Race and Ethnicity in the Genome Era: The Complexity of the Constructs.

The vast amount of biological information that is now available through the completion of the Human Genome Project presents opportunities and challenges. The genomic era has the potential to advance an understanding of human genetic variation and its role in human health and disease. A challenge for genomics research is to understand the relationships between genomics, race, and ethnicity and the implications of uncovering these relationships. Robust and scholarly discourse on the concept of race and ethnicity in genomic research should be expanded to include social and behavioral scientists. Interdisciplinary research teams are needed in which psychologists, as well as other social and behavioral scientists, work collaboratively with geneticists and other natural scientists. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Use of Race Variables in Genetic Studies of Complex Traits and the Goal of Reducing Health Disparities: A Transdisciplinary Perspective.

The use of racial variables in genetic studies has become a matter of intense public debate, with implications for research design and translation into practice. Using research on smoking as a springboard, the authors examine the history of racial categories, current research practices, and arguments for and against using race variables in genetic analyses. The authors argue that the sociopolitical constructs appropriate for monitoring health disparities are not appropriate for use in genetic studies investigating the etiology of complex diseases. More powerful methods for addressing population structure exist, and race variables are unacceptable as gross proxies for numerous social/environmental factors that disproportionately affect minority populations. The authors conclude with recommendations for genetic researchers and policymakers, aimed at facilitating better science and producing new knowledge useful for reducing health disparities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

On the complexity of race.

Although a variety of studies have indicated that using statistical clustering techniques to examine genetic information may allow for geographically based groupings of individuals that tenuously map onto some conceptions of race (P??bo, 2001), these studies have also indicated that the amount of genetic variation within these groupings is significantly larger than the variation that exists between them (even after controlling for "unused" portions of the human genetic sequence). However, irrespective of these problems with the concept of race, the study of race holds a prominent place within the social and behavioral sciences. In their recent article on this topic, A. Smedley and B. D. Smedley (see record 2005-00117-003) acknowledge the problematic position of race at the genetic level. However, Smedley and Smedley do not explicitly relate the nature of the analyses often conducted to discern race on a genetic level (e.g., forms of cluster and profile analysis) to the discussion of race at the social level. Although the problems of interpreting self-categorizations into racial categories as "real" in the same way that a genetic code is "real" are obvious (and thoroughly discussed by Smedley & Smedley, 2005), what is often less recognized is the fact that the human genetic code allows for an amazing amount of plurality, whereas the racial categories used in most psychological research are unbelievably restricting. Forgetting the serious problems associated with attempting to match the phenomenology of human life with a series of acids, at a minimum psychologists should pay more attention to the fact that the measurement of social constructs should be conceived at a level of complexity that is at least partially commensurate with that of the human genome. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

On the confusion of "race" with biophysical diversity.

Responds to M. J. Zyphur's (see record 2006-01690-012) comments on the original article by A. Smedley and B. D. Smedley (see record 2005-00117-003). Race, as people live and understand it, inhabits a dimension of reality that transcends biology and cannot be reduced to genes, chromosomes, or even phenotypes. A biological or genetic view of race cannot encompass the lived social reality of race, nor does it represent biogenetic variations in human populations very well (Marks, 1995). As Zyphur notes, biogenetic variations in the human species were produced by evolutionary forces as different groups interacted with and underwent adaptation to the natural environments encountered in their migrations. The result was a pattern of variation that should be familiar to everyone: People with dark skin coloring remained adapted to tropical environments (with some internal variations resulting from amounts of tree cover, land elevation, rainfall, etc.). Peoples of tropical lands thus resemble one another in their varying shades of dark skin color and often curly or frizzy hair (known as polytopicity). Some of the darkest skins are found not in Africa but in India, Sri Lanka, Melanesia, and Northern Australia, as anyone who watched the news coverage of the recent tsunami would readily recognize. Groups migrating beyond the tropical areas gradually lost genes for dark skin as they adapted to cooler climates with less sunlight. Geneticists have shown that just as no two individuals are genetically alike (except for identical twins), no two human groups are precisely alike, even when they derive from a common ancestral population. Biogenetic variation has continued to increase as individuals once widely separated meet and mate. Quite apart from the controversy over races as biological taxa, the idea of race as it is known and lived in American society is composed of social values and meanings imposed on this biological variation over the past three or four centuries. As a social construct, race refers to an ideology. Since the 18th century, Americans and many other people in the world have been conditioned to believe that race as biology is the main source of human identities. As Americans have come into contact with peoples around the world, confusion has inevitably ensued, because U.S. racial categories do not necessarily apply in other countries. Given the complexity of the human genome and the history of (continuous) intermixtures, I doubt if it will ever be possible to correlate our genes with our racial (i.e., social) identities. Nor can I imagine at this point why anyone should want to do so. What service to society or science will this fulfill? Social constructs have their own complex dynamics and are vulnerable to change, just as is any other cultural phenomenon. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Population Stratification in the Candidate Gene Study: Fatal Threat or Red Herring?

Advances in molecular genetics have provided behavioral scientists with a means of investigating the influence of genetic factors on human behavior. Unfortunately, recent candidate gene studies have produced inconsistent results, and a frequent scapegoat for the lack of replication across studies is the threat of population stratification. This review of the literature on population stratification suggests that the threat may be a red herring. Reliable findings will require improved specification and measurement of the behavioral phenotypes in question, a renewed focus on internal validity, and the specification and testing of genetic factors in the context of longitudinal multivariate models. In this respect, behavioral scientists are well suited to investigating genetic factors that influence psychological mechanisms. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Examining race and culture in psychology journals: The case of forensic psychology.

Scholars have argued that racial-cultural issues should be given more attention in psychological research. The American Psychological Association (APA) has instituted guidelines and policies about how to include race and culture in research, theory, and practice. Members of racial minority groups are overrepresented in populations served by forensic psychologists. This article reviews content analyses of racial-cultural issues in psychology and presents a content analysis of the treatment of race and culture in 7 forensic psychology journals between 1998 and 2003. Results indicate that less than 10% of the empirical articles addressed issues of race or culture with any depth and that the majority of the articles used a cultural deprivation paradigm. Results and recommendations for practice and future study are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Race and jury selection: Psychological perspectives on the peremptory challenge debate.

The legal system is a domain of potential relevance for psychologists, whether in the capacity of expert witness or citizen juror. In this article, the authors apply a psychological framework to legal debate surrounding the impact of race on the process of jury selection. More specifically, the authors consider race and the peremptory challenge, the procedure by which attorneys may remove prospective jurors without explanation. This debate is addressed from a psychological perspective by (a) examining traditional justifications for the practice of the peremptory challenge, (b) reviewing research regarding the influence of race on social judgment, (c) considering empirical investigations that examine directly race and peremptory challenge use, and (d) assessing current jury selection procedures intended to curtail racial discrimination. These analyses converge to suggest that the discretionary nature of the peremptory challenge renders it precisely the type of judgment most likely to be biased by race. The need for additional psychological investigation of race and jury selection is emphasized, and specific avenues for such research are identified. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Genes, Race, and Psychology in the Genome Era: An Introduction.

The mapping of the human genome has reawakened interest in the topic of race and genetics, especially the use of genetic technology to examine racial differences in complex outcomes such as health and intelligence. Advances in genomic research challenge psychology to address the myriad conceptual, methodological, and analytical issues associated with research on genetics and race. In addition, the field needs to understand the numerous social, ethical, legal, clinical, and policy implications of research in this arena. Addressing these issues should not only benefit psychology but could also serve to guide such thought in other fields, including molecular biology. The purpose of this special issue is to begin a discussion of this issue of race and genetics within the field of psychology. Several scholars who work in the fields of genetics, race, or related areas were invited to write (or had previously submitted) articles sharing their perspectives. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Genetic essentialism: On the deceptive determinism of DNA.

This article introduces the notion of genetic essentialist biases: cognitive biases associated with essentialist thinking that are elicited when people encounter arguments that genes are relevant for a behavior, condition, or social group. Learning about genetic attributions for various human conditions leads to a particular set of thoughts regarding those conditions: they are more likely to be perceived as (a) immutable and determined, (b) having a specific etiology, (c) homogeneous and discrete, and (d) natural, which can lead to the naturalistic fallacy. There are rare cases of “strong genetic explanation” when such responses to genetic attributions may be appropriate; however, people tend to overweigh genetic attributions compared with competing attributions even in cases of “weak genetic explanation,” which are far more common. The authors reviewed research on people's understanding of race, gender, sexual orientation, criminality, mental illness, and obesity through a genetic essentialism lens, highlighting attitudinal, cognitive, and behavioral changes that stem from consideration of genetic attributions as bases of these categories. Scientific and media portrayals of genetic discoveries are discussed with respect to genetic essentialism, as is the role that genetic essentialism has played (and continues to play) in various public policies, legislation, scientific endeavors, and ideological movements in recent history. Last, moderating factors and interventions to reduce the magnitude of genetic essentialism, which identify promising directions to explore in order to reduce these biases, are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Race and Genetics: Controversies in Biomedical, Behavioral, and Forensic Sciences.

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 60(4) of American Psychologist (see record 2007-16797-001). In this article, Table 1 contains several errors due to an editorial mistake. In the Population and Incarceration columns, the data for Blacks and Whites were transposed. In addition, decimal points were omitted from the data in the Rate (%) of Incarceration per Population columns. The correct version of Table 1 appears in the erratum.] Among biomedical scientists, there is a great deal of controversy over the nature of race, the relevance of racial categories for research, and the proper methods of using racial variables. This article argues that researchers and scholars should avoid a binary-type argument, in which the question is whether to use race always or never. Researchers should instead focus on developing standards for when and how to use racial variables. The article then discusses 1 context, criminology, in which the use of racial variables in behavioral genetics research could be particularly problematic. If genetic studies of criminalized behavior use forensic DNA databanks or forensic genetic profiles, they will be confounded by the many racial biases of the law enforcement and penal system. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Twin, sibling, and adoption methods: Tests of evolutionary hypotheses.

Twin, sibling, and adoption studies have long been used by behavioral geneticists to identify genetic and environmental influences underlying human behavioral and physical variation. The full potential of these methodologies for unraveling the blend of biological, cultural, and experiential factors affecting human development has been insufficiently appreciated. The application of twin, sibling, and adoption designs for examining hypotheses generated by evolutionary theory is described. Potential contributions from a closer association between these disciplines are underlined. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Race and IQ: Molecular Genetics as Deus ex Machina.

During the last hundred years, the debate over the meaning of race has retained a highly consistent core, despite evolution of the technical details. Non-Europeans, and in particular, Africans, are assigned the role of deviants and outcasts, whose claim on our common humanity remains in doubt. Each time the technical facade of these racialist arguments is destroyed, the latest jargon and half-truths from the margins of science are used to rebuild them around the same core belief in Black inferiority. Because race is in part a genetic concept, the advent of molecular DNA technology has opened an important new chapter in this story. Unfortunately, the article by D. Rowe (2005, this issue, see record 2005-00117-007) begins from mistaken premises and merely restates the racialist view using the terminology of molecular genetics. No technology--even the awe-inspiring tools now available to DNA science--can overcome the handicap of fundamental conceptual errors. Race is not a concept that emerged from within modern genetics; rather, it was imposed by history, and its meaning is inseparable from that cultural origin. By ignoring its cultural meaning the reductionist narrative about race fails--both in the narrow terms of science and as a contribution to the broader social discourse. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Race, social class, religion, and nationality as determinants of social distance.

"In a study of social distance of college students with respect to various social objects, a factorial design with two levels of value of race, social class, religion, and nationality was employed and analyses of variance were computed on social distance scores. For white Ss race and social class were found to be more important determinants of social distance than religion or nationality… . The data are interpreted in terms of a theory of prejudice that employs conformity, cognitive dissonance, and insecurity as its main constructs." (31 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Race and genetics: Controversies in biomedical, behavioral, and forensic sciences": Correction to Ossorio and Duster (2005).

Reports an error in "Race and Genetics: Controversies in Biomedical, Behavioral, and Forensic Sciences" by Pilar Ossorio and Troy Duster (American Psychologist, 2005[Jan], Vol 60[1], 115-128). In this article, Table 1 contains several errors due to an editorial mistake. In the Population and Incarceration columns, the data for Blacks and Whites were transposed. In addition, decimal points were omitted from the data in the Rate (%) of Incarceration per Population columns. The correct version of Table 1 appears in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2005-00117-011.) Among biomedical scientists, there is a great deal of controversy over the nature of race, the relevance of racial categories for research, and the proper methods of using racial variables. This article argues that researchers and scholars should avoid a binary-type argument, in which the question is whether to use race always or never. Researchers should instead focus on developing standards for when and how to use racial variables. The article then discusses 1 context, criminology, in which the use of racial variables in behavioral genetics research could be particularly problematic. If genetic studies of criminalized behavior use forensic DNA databanks or forensic genetic profiles, they will be confounded by the many racial biases of the law enforcement and penal system. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Behavioral genetics and evolutionary psychology: unified perspective on personality research

Behavioral geneticists and evolutionary psychologists have generally pursued human behavioral analyses with little theoretical or methodological exchange. However, significant benefits might accrue from increased communication between these disciplines. The primary goals of this article are (1) to identify meaningful junctures between behavioral genetics and evolutionary psychology, (2) to describe behavioral genetic research designs and their applications to evolutionary analyses, and (3) to reassess current personality research in light of behavioral genetic and evolutionary concepts and techniques. The five-factor model of personality is conceptualized as subsuming variation in normative species-typical systems with adaptive functions in the human environment of evolutionary adaptation. Considered as universal evolved mechanisms, personality systems are often seen in dynamic conflict within individuals and as highly compartmentalized in their functioning between settings. However, genetically influenced individual differences in personality may also be understood within an evolutionary framework. Studies of the heritability of personality traits indicate broad-sense heritabilities in the 0.40-0.50 range with evidence of substantial nonadditive genetic variation and nonshared environmental influences. Evidence indicates that evolutionary theory (e.g., inclusive fitness theory) predicts patterns of social interaction (e.g., cooperation and bereavement) in relatives. Furthermore, variation in personality may constitute a range of viable strategies matching the opportunities available in the complex niche environment of human societies. Within this wide range of viable strategies, personality variation functions as a resource environment for individuals in the sense that personality variation is evaluated according to the interests of the evaluator (e.g., friendships, coalitions, or mate choice).     

