Author
Listed:
- Jasmine S Dixon
- Dongwei Wang
- Rebecca E Ready
- Alyssa Gamaldo
Abstract
ObjectivesBlack women are at high risk for discrimination and cognitive impairment in late life. It is not known if discrimination is a risk factor for cognitive decline in Black women and if so, what factors are protective against the adverse cognitive effects of discrimination. Using the biopsychosocial model of gendered racism, we determined if discrimination is associated with poorer cognition in midlife Black women and if social support and/or spirituality would protect against the deleterious effects of discrimination on cognition.MethodsParticipants were midlife Black women (N = 669) from the Study of Women’s Health Across the Nation. Discrimination was measured by the Everyday Discrimination scale. Cognitive outcomes included episodic memory, processing speed, and working memory. Total social support, emotional support, instrumental support, and spirituality were assessed as protective factors.ResultsContrary to expectations, structural equation modeling indicated that discrimination was associated with better immediate recall. For women with more emotional support, greater discrimination was associated with better immediate recall than for women with lower emotional support. Spirituality was not a significant moderator in the association between discrimination and cognition.DiscussionDiscrimination had unexpected positive associations with learning and attention-based cognitive skills for midlife Black women. Discrimination might enhance vigilance, which could be facilitated by higher levels of emotional support. There is an opportunity for clinical and public health interventions for cognitive health and discrimination focused on Black women to better incorporate emotional support as a coping resource.
Suggested Citation
Jasmine S Dixon & Dongwei Wang & Rebecca E Ready & Alyssa Gamaldo, 2024.
"Discrimination and Cognition in Midlife Black Women: The Roles of Social Support and Spirituality,"
The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 79(4), pages 167-178.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:geronb:v:79:y:2024:i:4:p:167-178.
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:79:y:2024:i:4:p:167-178.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.