Search results

This study adds a new dimension in the study of racial and gender bias in farm lending. Most previous studies analyzed the separate effects of race and gender attributes on loan approval decisions. The analysis focuses on the stipulation of loan terms (loan amount, interest rate and maturity) among approved farm loan applications. The time period analyzed spans from 2004 until 2014 during which the government has undertaken reforms to improve delivery of loan services to its clientele of minority farmers. Thus, this study's findings could help validate the effectivity of such institutional reforms affecting Farm Service Agency (FSA) lending operations.

This study utilizes a national direct loan origination data from the FSA of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) collected from 2004 to 2014. The analysis begins by identifying significant differences in cross-tabulations of loan terms among different racial and gender classes. Seemingly unrelated regression (SUR) regression techniques are then applied for a system of equations involving the three loan packaging components. The combined effects of the prescribed loan packaging terms are subsequently analyzed under a simulation-optimization framework.

Regression results validate that indeed, relative to White American borrowers, certain minority borrowers are accommodated with lower loan amounts at higher interest rates and with shorter maturities. However, these decisions seem to be prompted by credit risk management considerations. The most compelling findings include the insignificance of all double minority labeling variables, except for the interest rate equation that even produced favorable results for Hispanic American females. Simulation-optimization results further reinforce that even when one or two unfavorable loan terms are included in the packaging, double minority borrowers end up with better profitability and liquidity positions.

This study provides a different perspective in dealing with the controversial minority bias in lending by presenting evidence gathered from a government farm lending institution. The USDA-FSA has been sued in numerous occasions by minority borrowers. Since then, however, it has deliberately implemented institutional reforms to rectify previous errors. This study provides empirical evidence strengthening FSA's claim of its intention to improve its delivery of loan services, especially for its socially disadvantaged borrowers with double minority classification.

This study pioneers the analysis of the double minority labeling effect on farm lending decisions. Its contributions to literature are further enhanced by its goal to validate the effectiveness of FSA institutional reforms undertaken since the early 2000s in order to improve credit access of and delivery of credit services to minority farm borrowers, especially those that belong to more than one minority classification.

As numerous scholars have noted, the law takes a strikingly incoherent approach to adolescent reproduction. States overwhelmingly allow a teenage girl to independently consent to pregnancy care and medical treatment for her child, and even to give up her child for adoption, all without notice to her parents, but require parental notice or consent for abortion. This chapter argues that this oft-noted contradiction in the law on teenage reproductive decision-making is in fact not as contradictory as it first appears. A closer look at the law’s apparently conflicting approaches to teenage abortion and teenage childbirth exposes common ground that scholars have overlooked. The chapter compares the full spectrum of minors’ reproductive rights and unmasks deep similarities in the law on adolescent reproduction – in particular an undercurrent of desire to punish (female) teenage sexuality, whether pregnant girls choose abortion or childbirth. It demonstrates that in practice, the law undermines adolescents’ reproductive rights, whichever path of pregnancy resolution they choose. At the same time that the law thwarts adolescents’ access to abortion care, it also fails to protect adolescents’ rights as parents. The analysis shows that these two superficially conflicting sets of rules in fact work in tandem to enforce a traditional gender script – that self-sacrificing mothers should give birth and give up their infants to better circumstances, no matter the emotional costs to themselves. This chapter also suggests novel policy solutions to the difficulties posed by adolescent reproduction by urging reforms that look to third parties other than parents or the State to better support adolescent decision-making relating to pregnancy and parenting.

The purpose of this study is to explore the support needs surrounding intimate relationships and sexuality of autistic adults accessing funded social care in England.

Semi-structured interviews with 15 autistic adults who were accessing funded social care examined their support needs surrounding intimate relationships and sexuality, with subsequent data analysis using reflexive thematic analysis.

Four themes were generated: Help at hand, but not too close for comfort, No “cookie-cutter rules”: personalised, inclusive approaches, Playing it safe, not leaving it too late, and Autism-informed education and support.

The authors produced an online learning module for social care staff in England on best practice in supporting autistic adults without learning disabilities with relationships and sexuality.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, there has been no other UK-based research published to date on the social care support needs of autistic adults without learning disabilities surrounding relationships, gender and sexuality.

The literature of ethnic ownership economies descends from middleman minority theory, a subject it continues to include. However, ethnic economy literature now more broadly addresses the economic independence of immigrants and ethnic minorities in general, not just of middleman minorities (Light & Bonacich, 1991, pp. xii–xiii).¹ This expansion releases the subject from narrow concentration upon historical trading minorities, and opens discussion of the entire range of immigrant and ethnic minority strategies for economic self-help and self-defense. Partial or full economic independence represents a ubiquitous self-defense of immigrants and ethnic minorities who confront exclusion or disadvantage in labor markets. Ethnic economies permit immigrants and ethnic minorities to reduce disadvantage and exclusion, negotiating the terms of their participation in the general labor market from a position of greater strength. Unable to find work in the general labor market, or unwilling to accept the work that the general labor market offers, or just reluctant to mix with foreigners, immigrants and ethnic minorities have the option of employment or self-employment in the ethnic economy of their group. Although ethnic and immigrant groups differ in how well and how much they avail themselves of this defense (Collins, 2003; Light & Gold, 2000, p. 34; Logan & Alba, 1999, p. 179), none lacks an ethnic economy.²

Black women faculty are experiencing multiple marginalities within their intersectional identities (Thomas & Hollenshead, 2001). The overwhelming obstacles that they face in academia regarding racism, lack of mentorship, and its impact on productivity are well documented (Allen, Huggins-Hoyt, Holosko, & Briggs, 2018). However, through a raced and gendered intersection centering Black women, these workplace obstacles can transform into something far more insidious (Young & Hines, 2018). Black women academics do not enter academic environments that have been liberated from racism, sexism, or misogynoir; instead, the environment itself is a microcosm of the world in which they reside (Thompson, 2020). Black women academics are double minorities and face issues such as isolation from collegial networks; lack of institutional/departmental support; forced positionality into the role of mentorship for students of color; and increased visibility and bodily presentation concerns (Allen et al., 2018; Pittman, 2010). Further still, the workplace dynamics and needs of students of color can collide within the work of Black women academics, increasing the prevalence of othermothering and a racialized and gendered racial uplift (Griffin, 2013; Mawhinney, 2011). Though previous studies have demonstrated positive effects of university diversification, women, ethnic minorities, sexual minorities, and religious minorities continue to face antagonistic environments (Cunningham, 2009; Hughes & Howard-Hamilton, 2003). Rooted within Black Feminist Thought and Critical Race Theory, this chapter aims to highlight the intersectional identities of Black women academics and identifies mechanisms to address how Black women are experiencing multiple marginalities within their intersectional identities (Hirshfield & Joseph, 2012).

Drawing upon theories of modern discrimination, the present study focuses on cyber incivility and interpersonal incivility as mechanisms through which race leads to perceived discrimination. Participants included 408 full-time working adults who responded to an online survey. The results indicate that Non-White employees experience subtle forms of discrimination through the use of e-mail, which accentuate the need for organizations to eradicate workplace mistreatment so that their employees can avoid the adverse outcomes associated with experiencing cyber incivility. The purpose of this paper is to extend the understanding of selective incivility and concludes with directions for future research and practical implications.

Participants included 408 full-time working adults who responded to the survey online.

The results indicate that race was indirectly associated with discrimination through cyber incivility. The results indicate that Non-White employees experience subtle forms of discrimination through the use of technology and cyber space which accentuate the need for organizations to eradicate workplace incivility so that their employees can evade the adverse outcomes associated with experiencing incivility at work.

This study extends the understanding of selective incivility and concludes with directions for future research and practical implications.

This paper is the first to explore the relationship between race, cyber incivility and discrimination.

Drawing on social identity theory and the concept of perceived organizational support, the authors conducted an online, exploratory survey of 150 lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) workers in 28 countries to examine whether being LGBT provides a unique perspective in the workplace, if they perceive their employer appreciates this perspective, and what effects this has on perceived discrimination and perceived career advancement. Collectively these questions have implications for work engagement and career prospects of LGBT workers. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Multiple regression and qualitative analyses were used to analyze Likert scale questions along with open-ended options.

The majority of respondents agree that being LGBT offers a unique perspective compared to heterosexual workers. The more respondents agree that they have a different perspective, the more they feel discriminated against. After controlling for demographic variables as well as education, tenure, job level, and disclosure, hierarchical linear regression analyses showed offering a unique perspective increases perceived career advantages. Results also showed increased perceived career advantages if the employer appreciates this perspective. Results of a second regression analysis also showed that a unique perspective is associated with more perceived discrimination, unless their employer appreciates this perspective.

Although single-item measures and a small international sample limit generalizability, rich qualitative responses provide insights into LGBT attitudes across multiple countries.

This study can be applied to future understandings of the diverse nature of LGBT perceptions and attitudes in the workplace.

This is one of the first studies to examine LGBT perceptions that they possess a unique perspective that should be valued by employers.

This exploratory study is one of the first to recognize unique LGBT perspectives and examine the relationship between their perspectives and perceived discrimination and career advantages.

Ethnoracial minorities report a variety of discriminatory experiences due to systemic racism. Yet, few studies have examined whether gender and race/ethnicity interact to predict institutional discrimination and racial microaggressions through an intersectional approach.

A predominantly female (60%), ethnoracial minority (20.8% Black, 31.6% Asian, 30.8% Latina/o, 8.2% White, 6.6% Middle Eastern) sample of 895 undergraduates attending a minority-serving public university in an urban setting completed self-report measures of sociodemographic characteristics, experiences of racial microaggressions and institutional discrimination.

Significant (p < 0.05) gender × race/ethnicity interaction effects were found in several institutional discrimination domains: Males reported more police/court discrimination overall, but gender differences in police/court discrimination were less pronounced for non-Black vs Black students. While males tended to report more institutional discrimination than females, the reverse was true for the Middle Eastern group: Middle Eastern females reported institutional discrimination in more domains and more discrimination getting hired than their male counterparts. There was a significant race/ethnicity × gender interaction effect for environmental microaggressions: White males reported more environmental microaggressions than White females, but gender differences were not found in the overall sample.

This study is the first to the authors’ knowledge to assess the interactive effects of gender and ethnicity on the type of microaggressions experienced in a diverse sample that includes individuals of Middle Eastern descent. The authors highlight the range of discriminatory events that ethnoracially minoritized undergraduates experience, even at a minority-serving institution.

Modern prejudice was examined as a potential predictor of overestimating proportions of minority employees in gender-typed occupations. Strength of conjunction error was considered as an indicator of distorted perceptions of these proportions. Furthermore, the purpose of this paper is to investigate whether the association between modern prejudice and strength of conjunction error was weaker for gender-untypical than for gender-typical targets.

Modern prejudice was considered as a predictor of overestimations of black female employees in Study 1 (n=183) and black female older employees in Study 2 (n=409). Data were collected using internet-mediated questionnaires.

In Study 1, modern racism, but not modern sexism, was associated with greater strength of conjunction error when respondents were presented with gender-typical targets. In Study 2, using a sample scoring higher on modern prejudice than in Study 1, modern racism, but not modern sexism and modern ageism, was associated with greater strength of conjunction error, irrespective of target occupation. Furthermore, there was an unexpected association between lower sexism and greater strength of conjunction error for gender-typical targets, but not for gender-untypical targets.

The findings lend support to the ethnic-prominence hypothesis in that modern racism, but not modern sexism or modern ageism, was associated with greater strength of conjunction error. Furthermore, empirical evidence suggests that target non-prototypicality can dilute the effect of modern prejudice on strength of conjunction error.

This is one of the rare studies examining attitudes and conjunction error in a work-relevant context, thereby bridging the gap between social cognition and applied psychology.

Research indicates that faculty of color in the United States face numerous challenges in the academy. To complicate their experiences further, children significantly impact academics’ work. Additional difficulties can arise in balancing work with familial responsibilities. Indeed, strategies to navigate parental obligations while engaging in professional activities are seldom examined among minority parents, across genders and institution types. In response, the current study investigates the intersectionality of race, gender, and parenthood on navigating a work–life balance in academia. This study examines 13 male and female minority parents from an array of institutions and explores their strategies for navigating professional advancement while managing familial obligations.

Our data suggest that parents of color often develop timesaving strategies to complete their work more efficiently. However, in order to do so, they tend to engage in professional and social isolation and to recalibrate personal expectations of work and accomplishments. Of importance, the study uncovered significant gender differences. While fathers faced comparable challenges, the findings indicate that familial responsibilities can disadvantage women more so by impacting their ability to foster professional relationships and potentially harm their emotional well-being. While most faculty of color face difficulties in the workplace, we argue that those with children, especially mothers, face additional challenges that should be addressed by home institutions to foster more equitable opportunities for professional growth.