White-Johnson RL, Ford KR, Sellers RM. Parental racial socialization profiles: Association with demographic factors, racial discrimination, childhood socialization, and racial identity. Cultural. Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. 2010;16:237–247. doi: 10.1037/a0016111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES