# ind_items

title_index: microaggressions in the context of academic communities
full_text_index:
       seattle journal for social justice volume 12  issue 2  article 3  2013  microaggressions in the context of academic communities catharine wells boston college law school  follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/sjsj  recommended citation wells, catharine (2013) "microaggressions in the context of academic communities," seattle journal for social justice: vol. 12: iss. 2, article 3. available at: https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/sjsj/vol12/iss2/3  this article is brought to you for free and open access by the student publications and programs at seattle university school of law digital commons. it has been accepted for inclusion in seattle journal for social justice by an authorized editor of seattle university school of law digital commons.  
  319  microaggressions in the context of academic communities catharine wells* prologue in the late 1990s, i was invited to speak on a panel about the difficulties encountered by women in the legal academy. in this connection, i wrote a paper about microaggressions in which i used some of my own experiences as the basis for analysis. the frequent response to my examples was, “that can’t be true!” or “why are you so sensitive?” of course, neither of these reactions came from other women or men of color. but the response was telling. what seemed burdensome to me was invisible or seemingly harmless to the group of white men that dominated most law schools. in this context, the publication of presumed incompetent1 is an important milestone. first, it demonstrates that little has changed in the academic landscape. second, it describes the especially vulnerable position still occupied by women of color. third, by bundling these stories, the book makes skeptical responses less viable—we are telling the truth and we are not exceptionally sensitive. of course, the past few decades have brought some progress. although the book makes it clear that the academic landscape is still littered with landmines for women of color, it is also true that the pool of tenured  *  catharine wells is a professor of law and law school fund research scholar at boston college law school, where she teaches and writes in various areas of legal theory, including pragmatic legal theory, feminist jurisprudence and civil rights theory. 1 presumed incompetent: the intersections of race and class for women in academia (gabriella gutierrez y muhs, yolanda flores niemann, carmen g. gonzalez & angela p. harris eds., 2012) [hereinafter presumed incompetent].  
  320 seattle journal for social justice  faculties has become less overwhelmingly white and male.2 this creates important opportunities for discussion and change. white women, in particular, can play a constructive role but only if we recognize that our hard won places in the establishment create the risk of blindness. unless we remain alert, a microaggressive climate may become as invisible to us as it has been to our male colleagues. a good place to begin is with a thorough understanding of the microaggressions themselves. microaggressions are not merely insensitive remarks. if that is all they were, it would be bad enough; but, they also operate in predictable ways to insure that the interests of insiders are protected from newcomers. thus, they have the overall effect of maintaining current patterns of exclusion.3 this is why the discussion that has been started by presumed incompetent4 is so important. reliving these painful experiences is more than just catharsis. it is an opportunity to strategize—to think about the ways in which these obstacles impede our progress. it is in that spirit that i offer the following paper.  i. thinking about microaggressions i first heard the word “microaggression” at the 1987 critical legal studies (cls) conference where the topic was cls and problems of race. the evening before the program began, richard delgado circulated a letter 2  a complete statistical analysis of racial and gender diversity in law faculties for the years 2000 to 2008 is available from the american association of law schools website. aals statistical report on law faculty, aals, http://www.aals.org/resources_statis tical.php (last visited oct. 28, 2013). 3 indeed the “progress” noted above has not solved the problem. recent data compiled by the aals shows that law faculty are still only 37.3 percent female and 14.9 percent non-white. 2008-2009 aals statistical report on law faculty, aals, http://www.aals.org/0809stats.php (last visited july 16, 2013). the most recent year for which data is available on the aals website is the academic year 2008-2009. see id.; aals, the promotion, retention, and tenuring of law school faculty: comparing faculty hired in 1990 and 1991 to faculty hired in 1996 and 1997 (dec. 14, 2004), available at http://www.aals.org/documents/2005recruitmentreport.pdf. 4 presumed incompetent, supra note 1.  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  saying that one of the things that made it difficult for minorities to participate in cls was the repeated use of microaggressions. in the letter, he gave a number of examples, one of which stands out in my mind. it was a quote from an article authored by a prominent member of the cls community. it said the following: (law) teachers are overwhelmingly white, male, and middle class; and most (by no means all) black and women law teachers give the impression of thorough assimilation to that style, or of insecurity and unhappiness.5 richard suggested that we discuss this and the other examples in small groups before the formal opening of the conference. the discussions that followed were extremely illuminating. most of the women and minorities in the small groups immediately perceived why these words could be called “microaggressions,” although few of us had a clear idea about what the term meant. on the other hand, almost all of the white men6 in the group were dumbfounded. they noted that this comment appeared in the context of an argument for racial and gender parity and that it would be perverse indeed to interpret the statement as racist or sexist.7 obviously, the statement was not the kind of hate speech that is frequently associated with these terms. nevertheless, it entailed a number of negative consequences for women and minorities, and these became apparent as the discussion progressed. in trying to explain why the statement was offensive, we asked the white men, “how would you feel if one of your colleagues publicly described you as insecure and unhappy?” they replied with the following: it’s not personal. don’t take it personally.  5  duncan kennedy, legal education as training for hierarchy, in the politics of the law: a progressive critique 54, 56 (david kairys ed., 1st ed., 1982) (“the  teacher sets the tone – a white, male middle class tone”). 6 in general, i dislike using the term “white men,” but there is not a more accurate way to describe those who defended the remark. as discussed below, microaggressions have a way of polarizing the community along racial and gender lines. 7 as we shall see below, the words “racist” and “sexist” add to the confusion about microaggressions.  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  321  
  322 seattle journal for social justice  a. it’s not personal. don’t take it personally but, it is not hard to see why those of us who were women and minorities would take it personally. at that time, the phrase “black and women law teachers” denoted a small group of individuals who were, because of their race or their gender, highly visible to the intended audience. thus, while those on the privileged side of race and gender distinctions understood the phrase “black and women law teachers” as an abstraction, the rest of us took it personally as identifying a group of individuals of which we were a part of. to us, such an “abstraction” not only referred to us directly, but it also singled out race and gender—the two characteristics that had made our participation in the community most problematic. nor did the particular attributes ascribed to us—”insecure” and “unhappy”—have a sympathetic tone. calling someone insecure and unhappy attributes a subjective state to that person, while at the same time remaining non-committal as to whether the subjective state is the result of external circumstances. in addition, publicly identifying someone as “insecure and unhappy” is particularly harmful in a community, such as law teaching, where everyone understands that self-assurance and positive energy are crucial to success. the white males in the group made another response that also deserves attention. this was the question: are you really saying that no one can comment on the sorry state of women and minorities in law teaching without offending you personally? to which the answer seems obvious enough, although perhaps not in the heat of the moment. there are many ways to express the thought that the law school environment is disempowering to women and minorities without calling us unhappy and insecure. the point that needs to be made is not one about women and minorities, but about the environment that oppresses us. this is easily done without saying anything personal about us individually or as a group. for example, this is a hostile environment for women and minorities; women and minorities report that they experience this community as being hostile  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  to them;8 we don’t really create room in this community for women and minorities to talk about the ways in which their experience might be different from our own. indeed, if the author had been pressed to describe the problems encountered by women and minorities as problems with the community itself, it might have prompted him to inquire further what it is about the community that makes it so unwelcoming. the final response also deserves discussion. some, who thought that even if the remark was “theoretically” objectionable, wondered, does it really make any difference? b. does it really make any difference? this question was asked despite the fact that several people stated their feelings had been hurt by this characterization. interestingly, in the discussion these statements were almost entirely overlooked or treated as irrelevant. in fact, several discussants noted that no harm had been intended in order to show that no harm had resulted. this was not, they argued, hate speech; and indeed, it was not. totally overlooked in this approach, however, was the assaultive nature of the comments themselves. suppose, for example, in the course of a discussion, i illustrate my point by sweeping my hand within inches of your face. you recoil, you lose concentration, and perhaps you have a sense of physical violation. nevertheless, no harm is intended, the conduct is not particularly violent, and no physical contact is made. but even so, the gesture itself invades your space and places you at a disadvantage. it is similar with microaggressions. a microaggression may surprise you, stun  8  someone who says this must be careful to consider whether women and minorities actually do report this, or whether he is simply putting words in their mouths for his own purposes. often times a microaggression consists of an attempt by well-meaning individuals to speak on behalf of women and minorities when these groups are in fact present and able to speak for themselves.  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  323  
  324 seattle journal for social justice  you, enrage you, or even hurt your feelings. even trivial microaggressions can put you off balance and distract you from the task at hand. the fact that microaggressions place the subject at a disadvantage is especially harmful because the aggression itself is often invisible to those who witness it. as the cls discussion showed, a microaggression may pass entirely unnoticed by those in the dominant community. even those who notice it may say that the recipient should let it go because it was unintended; because it was harmless; or because confronting the issue “plays the race card”—a move viewed by many in the dominant community with such dread that discussions of racial issues are limited to abstract consideration of other people’s practices. indeed, in ordinary circumstances, one is well advised to ignore microaggressions and let them pass. because of this, there is little opportunity to think clearly about the meaning of microaggressions and to consider their impact not only upon women and minorities, but also upon the communities in which we live. my aim in this essay is to begin a different kind of conversation about microaggressions. much of what has been written about microaggressions has been addressed to one of two audiences. those in the first audience— the audience for feminist scholarship and critical race theory—have themselves experienced microaggressions and are eager to share their analysis with one another. the second—largely consisting of those who by virtue of a privileged status rarely experience microaggressions—see the problem of political correctness. the latter ask to what extent individuals should be required to moderate their speech on account of the sensitivities of other members of the community. this division is understandable given the polarization that i discuss later in the essay. but i believe we can do better. i believe that there are many people who are on the privileged side of microaggressions who would like to learn more. i also believe that people who are not on the privileged side would gain something by hearing from the other side.  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  for these reasons, i am addressing my paper to both audiences, recognizing the possibility that what i am saying will prove irritating to both. those on the non-privileged side may find my approach insensitive to their injuries, while those who are on the privileged side may feel that i am making a big deal out of nothing.9 because it is so easy to seem wrong to both sides, it is difficult to talk about microaggressions in “mixed” company. nevertheless, i think it is extremely important we do so. the problem of microaggressions is important because most of us still work in semi-integrated (or inadequately integrated) communities. microaggressions make these communities more stressful than they need be. all of us—not just women and minorities, but all of us—would live better and work more productively if we could learn to avoid them. in the remainder of this essay, i will discuss three questions: 1) what are microaggressions? 2) what kinds of harm do they cause? 3) can we learn to avoid them? it is my hope that an open and frank discussion of these questions will motivate each of us to think about the role microaggressions play in our respective communities and to consider how the harms they cause might be mitigated.  ii. what are microaggressions? since the conference in 1987, critical race theorists and feminist legal scholars have used the concept of microaggressions to describe the social and verbal cues that make them feel unwelcome in traditionally white society. they understand microaggressions as comments or actions that single out an individual as being different from other members of the group by relating that individual to certain negatively valued racial or gender 9  the people who have read or heard about this essay have fallen into two camps. those who have been frequent targets of microaggressions have felt that my condemnation of them should be more forceful, and those who have not been targets, wonder whether i have not overstated their importance. as i discuss below, part of the harm caused by microaggressions is this kind of polarization.  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  325  
  326 seattle journal for social justice  stereotypes. one set of authors puts it this way: “microaggressions are subtle verbal and non-verbal insults directed toward non-whites, often done automatically and unconsciously. they are layered insults based on one’s race, gender, class, sexuality, language, immigration status, phenotype, accent, or surname.”10 and they give the following examples—“being ignored for service, assumed to be guilty of anything negative, treated as inferior, stared at due to being of color, or singled out in a negative way because of being different.”11 most authors recognize that microaggressions can cause substantial injury. for example, professor tayyab mahmud considers them “affronts to human dignity and self-respect . . . [they are] [b]ehaviors that impact not only the social existence of the victims, but also potentially leave scars on their psyche.”12 it is wrong to think of microaggressions as “subtle” forms of racism or sexism. there was, after all, nothing subtle about the racism and sexism reported in the bell-delgado survey. here is an example: a respondent, the only black woman teaching at a major southern university, reported that many of the law students had never seen a black woman “out of uniform”— outside of domestic service. she said that although she dresses impeccably, visitors to the law school often mistake her for a maid and call spills and messes to her attention.13 such microaggressions are a common ingredient of professional life both for women and for people of color. their pervasiveness has been well 10  solorzano et al., keeping race in place: racial microaggressions and campus racial climate at the university of california, berkeley, 23 chicano-latino l. rev. 15, 17 (2002). 11 id. 12 tayyab mahmud, citizen and citizenship within and beyond the nation, 52 clev. st. l. rev. 51, 58–59 (2005). 13 richard delgado, minority law professors’ lives: the bell/delgado survey 24 harv. c.r.-c.l. l. rev. 349, 360 (1989). unfortunately, this seems to be a common theme. see, e.g., anita allen, on being a role model, 6 berkeley women’s l. j. 22, 31 (1990) (“once, an eminent white scholar with whom i was dining suddenly took my chin into his hand to inspect my face. he told me, approvingly, that i resembled his family’s former maid”).  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  documented in literature, and their effects on women and people of color have been widely discussed.14 the undeniable effect of microaggressions has been to form a barrier against inclusion that has persisted long after more formal barriers have disappeared. microaggressions impede integration. therefore, the concept of microaggressions deserves further analysis.  14  see generally jill nelson, volunteer slavery: my authentic negro experience (1993); patricia j. williams, the alchemy of race and rights (1992); allen, supra note 13; jodi david armour, color-consciousness in the courtroom, 28 sw. u. l. rev. 281 (1999); kathleen s. bean, the gender gap in the law school classroom–beyond survival, 14 vt. l. rev. 23 (1989); jermone mccristal culp jr., autobiography and legal scholarship and teaching: finding the me in the legal academy, 77 va. l. rev. 539 (1991); peggy c. davis, law as microaggression, 98 yale l.j. 1559 (1989); delgado, supra note 13; leslie g. espinoza, masks and other disguises: exposing legal academia, 103 harv. l. rev. 1878 (1990); christine haight farley, confronting expectations: women in the legal academy, 8 yale j.l. & feminism 333 (1996); lucinda finley, womens’ experience in legal education: silencing and alienation, 1 legal educ. rev. 101 (1989); paula gaber, “just trying to be human in this place”: the legal education of twenty women, 10 yale j.l. & feminism 165 (1998); trina grillo, tenure and minority women law professors: separating the strands, 31 u.s.f. l. rev. 747 (1997); angela harris, women of color in legal education: representing la mestiza, 6 berkley women’s l.j. 107 (1990); cheryl i. harris, law professors of color and the academy: of poets and kings, 68 chi.-kent l. rev. 331 (1992); kevin r. johnson, “melting pot” or “ring of fire”?: assimilation and the mexican-american experience, 85 calif. l. rev. 1259 (1997); charles r. lawrence iii, if he hollers let him go: regulating racist speech on campus, 1990 duke l.j. 431 (1990); charles r. lawrence iii, the id, the ego, and equal protection: reckoning with unconscious racism, 39 stan. l. rev. 317 (1987); lu-in wang, race as proxy: situational racism and self-fulfilling stereotypes, 53 depaul l. rev. 1013 (2004); mahmud, supra note 12; margaret e. montoya, mascaras, trenzas, y grenas: un/masking the self while un/braiding latina stories and legal discourse, 15 chicano-latino l. rev. 1, 25 (1994); russell g. pearce, white lawyering: rethinking race, lawyer identity, and rule of law, 73 fordham l. rev. 2081 (2005); marc r. poirer, gender stereotypes at work, 65 brooklyn l. rev. 1073 (1999); john a. powell, as justice requires/permits: the delimitation of harmful speech in a democratic society, 16 law & ineq. 97 (1998); solorzano et al., supra note 10; amy l. wax, discrimination as accident, 74 ind. l.j. 1129 (1999); catherine weiss & louise melling, the legal education of twenty women, 40 stan. l. rev. 1299 (1988).  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  327  
  328 seattle journal for social justice  a. the “micro” aspect of microaggressions the “micro” in “microaggression” suggests that microaggressions inflict only minor pains and bruises; in some cases, this is true. for example, i hear the following types of comments, and their effect on me is quite minimal: “we shouldn’t lower the standards by recruiting women and minorities.” “she reminds me of my mother in law.” — a comment made by a colleague as an explanation for his negative vote on a female candidate. “is there any way a white male can get into teaching?” — a comment made by a student who attended a school where 92 percent of the faculty was white and male. to me, these comments betray ignorance and confusion; they are irritating but do not constitute a particular threat to my sense of well-being. there are other comments, however, that cause real pain. here is a description reported by an african-american male who was contemplating applying for tenure: when i entered my colleague’s office, i was already deeply in pain. it was a very rough beginning. i was battle weary, bone tired. and when he began to talk, i sank into my pain which embraced me with rough, razor sharp arms. as he talked, i sensed that invisible cuts would hasten my death. i wondered if he saw my pain. he did not. as he continued to talk, i felt small and unsure.15  15 reginald leamon robinson, teaching from the margins: race as a pedagogical subtext, 19 w. new eng. l. rev. 151, 175–76 (1997). the microaggressions in this case were part of an extended discussion of prof. robinson’s teaching and scholarship. when i have described this incident to people who are not of color, they have suggested that this might simply have been “honest feedback.” without knowing anything about the merits of the case, i am confident that telling someone that they are “distinctly sub-par,” as the white colleague did in this case, is a particularly blunt assessment that would not normally be conveyed in a conversation between two people of the same race. honest feedback is important, but under “normal” circumstances, most of us recognize the value of tact.  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  obviously, there is nothing “micro” about these feelings. it is not an extreme case. it represents a set of feelings that are familiar to me and to many others who have experienced microaggressive conduct. the term “microaggression” is somewhat misleading when looked at from the victim’s perspective. a microaggression is only “micro” when it is compared to acts of outright sexism or racism. if someone calls me a c*nt or calls my black friend a n*gg*r, that is hate speech, and everyone will recognize it as such and agree that it is unacceptable in civil society. a microaggression is not “micro” in the sense that it is less disturbing and less hurtful than this kind of hate speech. it is only “micro” in the sense that privileged members of the community will regard it as trivial, if they notice it at all. this makes such a remark truly dangerous. if i were shot in the arm, no one would be surprised if i grabbed the wound, screamed in pain, and fell to the ground. but if the bullet were invisible, these same responses would seem overwrought and hysterical. thus, a microaggression does not just bring injury, but also brings the practical need to pretend that the aggression never happened. if one is left angry, speechless, or hurt, one must hide that fact as best one can. better to be seen as stumbling and inarticulate than to be seen as sensitive in irrational ways. b. the “aggressive” aspect of microaggressions it is also important to be clear about the aggressive impact of microaggressions. we can see this more clearly by comparing a microaggression to an assault. like an assault, a microaggression produces fear, stress, and emotional harm. in addition, it may have material consequences; it may intimidate the victim and deter her from pursuing her own interests.16 when made in public, a microaggression may also embarrass the victim, undermine her credibility, or expose her vulnerability.  16  see infra section ii(b).  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  329  
  330 seattle journal for social justice  there are, however, important differences between a microaggression and an assault. first, the tort of assault requires intent, but most microaggressors have no conscious intent to harm the victim;17 nor, in most cases, do they even realize that such harm can occur. indeed, as the cls example indicates, those who share a racial or gender identity with the perpetrator may not perceive the harm even after it is explained to them. this is not surprising. race and gender often act in unconscious ways to alter social relationships,18 and it is also true that being on the privileged side of a microaggression is—like most privileges—least visible to the holder of the privilege.19 second, microaggressions often consist only of words, and it is black letter law that mere words do not constitute an assault.20 but, even though most microaggressions are entirely verbal, they do not represent mere personal disputes. instead, they reflect a history of racial and gender practices that have resulted in a wide-ranging pattern of oppression and discrimination. thus, microaggressions are, in some ways, even more serious and consequential than an individual assault. third, an assault is only actionable if it creates a fear of physical harm.21 microaggressions do cause fear, but rarely a fear of physical harm. furthermore, from the victim’s perspective, the fear is reasonable. in  17 in tort law, one can meet the intent requirement for intentional torts by showing the act was intended and that it was substantially certain the harm would result from the act. garratt v. daily, 279 p.2d 1091, 1093–95 (1955), appealed after remand 304 p.2d 681 (1956). from the point of view of the target, intent is present since it seems substantially certain that harm will result; however, as the cls discussion indicates, the likelihood of harm is not apparent to those who share the race and/or gender of the aggressor. citation needed. 18 charles r. lawrence iii, the id, the ego and equal protection: reckoning with unconscious racism, supra note 14. 19 see generally stephanie m. wildman & adrienne d. davis, making systems of privilege visible, in privilege revealed: how invisible preference undermines america (stephanie m. wildman ed., 1996). 20 restatement (second) of torts § 31 (1965). 21 id. at § 21 (contact required).  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  assessing the issue of reasonableness, the tort law has recognized that circumstances are extremely important. in the context of microaggressions, circumstances look different to the victim than they do to a member of the dominant majority. the resulting effect is a divide between men and women (and in the case of a racial microaggression, between white people and people of color) in their ability to discern microaggressive conduct and judge its severity. thus, the question arises: whose reality should be considered in determining whether a microaggression has occurred? as a matter of practical fact, in most groups, it will be the holders of race and gender privilege who establish group norms, and this means that their view will come to dominate. as a result, those who complain about microaggressions will be seen as too sensitive, and victims will be further isolated as people “watch what they say” around them—not out of respect or consideration, but simply to avoid the irrational outbursts of someone who they believe will never be satisfied.  iii. what kinds of harm do microaggressions cause? microaggressions cause harm on many different levels. on the surface, they seem to be no more than a faux pas or a small moment of disrespect. this way of looking at it, however, overlooks the extent to which microaggressions resonate with past experience and contribute to an ongoing sense of being fatally out of place. indeed, a steady onslaught of microaggressions can create a psychological war zone in which the target feels hyper-alert, endlessly at risk, and overcome with negative selfimagery.22 furthermore, as allen and solarzano point out, microaggressions act on several levels simultaneously: “any one stereotype or 22  see, e.g., r.a. lenhardt, understanding the mark: race, stigma, and equality in context, 79 n.y.u. l. rev. 803, 839 (2004). “[microaggressions] make it impossible to forget, even momentarily, about one’s compromised social position. and, like racial disparities and discriminatory conduct, microaggressions have the effect—even when they are committed unconsciously—of further amplifying the negative messages conveyed not just about individuals, but about entire groups of racial minorities.” id.  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  331  
  332 seattle journal for social justice  microaggression may contain various layers of discrimination. the stress related to deciphering these layers and responding or not responding to each microaggression falls on the student of color.”23 and, as the authors note, this layering effect leads to serious consequences: “in and of itself a microaggression may seem harmless, but the cumulative burden of a lifetime of microaggressions can theoretically contribute to diminished mortality, augmented morbidity, and flattened confidence.”24 indeed, the better one understands microaggressions; the more clearly one sees that patricia williams’ famous phrase—spirit murder25—is not a metaphor but a particularly apt description of the harm that microaggressions cause. to illustrate the harmful effects of microaggressions, i have chosen an example from my own experience. i have intentionally selected an example that is fairly mundane—one that passed unremarked at a routine lunch in the presence of two men who are generally kind and decent people. while at lunch, prof. x asked, “why doesn’t anyone discuss the sexual harassment of men?” in the ensuing discussion, prof. x emphasized two things: first, that it was exactly the same thing if a female student made unwanted advances to him as it would be if he made unwanted advances to the student; and second, that, in his experience, it was more common that the woman student was the predator. i bit my lip. i knew better than to express my opinion, but after 15 minutes, i could stand it no longer. i asked, “why is it so important to you to show that men and women go through exactly  23 walter r. allen & daniel solorzano, affirmative action, educational equity and campus racial climate: a case study of the university of michigan law school, 12 la raza l.j. 237, 283 (2001). 24 id. (quoting chester pierce). 25 see patricia williams, spirit-murdering the messenger: the discourse of fingerpointing as the law’s response to racism, 42 u. miami l. rev. 127, 129 (1987) (equating racism with spirit murder as a hostile act that is “as devastating, as costly, and as psychically obliterating as robbery or assault”).  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  the same thing?” his reply stunned me: “i would hate it,” he said, “if i had to wipe out half the human race.”26 in retrospect, i am not exactly sure what prof. x meant. certainly, the remark suggested that he was not willing to tolerate the presence of people who were substantially different from himself. in any case, my lunch-mates laughed. they probably did not agree with prof. x. unlike him, they found some measure of difference between human beings not just tolerable, but agreeable. in their view, prof. x was sometimes ridiculous—just a little bit over the top—but they liked this about prof. x, who was brilliant in so many other ways. at the time, this “casual” comment took my breath away. i was literally frightened. for hours, i was preoccupied with the remark. i had to sort out what was actually said, what had been intended, and how other listeners would have heard the comment. i had to deal with my anger, and with the nagging suspicion that there was something that i could and should have said at the time. perhaps on another day i would not have found his remark so threatening, but on this day i really did. i heard a tone of menace—what i understood from his remark was that it would be dangerous to express difference. if i was “just like him,” i could live peacefully within the community. if not, i would be “wiped out.” i know, as i recount this, that some readers will think that my response bordered on paranoia.27 to the contrary, however, it was a natural response of someone who felt herself to be vulnerable. imagine that you are the only untenured woman at a school where the tenured faculty has a ratio of 35  26 it is not clear what this remark was supposed to mean. i think he meant that if we all did not share the same experiences, then there was no use in our trying to communicate. in any case, i heard this, but i also heard a much more alarming and threatening interpretation of what he said. 27 if this was paranoia, then it was a paranoia shared by the men who had been hired with me. they also would agonize over ambiguous remarks and would worry that the tenure process would be unfairly skewed by the idiosyncrasies of individual members of the tenured faculty.  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  333  
  334 seattle journal for social justice  men to 2 women. imagine also that you received numerous comments every single working day that made some point—often a negative one—about your gender. consider that, in light of such comments, you feel yourself sticking out like a sore thumb in every faculty meeting and discussion. and consider also that prof. x was well known within the community for his sexual predation and his hostility to women. under these circumstances, the seeming metaphor felt real—i would be “wiped out” if i expressed difference. this example of a microaggression illustrates a number of ways in which such statements cause harm to women, and to people of color. they are upsetting in the immediate context, but they also have consequences that stretch far beyond the immediate circumstances. in the remainder of this section, i will describe these consequences, dividing them into three categories. first, i will describe how microaggressions cause distress and demoralization. second, i will show how they impair the ability of the recipient to pursue certain vital interests. finally, i will discuss how they isolate the recipient and serve to polarize the greater community. a. distress and demoralization when i practiced law, most of the microaggressions i heard came from people who had little power to shape my destiny. i could safely ignore them and go about my business. for example, a court clerk who told me that i would have to move because my seat was reserved for lawyers could easily be corrected. when i entered teaching, however, many microaggressions came from colleagues, and how to handle them became a difficult question. since tenure took a vote of the faculty, it was necessary to pay particular attention to comments that indicated a negative assessment; but i found that paying attention to these comments carried a high price. taken seriously, microaggressions distress and demoralize, undermine self-confidence, and lead to a paralyzing form of alienation. there are two aspects of  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  microaggressions that amplify this effect. the first is resonance; the second is repetition. 1. resonance microaggressions are not merely surface injuries. they resonate with deeply held understandings about our imperfections and limitations. many of these understandings are linked to negative stereotypes; others are linked to painful aspects of gender or racial experience. for example, when prof. x talked about “wiping out” half the human race, it resonated with my feelings of being an outsider. it also evoked the violence that sometimes accompanies gender conflict. resonance can even convert a comment that is ostensibly favorable into one that feels demeaning to its subject. take, for example, senator biden’s recent statement that senator obama is articulate. the word “articulate” is generally understood as a compliment. we use it to describe someone who does a particularly good job of explaining what we don’t understand. nevertheless, there are a number of reasons why this “compliment” can be offensive to african-americans. first, there is a tendency for white people—myself included—to describe african-americans as “articulate” when we mean to say, “the experience of your race is a mystery to me; and, despite this, you have managed to make a connection with me.” when the word is used in this way, it conveys not only a positive message—“you connected with me”—but also a negative one—“despite the fact that african-americans are outsiders in my world.” second, the “compliment” resonates with negative stereotypes such as “poorly educated” and “poorly spoken.” in this context, the praise seems condescending; it seems to suggest that my prior expectations were entirely to the contrary. third, the statement may have painful reverberations as it stands in direct contrast to a time when white people used the criminal law to prevent african-americans from becoming educated and literate.  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  335  
  336 seattle journal for social justice  2. repetition as any political strategist knows, the more a message is repeated, the more powerful it becomes. a remark can hurt when it is said only once; but when it is endlessly repeated by many different people, its truth becomes hard to resist. when prof. x made his remark about gender differences, he did so against a steady chorus of comments that reflected ambivalent attitudes about women. some of my colleagues seemed to agree with prof. x, in his feeling that women are only human if they are just like men. others seemed to feel that women were fundamentally different and that their stereotypical differences might make them ill-suited to an academic life. still, others treated the women on the faculty as exceptional—we were women, but we shared many of the good male traits. these varying viewpoints were expressed day in and day out in a variety of ways. for example, i would frequently be asked for a “woman’s perspective” on some particular issue. or worse, a colleague would ask me to explain the reaction of a female student who had taken offense at a sexist comment, usually with the expectation that i would agree with him that she was oversensitive. this would leave me in the awkward position of defying his clearly communicated expectations, or undermining the female student by delegitimizing her “feminist” response. when i was not cast as the spokeswoman, i was frequently treated as an honorary male. this designation was awkward for two reasons. first, it emphasized my outsider status by including me only on an “honorary” basis. second, it impugned my femininity—something that made me feel like a freak to the rest of the world. for example, one of my male colleagues overheard a conversation between me and a female student about where to shop for clothes. he walked over and admonished her by saying, “she’s a professor; she isn’t a shopper.” certainly, he was trying to be humorous, but, in fact, no woman likes to be told in public that she is no longer a woman.  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  another repetitive problem was the response that conversations among female faculty prompted among our peers. when such conversations occurred, the inevitable question was, “what are you women plotting now?” a question that seemed to speak volumes about the anxiety that was created by our presence on the faculty and also reminded us of our perpetual “outsider” status. i could offer many more examples, but the time has come to recognize the harm that microaggressions cause to women and people of color. there is an old saying about sticks and stones and words that never hurt, but these words are hurtful. microaggressions have the systematic effect of devaluing and demoralizing members of the group who are defined as different. furthermore, their frequency adds to the distress. it is one thing to laugh off a single comment; it is another to withstand a virtual onslaught of negative messages. b. inability to pursue vital interests the term “microaggression” was coined by chester pierce, the first african-american psychiatrist to join the faculty of the harvard medical school. he wrote an article on the subject soon after he finished a stint as an assistant coach to the harvard football team.28 i believe that this timing is important. it suggests that microaggressions have strategic consequences. a football game is all about territory. field position is everything. teams gain field position by means of aggression. sometimes, this takes the form of pushing someone out of the way. other times, it is simply a matter of being there first. if we think about social relations in these terms, then it is not 28  chester pierce, stress analogs of racism and sexism: terrorism, torture, and disaster, in mental health, racism, and sexism 277 (charles v. willie et al. eds., 1995). pierce’s article emphasizes the extreme nature of the harm that microaggressions cause: “in and of itself a microaggression may seem harmless, but the cumulative burden of a lifetime of microaggressions can theoretically contribute to diminished mortality, augmented morbidity, and flattened confidence.” id. at 281.  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  337  
  338 seattle journal for social justice  hard to see why traditional forms of privilege dominate the field. first, those who are traditionally privileged are inevitably there first. second, even when those who are not privileged have staked out their territory, microaggressions can be used to surreptitiously push them out of the way. the football analogy will help us to understand why microaggressions are so important. when a tackles b, b falls to the ground and suffers a momentary injury. but that is, in some ways, the least important effect of the tackle. if b was carrying the ball, the tackle will define field position. if b was trying to sack the quarterback, the tackle may clear the way for a touchdown pass. similarly, when prof. a says something to or about prof. b, it may have an effect on his or her standing in the community. for example, if prof. a says “there are only a few women on this faculty and they are effectively marginalized,” it will have the effect of further marginalizing the women on the faculty. this may not be the speaker’s intention, but it will be the result. similarly, recall prof. x’s comment about having to wipe out half the human race. at the time he said it, feminist jurisprudence had become an important topic of discussion. some feminists claimed that gender differences resulted in different ethical structures;29 others saw legal norms as tools that defended male power from the claims of disempowered women.30 put in its simplest form, feminist jurisprudence was based on two claims: 1) the law treats men and women differently by overlooking the legitimate needs of women; and 2) it is important to pay attention to this difference. when prof. x indicated that his preferred way of dealing with difference was to “wipe out” those who were different, it suggested to me that doing feminist jurisprudence might be dangerous. thus, prof. x’s comment had a very concrete and practical effect: i lost something—i 29  see generally carol gilligan, in a different voice: psychological theory and women’s development (1982). 30 see generally catharine a. mackinnon, feminism unmodified: discourses on life and law (1987).  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  became conflicted about doing a form of scholarship that interested me, and he gained something—freedom from an unwanted discussion about the effect of gender differences on american law. another area where microaggressions have important practical consequences is student evaluations. there is a great deal of evidence— both scientific and anecdotal—that student evaluations are laden with microaggressive comments31 and that they exhibit a clear bias against women and people of color.32 nevertheless, most schools accept these evaluations as an accurate indicator of a professor’s skill in the classroom. in doing so, most readers assume that they can look beyond the “occasional” racism and sexism that these reports convey. this assumption, however, needs scrutiny. some comments are so blatant that they can be readily discerned and discounted, but many, if not most, microaggressions remain invisible to members of the dominant majority.33 finally, if one is skeptical about the strategic value of microaggressions, one should ask the political experts. consider, for example, the effectiveness of the willy horton advertisement that appeared in the 1988 presidential race, the “call me” ad that was deployed against senatorial candidate harold ford or the “black rapist” ad that ran against massachusetts governor deval patrick.34 such examples make it plain that 31  see, e.g., deborah j. merritt, bias, the brain and student evaluations of teaching, 82 st. john’s l. rev. 235, 235 n.2 (articles discussing the effects of race and gender on teaching evaluations). 32 see generally id. 33 once, when a faculty committee was investigating whether to make faculty evaluations public, there was a question as to what should be done about those evaluations that made overtly racist or sexist comments. it was suggested that the best way to deal with this problem was simply to excise the offending remark. this was a remedy that would only enhance the microaggression by allowing the student his say, but allowing him to say it on a supposedly race neutral basis. when i protested this arrangement, the argument was that it would save the faculty member from embarrassment. i was thus left to wonder why a sexist remark should be embarrassing to me rather than to the student who wrote it. 34 harold ford is an african-american who was running for the senate from tennessee. his opponent, a white man, ran an ad that featured a buxom blond with her hand to her  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  339  
  340 seattle journal for social justice  when we look at microaggressions as merely random bits of bad behavior, we are missing something important. c. polarization microaggressions look different depending upon whether the viewer identifies with the aggressor or the target class. when a microaggression  ear as if holding a phone, mouthing the words “call me!” there was little point to the reference except to play on southern fears that black men will defile white women. the ad is available on youtube. harold ford...call me, youtube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v 24rm3—liv8. deval patrick is an african-american who ran for governor of massachusetts. kerry healy was his white, female opponent. here is an ad she ran: the scene is set in a deserted parking garage. a woman is walking slowly to her car. you can hear her footsteps, and there is scary music playing in the background. woman’s voice: here’s a question: if a teacher at your kids school, or a friend or a coworker or if anyone you knew actually praised a convicted rapist, what would you think? deval patrick did. here’s what he said about brutal rapist ben laguerre. deval patrick’s voice: “he is eloquent and he is thoughtful. there is no doubt about that.” woman’s voice: here’s another question: have you ever heard a woman compliment a rapist? deval patrick — he should be ashamed not governor david dahl, healy launches new laguer ad, boston.com news, oct. 16, 2006, http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2006/10/healey_launches.html. a naive analysis of this would be that kerry healy is tough on crime and deval patrick is not. healy gets to occupy the anti-crime space—a five yard pass. if, however, you add in the racial stereotype of the black rapist, the field looks different. kerry-healy gets to occupy the “safe and sane” space, while deval patrick represents terror and fear for women voters. if this ad had worked—which thankfully didn’t—the connection with a racial stereotype would have elongated a five yard pass to a touchdown. the video clip of the advertisement is available online. lt. gov. kerry healey (r-ma) “garage” campaign ad, cspan, http://www.cspan.org/events/lt-gov-kerry-healey-r-maquotgaragequot-campaign-ad/6060/ (last visited oct. 28, 2013).  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  relates to race or gender, this difference in perception deepens a divide that already exists. microaggressions have a cumulative effect. as there are more of them, and as targets become more aware of them, there will be a growing perceptual divide between the men and women of the community. the men are viewed by the women as meaner and more hostile; the women are viewed by the men as too sensitive and too quick to take offense. even if the women choose not to confront the microaggression, it still has a divisive effect. for example, when prof. x made his comment about “wiping out” half the human race, i said nothing. the response of my lunchmates was laughter. they probably did not agree with prof. x. remember that they saw prof. x as a little bit ridiculous when it came to gender issues. however, had i confronted prof. x, they would have felt that i lacked humor and perspective. later—much later—i recounted this incident to one of my senior, male colleagues. he was a sensitive man and a good listener, and he could see that, from my point of view, the comment would feel threatening. he pointed out, however, that at the time the comment was made, prof. x was going through a particularly litigious divorce and that this, no doubt, had contributed to his hostility.35 no doubt this was true, and it was no doubt true that the laughing response of the men who heard prof. x was an appropriate response to his comment. the trouble is that neither were responses that i could very well share, and, as time wore on, and the number of un-shareable moments accumulated, i came to feel that i did not belong to “their” community. this was painful to me and to others similarly targeted. it was also disruptive to the wider community. it was what none of us wanted, but equally something that none of us knew how to prevent. this 35  the idea that microaggressions had “little to do with me” was, in fact, a common theme. when i mentioned to another one of my colleagues that prof. y, whom i liked a lot, had seemed hostile to me recently, he speculated that this was because prof. y’s wife had recently had a baby and was suffering from post-partum depression. “it’s a situation,” he said, “that would make any man feel a need to avoid female companionship.”  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  341  
  342 seattle journal for social justice  is why it is so important for everyone to take microaggressions seriously. as individuals, we need to work at diminishing their number; and as communities, we need to find ways to mitigate their effects.  iv. how can we avoid microaggressions? it can be difficult to recognize microaggressions. first, if you are not part of the target class, they will not be apparent to you. we have seen that microaggressions often remain invisible to those who are not affected. in addition, there is no general rule that applies in all cases. microaggressions need not mention race or gender. they may not even be negative in tone. “you have beautiful eyes,” written on a teaching evaluation, is microaggressive36 despite the fact that it is a positive appraisal of a characteristic that seems unrelated to the gender of the professor. thus, avoiding microaggressions requires more than just keeping our feet out of our mouths; it requires us to think more deeply about our relations with people of different races and genders. in this connection, the following questions are worth considering. a. ask: how would i feel if someone said this to or about me? in most situations, this is a useful question. it guides our empathy and helps us to avoid unintentional insults. with microaggressions, however, the question will be practically useless unless the questioner works at supplying context. in the cls discussion above, it would not have helped for a man to ask, “how would i feel if someone wrote, ‘many but not all of the men in law school teaching seem unhappy and insecure.’” one can imagine that 36 it is microaggressive because the student is attempting to redefine the relationship between the parties in a way that diminishes the professional stature of the female professor. in effect, the student is trying to replace a teacher-student relationship—a relationship in which he is relatively powerless—for a male-female relationship—one in which he might expect to dominate. this is not only disrespectful to the teacher, but it also undermines the success of the teacher-student relationship. a student who is busy admiring your eyes is not a student who is getting very much out of the class that it is your job to teach.  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  most men would respond to such a statement by thinking, “what a stupid thing to say.” it seems stupid because the number of male law teachers is very large, and it is unlikely that any such personal characterization would apply to all of them. in fact, because men are a dominant group, we tend to individuate them and hesitate to make generalizations about them. there is no similar restraint when it comes to women. therefore, for a white, male teacher—call him prof. a—to get the microaggressive aspect, he has to reformulate the statement in this way: “prof. a is one of a small group of people in law teaching who seem unhappy and insecure.” he will also have to assume that the statement defines the small group as one that has often suffered discrimination. for example, he may be from a poor family; he may be short; he may be irish, italian, or greek; or he may not have gone to a top tier law school. imagine then the comments: men who come from poor families often don’t have the charisma required for law school teaching; short men often have trouble commanding the classroom; men who don’t go to a top tier law school often seem insecure in the classroom. comments about women and minorities must be considered in this light. it is not enough to ask whether you yourself would have been offended. the challenge is to recreate the situation as it might appear to the person who might have been harmed. to do this, you have to imagine the real vulnerability, the enhanced visibility, and the history of exclusion that define token participation in traditionally white and male communities. b. ask: would you say this to someone who shared your race and gender? the problem with many microaggressions is that they represent things that would never be said to someone of the dominant race and gender. recall, for example, the african-american law professor who was always summoned to do housekeeping chores. similarly, we might consider the fact that men often assume that women are available for secretarial or  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  343  
  344 seattle journal for social justice  administrative tasks.37 there are two problems with these kinds of microaggressions. first, they are demeaning. the african-american law professor was treated as a servant rather than an educator; women in general may be treated as assistants rather than as free agents in their own right.38 the second problem is that they interfere with the kind of effort that a professorial job requires. whether i am preparing a class or writing an article, the task requires concentration and a sense of my own expertise. an interruption—particularly an interruption that is demeaning—interferes with both, and, if such interruptions are frequent, they seriously interfere with the completion of the task at hand. personal comments are another area where microaggressions are likely to occur. every relationship has its own particular level of intimacy. with some people i am simply polite; with others i share personal experiences; and with others i struggle to be as authentic as i can. when one person has a higher status than another, the inevitable rule is that the person with higher status can dictate the level of intimacy. an extreme form of this is the sexual license that existed during slavery. lesser forms of this license, however, are still plentiful. in most environments, the boss sets the terms of his relationship with an employee. some bosses choose to be very personal; others treat underlings like robots. in either case, the level of intimacy will be calibrated to suit his needs rather than hers.39 37  here are two examples from my own experience. first, i have often watched someone—a student or a visitor—walk down a corridor of open office doors and then poke his head in mine to ask directions or the whereabouts of one of my colleagues. second, in one work environment, i was often interrupted by requests for proper spelling and grammar by men who would not have dreamed of interrupting their male colleagues with similar requests. 38 it is difficult to complain about these things without sounding as though you think you are better than servants and secretaries. in an ideal world, i would not feel demeaned by the fact that someone mistook me for a secretary. however, in a hierarchical world, it is difficult to overlook the fact that such conduct is, in fact, a sign of disrespect. 39 as workplaces have become more informal, this is not universally true. thus, some readers who have been bosses will say that this is not true. in fact, we can all think of notable exceptions. but in view of the fact that we most remember what is most  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  many men invoke this privilege with women of the same professional stature. such men will make personal comments to a woman that they would never make to a man with whom they share the same level of intimacy. for example, most men would not comment on the dress of another man unless they were reasonably good friends, but nevertheless feel free to make such comments to women colleagues that they barely know. c. treat each person as an individual rather than as a member of a racial or gender group we all want to be treated as individuals, and most of us want to treat others with the same respect. this can be hard to achieve when we live in a society that is dominated by racial and gender stereotypes. in such a society, stereotypes distort our perception of the individual person. equally, our perceptions are distorted when we simply ignore race and think of ourselves as color blind.40 either way, we interact with a person who is one step removed from the way we think of ourselves—as a unique and uncategorized individual. this poses a difficulty that may seem as difficult as odysseus’ problem with scylla and charybdis. how do we avoid the dehumanizing effect of stereotypes without seeming to ignore important aspects of an individual’s life story? stereotypes construct our subconscious categories, and there is no return to the innocence of a pre-racial or pre-gendered state.  exceptional, our memory is not really the issue. the issue is better understood by considering what pressures exist in the workplace and how they affect the disempowered people within it. 40 steven colbert frequently makes this point obvious by asking guests of color what color they are because he is colorblind and cannot distinguish between white people and people of color. the colbert report, colbert nation (dec. 4, 2013), http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/430968/december-04-2013/12-413-in—60-seconds.this, together with his perpetual search for a “new black friend,” constitutes a satire of white attitudes, which is precisely on target. who’s honoring me now?—gq, colbert nation (nov. 28, 2006), http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbertreport-videos/182424/november-28-2006/who-s-honoring-me-now——gq.  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  345  
  346 seattle journal for social justice  nevertheless, there are ways to deal with the problem. most stereotypes bespeak ignorance, and the way to cure ignorance is not mysterious. we do not do it by avoiding the subject; instead, we need to become more informed; we must educate ourselves about people’s differences. i am less likely to stereotype the people i know if i take some trouble to learn about the way their experience is different from mine. for those of us who are white, this means learning more about the complicated history of racial relations. but it also means thinking about our whiteness and the ways in which it aids our progress in the world. we need to notice all the ways in which the world gives us benefits based on our whiteness.41 the irony is that it is only by becoming more informed about racial differences that we can hope to lessen them. it is only by becoming informed that we can look at someone who is different, acknowledge that she or he is different, and, at the same time, show that we care about what that difference means to the individual. my own ignorance in these areas has been prodigious. i went to a girl’s high school and a woman’s college, and therefore was in my twenties before i had close male friends. i was equally ignorant about race—it was not until i was 35 that i had a good friend who was not white. i have managed to lessen this ignorance with the generous help of many friends. however, i have also been helped by an honest effort at self-education. there is an incredibly rich literature that describes the experience of race and gender from a variety of perspectives.42 there are novels, memoirs, statistics, and psychological and political studies. learning about differences can change attitudes. while i may never know what it is like to 41  see generally margaret mcintosh, white privilege and male privilege: a personal account of coming to see correspondences through work in women’s studies (wellesley coll. ctr. for res. on women, working paper no. 189, 1988), available at http://www.iub.edu/ tchsotl/part2/mcintosh%20white%20privilege.pdf. 42 just reading the stories in presumed incompetent of these wonderfully talented women of color enhances one’s sensitivity to the kind of remarks that cause problems. presumed incompetent, supra note 1 (see also the bibliography at page 505).  presumed incompetent  
  microaggressions in the context of academic communities  suffer racial discrimination, i can certainly learn more about it, and the more i learn, the less likely i am to engage in it. d. take more time; be more observant even if we lessen our ignorance, we are still prone to committing microaggressions. sometimes they just seem to sneak up on us. for example, one day at the store, i had selected my purchases and was heading towards the cash register. i noticed that the person at the cash register was talking to a friend, and, since i was in a hurry, i resolved to interrupt them. fortunately, i took a second look. this time i could see that the person at the counter was a customer and the store employee was waiting on her. in fact, i am embarrassed to say, the only reason that i assumed the conversation was social was because both women were african-american. this is an easy mistake to make. it was triggered not only by the unconscious operation of racial assumptions, but also by my exaggerated sense of being pressed for time and a strong sense of entitlement. this incident taught me that if i want to avoid such mistakes in the future, i had to both become aware of my own racial assumptions and live a slower, more thoughtful way of life.  v. conclusion microaggressions are not just about misbehaving men and victimized women. we live in a society where it is difficult to escape the sharp elbows of difference, and this is an on-going challenge for all of us. as a woman, i have often been harmed by microaggressions. but i am also white and, as a white person, am liable to the same kind of privileged obliviousness that i sometimes see in my male colleagues. all of us in academic life enjoy some forms of privilege. we are well-educated, well-compensated, and mostly well-treated. our communities are in various stages of integration. these stages can be painful, but they can be joyful as well.  volume 12 • issue 2 • 2013  347  
  348 seattle journal for social justice  i worked for ten years at the university of southern california. one day, i walked across campus with a group of african-american students. as we walked, they exchanged greetings with every black person they saw, and suddenly the campus seemed alive with color. prior to this, i had seen the campus with very limited vision. given the university’s location and reputation, it had been easy to assume that the white people were the important players—the students and faculty who were at the center of university life. my eye responded to this assumption by centering my gaze upon the white people i encountered. as i came to this realization, i felt embarrassed by the racism it revealed. but i also felt impoverished by my own racism. i liked the campus i saw that day, and struggle now to see it wherever i go. whether this will become easier or not is the question of our age. if we want it answered in the affirmative, then we all need to be concerned about microaggressions and their effect on community life.  presumed incompetent  
       


secondary_title_index: cultural diversity &amp; ethnic minority psychology
title_index: racial microaggressions and difficult dialogues on race in the classroom.
full_text_index:
       cultural diversity and ethnic minority psychology 2009, vol. 15, no. 2, 183–190   2009 american psychological association 1099-9809/09/ 12.00 doi: 10.1037/a0014191  racial microaggressions and difficult dialogues on race in the classroom derald wing sue, annie i. lin, gina c. torino, christina m. capodilupo, and david p. rivera  this document is copyrighted by the american psychological association or one of its allied publishers. this article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.  teachers college, columbia university a qualitative study supports the observation that difficult dialogues on race and racism are often triggered by racial microaggressions that make their appearance in classroom encounters or educational activities and materials. difficult dialogues are filled with strong powerful emotions that may prove problematic to both students and teachers. when poorly handled by teachers, difficult dialogues can assail the personal integrity of students of color while reinforcing biased worldviews of white students. the success or failure of facilitating difficult dialogues on race is intimately linked to the characteristics and actions of instructors and their ability to recognize racial microaggressions. implications regarding specific education and training recommendations are presented. keywords: racial microaggressions, difficult dialogues, training, aversive racism, multicultural education  issue is “oversensitive,” “paranoid,” or has simply misinterpreted the situation. even when whites entertain the notion that they unintentionally offended, they are likely to trivialize the slights as banal and “small things” (rowe, 1990; sue & constantine, 2007). studies reveal, however, that racial microaggressions, while seemingly trivial in nature, have major consequences for persons of color: (a) they assail the mental health of recipients (sue, capodilupo, & holder, 2008); (b) create a hostile and invalidating campus climate (solo rzano, ceja, & yosso, 2000); (c) perpetuate stereotype threat (steele, spencer, & aronson, 2002); (d) create physical health problems (clark, anderson, clark, & williams, 1999); and (e) lower work productivity and problem-solving abilities (dovidio, 2001; salvatore & shelton, 2007). far from being benign slights, racial microaggressions have major detrimental consequences for people of color. a point less often explored is the detrimental consequences to whites who unknowingly engage in offensive racial actions or statements but remain oblivious to their meaning and impact. the invisible nature of racial microaggressions to whites, for example, lowers empathic ability, dims perceptual awareness, maintains false illusions, and lessens compassion for others (spanierman, armstrong, poteat, & beer, 2006). in other words, lack of awareness allows many whites to live in a world of false deception about the nature and operation of racism (bell, 2002; sue, 2005). it has been hypothesized that racial microaggressions often trigger difficult dialogues on race in the classroom because they are found to be offensive to students of color who directly or indirectly confront perpetrators who prefer to avoid the topic or feel falsely accused of racism (sue & constantine, 2007). as a result, the dialogues or interactions become emotionally charged, producing misunderstandings, conflicts, and hostility between the parties (watt, 2007). unfortunately, teachers and human relations specialists seem ill prepared to deal with the potential, explosive nature of racial interactions; they do not recognize racial microaggressions when they occur, feel uncomfortable with race-related topics, and lack the skills needed to facilitate difficult dialogues on race (young, 2003).  racial microaggressions have been defined as “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral and environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults to the target person or group” (sue, capodilupo, et al., 2007, p. 273). from the perspective of people of color, microaggressions are tinged with explicit and implicit racial snubs, put-downs, or a pattern of disrespect. being ignored by a sales clerk, told by an employer that “the most qualified person should get the job,” told “i don’t see color,” or even complimented for speaking “good english” may all constitute racial microaggressions because they communicate denigrating hidden messages: “you are not important enough to be noticed”; “people of color are less qualified”; “i don’t notice color, so i can’t be racist”; and “you are not a true american but a foreigner.” although any group can potentially be guilty of delivering racial microaggressions, the most painful and harmful ones are likely to occur between those who hold power and those who are most disempowered (sue, capodilupo, nadal, & torino, 2008). some have argued that racial microaggressions are reflections of an unconscious worldview of white supremacy, superiority– inferiority, and inclusion– exclusion views that are imposed on racial and ethnic minorities (bell, 2002; rowe, 1990; sue, nadal, et al., 2008). people of color report that their lives are filled with incidents of racial microaggressions and that their well-intentioned white brothers and sisters are generally unaware that they have committed an offensive racial act (dovidio, gaertner, kawakami, & hodson, 2002; sue, capodilupo, & holder, 2008). more important, once these are brought to their attention, whites deny that they intended to offend, believe the person of color raising the  derald wing sue, annie i. lin, gina c. torino, christina m. capodilupo, and david p. rivera, department of counseling and clinical psychology, teachers college, columbia university, new york. correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to derald wing sue, department of counseling and clinical psychology, teachers college, columbia university, box 36, 525 west 120th street, new york, ny 10027. e-mail: dw2020@columbia.edu 183  
  sue, lin, torino, capodilupo, and rivera  this document is copyrighted by the american psychological association or one of its allied publishers. this article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.  184  yet the president’s initiative on race (1998) explicitly stated that the first steps to mutual respect and understanding must begin with educators working effectively to facilitate constructive dialogues and establish opportunities to bridge racial and ethnic divides. educators and social scientists believe that successful racial dialogues are necessary to reduce prejudice, increase compassion, dispel stereotypes, and promote mutual understanding and goodwill (willow, 2008; young, 2003). seen from this perspective, interracial dialogue can serve as an educational tool to lessen intergroup hostilities and conflict and to foster racial harmony. yet topics on race and racism often evoke unpleasant emotional “hot buttons” that lead many to avoid, ignore, or dismiss them as taboo topics (watt, 2007). broadly defined, difficult dialogues on race represent potentially threatening conversations or interactions between members of different racial or ethnic groups when they (a) involve an unequal status relationship of power and privilege, (b) highlight major differences in worldviews, personalities, and perspectives, (c) are challenged publicly, (d) are found to be offensive to others, (e) may reveal biases and prejudices, and (f) trigger intense emotional responses (sue & constantine, 2007; young, 2003). any individual or group engaged in a difficult dialogue may feel at risk for potentially disclosing intimate thoughts, beliefs, or feelings related to the topic of race. as classrooms become increasingly diverse, interracial interactions increase opportunities for racial microaggressions and difficult dialogues on race. these interactions have often polarized students and teachers rather than clarified and increased mutual respect and understanding about race and race relations. poorly handled by teachers, such dialogues may result in disastrous consequences such as anger, hostility, silence, complaints, misunderstandings, and blockages of the learning process; skillfully handled, they present an opportunity for growth, improved communication, and learning (sanchez-hucles, & jones, 2005; young, 2003). most studies on difficult dialogues on race focus on the fears and biases of white students while neglecting the perspective of students of color (sue & constantine, 2007). the present study is important in understanding how students of color perceive the relationship between racial microaggressions and difficult dialogues. because 86% of teachers are white (u.s. department of education, 2007), they often do not understand the worldview of racial and ethnic minorities and may be unaware of how racial microaggressions may trigger difficult dialogues in the classroom. this study has four major goals: (a) identify and classify microaggressions and the various forms they take in the classroom from the perspective of students of color; (b) explore how racial microaggressions evoke and often form the basis for a difficult dialogue; (c) identify strategies that allow teachers to successfully facilitate a difficult dialogue; and (d) extract basic principles that may guide the education and training of teachers in their ability to use difficult dialogues as an opportunity for learning and understanding of different racial worldviews.  method the present study utilized a qualitative method to explore people of color’s experiences of difficult dialogues on race in the classroom. focus groups were conducted to capture the complexity  of the participants’ experiences by allowing the social context to facilitate the development of meaning (krueger, 1998). in this case, it was hoped that the interactions between the volunteers would serve to stimulate a wider array of incidents than would individual interviews. furthermore, it has been found that focus groups are effective means of obtaining in-depth information about a relatively unexplored concept (krueger, 1994; seal, bogart, & ehrhardt, 1998) and are used successfully to explore racial perceptions on a number of topics (saint-germain, bassford, & montano, 1993; solo rzano et al., 2000), particularly racial microaggressions (sue, bucceri, lin, nadal, & torino, 2007; sue, capodilupo & holder, 2008; sue, nadal, et al. 2008). for the current investigation, we were interested in understanding studentto-student and student-to-instructor interactions and events related to experiencing difficult dialogues on race in the classroom.  participants the ideal number for maximizing focus group analyses ranges from 4 to 12 people (kress & shoffner, 2007; seal et al., 1998). informants in our study were all students at teachers college, columbia university, self-identified as a person of color— 8 blacks (african americans, trinidadian, bermudian, caribbean, or jamaican), 3 asians or asian americans (korean, taiwanese, or chinese), 2 latinos (puerto-rican/peruvian or dominican) and 1 biracial (indian/german) individual—and claimed to have experienced a difficult dialogue in the classroom. totaling 14 participants, the two focus groups consisted of 3 men and 11 women, with ages ranging from 23 to 47 years. eleven of the participants were students with at least a bachelor’s degree, and 3 were working professionals. most of the participants preferred english as the primary language of communication and ranged from having spent 2 years to their entire lives in the united states.  researchers the research team for the study consisted of 5 doctoral students and 4 master’s students in counseling psychology taking a graduate research seminar in racism and antiracism taught by derald wing sue at teachers college, columbia university. specifically, the team consisted of 4 african americans, 3 asian americans (including derald wing sue), 1 latino, and 2 white americans. the instructor (derald wing sue) has nearly 40 years of research related to topics of diversity, multiculturalism, racism, and antiracism. given the advanced graduate status of the research team, cognitive and experiential understanding of racism by the participants was considered an asset that allowed for informed formulation of the study and enhanced awareness, knowledge, and sensitivity to incidents of difficult dialogues experienced by the participants. because qualitative research makes the researcher the central means of data collection, identification of personal values, assumptions, and biases are required at the initial onset of the study (fassinger, 2005; hill et al., 2005). making known explicit attitudes and beliefs held by researchers has been shown to be an effective safeguard in controlling potential biases in the research setting, methodology, analysis, and interpretation process (krueger, 1998; polkinghorne, 2005). team members believed, for example, that participants would be able to generate several ex-  