Race--Social, Biological, or Lemonade?

Comments on an article by R. L. Sternberg, E. L. Grigorenko, and K. K. Kidd (see record 2005-00117-006) and another article by H. Tang, T. Quertermous, B. Rodriguez, S. L. Kardia, X. Zhu, X., A. Brown, et al. (2005). On the day that I read Sternberg, Grigorenko, and Kidd's (January 2005) article on race, an article from the American Journal of Human Genetics (Tang et al., 2005) also crossed my desk. As part of their research, the latter authors compared the results of a cluster analysis of people using many genetic markers with the respondent's self-identified race/ethnicity: "Of 3,636 subjects of varying race/ethnicity, only 5 (0.14%) showed genetic cluster membership different from their self-identified race/ethnicity" (Tang et al., 2005, p. 268). I would very much like to hear a response to this finding from Sternberg et al. (2005), who maintained that "race is a socially constructed concept, not a biological one" (p. 49), that reifies those physical correlates of ancient population dispersions "as deriving from some imagined natural grouping of people that does not in fact exist, except in our heads" (p. 51). My take is that if we psychologists could use genetics (or any other biological variables) to distinguish those with schizophrenia from those with bipolar disorder with an error rate even a hundredfold greater than that of Tang et al. (2005), we would announce--and do it with no small fanfare--that there are valid, biological differences between the two disorders. I suspect that much of the difficulty in discussing this issue stems from a tendency to treat "social" and "biological" (or "genetic" and "environmental") phenomena as mutually exclusive. Placing a complicated construct like race into a discrete "social" or "biological" box makes as much sense as asking whether lemonade is (a) lemon juice, (b) water, or (c) sugar. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Psychosocial and leadership identities among leaders of identity-based campus organizations.

In this article, we describe a qualitative study of identities of 18 college students leading identity-based campus organizations at 1 large public institution. Identity-based organizations are those registered student groups whose mission includes serving the educational, cultural, social, or other needs and interests of students from a given psychosocial identity (e.g., race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation). We observed 2 paths that students followed through their leadership experience: (1) A “parallel” path in which students experienced their psychosocial identity and their leadership identity separately, and (2) a “merged” path in which students merged these identities into a sense of being, for example, a “gay leader” or a “Latina activist.” Based on our findings that student leaders in identity-based organizations experience both psychosocial identities and leadership identities as salient—whether parallel or merged—we make recommendations for higher education practice, policy, and research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Integrating feminism and multiculturalism: Scientific fact or science fiction?

How can contemporary psychologists become more multiculturally competent? Should practitioners focus primarily on race/ethnicity or should they attempt to integrate feminist principles and other aspects of identity and social location into their quest for multicultural competence? Competent clinical practice requires a complexity paradigm that encompasses the intersectionalities of class, gender, race/ethnicity, and other aspects that define an individual's subjective experience. This article points out the fact that multicultural theorists, for the most part, have underplayed gender and feminism, as feminist theorists have deemphasized race/ethnicity and class. The author provides several clinical examples that illustrate how integrating multiculturalism and feminism can improve clinical practice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Factorial invariance of a campus climate measure across race, gender, and student classification.

Invariance analyses using multigroup confirmatory factor analysis were conducted to test a model of campus climate perceptions for its equivalence in a combined sample of 2,634 undergraduate and graduate university students across race, gender, and student status. Results suggested that a multidimensional model of campus climate comprised of psychological and behavioral climate dimensions appears to be supported for both undergraduate and graduate students across race/ethnicity and gender. Nonequivalence of factor loadings seen in all three invariance comparisons indicated that relationships between items and the underlying factors differed in magnitude on some climate dimensions between males and females, White and ethnic minority students, and graduate versus undergraduate students. Implications for future climate measurement and higher education policy and practice are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Race as Biology Is Fiction, Racism as a Social Problem Is Real: Anthropological and Historical Perspectives on the Social Construction of Race.

Racialized science seeks to explain human population differences in health, intelligence, education, and wealth as the consequence of immutable, biologically based differences between "racial" groups. Recent advances in the sequencing of the human genome and in an understanding of biological correlates of behavior have fueled racialized science, despite evidence that racial groups are not genetically discrete, reliably measured, or scientifically meaningful. Yet even these counterarguments often fail to take into account the origin and history of the idea of race. This article reviews the origins of the concept of race, placing the contemporary discussion of racial differences in an anthropological and historical context. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)