  this document is copyrighted by the american psychological association or one of its allied publishers. this article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.  racial microaggressions and difficult dialogues  amples and discuss personal experiences of difficult dialogues on race in the classroom. we also believed that racial microaggressions oftentimes precipitated incidents of such dialogues. it is also noteworthy to mention that all team members are a part of a research seminar, which might inadvertently influence their work on the project (i.e., pleasing the instructor). as a result, every effort was made to ensure the trustworthiness of the participants’ voices and experiences through triangulation (utsey, gernat, & hammar, 2005): (a) considerable time was devoted to explicating personal values and beliefs of the team; (b) stress was placed on maintaining the integrity of the data as opposed to pleasing the professor; (c) the inherent dangers of “groupthink” and guarding against it was emphasized; and (d) the focus group analysis used three independent analyses (subteams, entire team, and audit) that challenged each and every major domain and core idea identified. it is acknowledged, however, that despite these safeguards, biases may still shape the way data were collected, viewed, and interpreted.  measure two formal means of collecting data were used: (a) a brief demographic questionnaire aimed at obtaining basic information related to race, ethnicity, gender, age, occupation, years of residence in the united states, preferred language, and years of education; and (b) a semistructured interview protocol (available upon request of derald wing sue). the protocol was developed from a review of the literature on difficult dialogues (blum, 1998; bolgatz, 2005; goodman, 1995; young, 2003) and racial microaggressions (pierce, carew, pierce-gonzalez, & willis, 1978; solo rzano et al., 2000; sue, 2003; sue, bucceri, et al., 2007; sue, capodilupo, et al., 2007; sue, capodilupo, nadal, et al., 2008). we wanted to allow the participants ample freedom in responding to the questions and prompts. the interviews started with general questions such as, “can you recall a classroom situation where the issue of race was involved?” and “what makes it difficult to discuss race in the classroom?” all questions were open-ended and aimed at eliciting real-life experiences. follow-up questions such as, “how are invalidating experiences communicated to you in the classroom?” and “how was the situation handled?” were used to obtain further details when necessary. in general, questions were intended to generate a variety of difficult dialogue examples, explore the impact they had on participants, reveal the meaning participants construed from the interaction, and examine the role of racial microaggressions in these dialogues.  procedures participants were solicited throughout the local university community (campus and neighborhood) through posted flyers, word of mouth, classroom invitations, and a website asking for volunteers. recruitment activities provided minimal information about the nature of the study; it simply asked whether students of color had ever experienced a difficult dialogue on race in which they felt “put down,” “overlooked,” or “insulted,” and whether they would be willing to share their experiences in a focus group. volunteers were placed in one of two focus groups on the basis of their scheduling availability (group 1 consisted of 2 asians, 2 latinos, 1 black, and 1 biracial, while group 2 consisted of 7 blacks and 1 asian). no financial compensation was offered. each focus  185  group lasted for approximately 90 min and was conducted by a two-person team, the facilitator and the observer. both the facilitator and the observer were persons of color and members of the research team. group 1 was led by 2 asian americans and group 2 by 1 asian american and 1 black. because group 2 contained mostly black informants, we used a black facilitator and an asian american observer. because the topic dealt with difficult dialogues on race, it was believed that facilitators of color would minimize any hesitancy or reluctance to disclose negative sentiment about interactions with white individuals. the role of the facilitator was to lead the discussion, while the observer noted nonverbal behaviors and group dynamics (krueger, 1998). before the interview, both researchers went through a brief behavioral rehearsal related to moderating the focus group discussion and to anticipating and overcoming possible resistances to the flow of the discussion. for example, we were concerned that the focus group discussions might represent difficult dialogues themselves. we believed, however, that the focus of the task (describing microaggressions they personally experienced rather than interactions between one another) minimized any reluctance to share with others. indeed, the observers in both groups noted that participants seemed very free to describe the incidents and supported one another by head nods, verbal agreements, and encouragements to continue. immediately after the interview and after the focus group was dismissed, a debriefing session was held between the two researchers related to their own reactions, observations about the group, major themes that arose, climate in the room, and discussion of problematic issues. the focus group discussions took place in an enclosed private room at teachers college. all participants were asked to sign a consent form that included permission to audiotape the entire session. the debriefing between the two researchers was audiotaped as well. the tapes were transcribed verbatim, making sure that the identities of participants were removed. tapes were destroyed after transcription. transcripts were subsequently checked for accuracy by the two facilitators before they were presented to the team for qualitative analysis. to qualitatively analyze the transcripts, a two-person subteam (facilitator and observer) performed all of the initial analysis, which consisted of identifying domains. the methodology used was a modified version of consensual qualitative research (cqr), developed by hill, thompson, and williams (1997), that has been proven to be useful and suitable for focus groups (sue, bucceri, et al., 2007; sue, capodilupo, & holder, 2008; sue, nadal, et al., 2008). during this phase, members independently reviewed each focus group transcript and developed an initial set of domains, which are broad or general categories. then members came together to discuss their findings. after consensus was reached, members returned to the transcripts and independently developed core ideas (hill et al., 2005), which corresponded to the domains. core ideas further explicate details following each domain. during this process, team members identified corresponding transcript quotes to support the development of the core ideas. then members met again and discussed their independent findings to consensus. at this point, findings from the two-person subteam were presented to the entire research team to discuss the results. team members were all required to read the entire transcripts prior to discussing and deliberating domains and core ideas. once consen-  
  sue, lin, torino, capodilupo, and rivera  this document is copyrighted by the american psychological association or one of its allied publishers. this article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.  186  sus among all members was reached, the data were presented for auditing. as is outlined in the cqr methodology, (hill et al., 2005), an auditor is required to preserve the integrity of the data. as such, derald wing sue served as the auditor in this process. to minimize his potential influence, derald wing sue was not involved in the analysis prior to the audit, stressed the need for the organizational task to stay true to the participants’ meanings and worldviews, and followed carefully the auditing cqr guidelines. other than identifying additional passage quotes that exemplified the core ideas, very little of the teams’ work was modified.  ically, which could have detrimental effects on one’s self-esteem, self-concept, and self-efficacy. alien in own land themes were upsetting to an asian american man who described an incident that depicted his group as perpetual foreigners (an assumption that he could not speak or understand english well):  results  denial of racial reality incidents were reported to happen quite frequently in triggering a difficult dialogue. in this theme, racial microaggressions had the effect of rejecting, dismissing, or invalidating the student of color’s racial reality. for example, 1 participant stated,  this section offers descriptions and examples of the domains and themes identified from the combined transcripts of both focus groups. three broad domains were identified: (a) racial microaggressions as precipitators of difficult dialogues, (b) reactions to difficult dialogues, and (c) instructor strategies for facilitating difficult dialogues. it is important to note that no restrictions were placed upon describing difficult dialogues that involved educators of color, but informants focused exclusively upon white teachers.  domain 1: racial microaggressions as precipitators of difficult dialogues although participants did not use the term racial microaggressions, the triggers to difficult dialogues on race reflected racial microaggressive content, such as “ascription of intelligence,” “alien in own land,” “denial of racial reality,” and “assumption of criminality” (sue, bucceri, et al., 2007; sue, capodilupo, & holder, 2008). while a frequency count was not taken, it was clear from the reactions of the informants that they often experienced similar incidents (head nods of agreement, statements such as “me, too,” “you said it!” and other such exclamations). more important, none of the participants ever disagreed with one another when incidents were described. more often than not, they seemed to indicate they had either witnessed or experienced similar situations. ascription of intelligence incidents described racial microaggressions in which white people attribute a particular degree of intelligence to students of color. one black participant reported a classroom incident in which a fellow classmate asked her a question: i started to explain, and the white girl said, “well, what she means is”—and she tried to talk for me. that i don’t know what i’m talking about. i can’t even articulate my own, my own idea. and i had to tell her, i can speak for myself, i can articulate my idea better than you can, you know? and only—i could not believe that she tried to speak for me.  ascription of intelligence can also take an opposite twist. for example, several asian students reported that they were often assumed to be intelligent in math and sciences and that they “study hard.” one asian female informant described how classmates in high school frequently asked her for help in math, which was her weakest subject. she felt offended by the “nerdy” stereotype but felt conflicted about letting down her classmates. inaccurate attributions of intelligence directed toward asian americans may inadvertently cause stress and create pressures to succeed academ-  but she looked at me and spoke extra slow, like to explain what the professor had just said. and i was kind of like, okay. so when i spoke and i spoke in regular speech, she was kind of shocked . . . um like wondering if i actually speak english.  . . . [they] keep rejecting whatever you say in class, it doesn’t matter what you say, [they’d] disagree. they’ll say [racial related matter] it’s either irrelevant, it’s not clear enough, um i don’t understand what you’re saying, stuff like that . . . .  another informant describes how bringing up topics of race, culture, or ethnicity in the classroom is met with statements such as “not everything is racial, you know” or nonverbals (rolling of the eyeballs) that “scream at you, here we go again.” another informant states, “when i share personal experiences of discrimination in class, they always want to find another reason for the behavior.” assumption of criminality was also a common theme, especially for blacks. black participants described situations of white classmates not sitting next to them and becoming extra vigilant with their personal belongings when they approached. they felt that white students communicated a fear of them or that they might steal; “they don’t trust us, we’re criminals, dope pushers, and thieves.” consistent with these findings (sue, capodilupo, et al., 2007; sue, capodilupo, & holder, 2008), racial microaggressions can be manifested environmentally in other mediums such as curricular content (training tapes, readings, etc.). one participant reported getting upset when a counseling session videotape of an african american male client portrayed him as angry and hostile. this reinforced white student beliefs about the potential violent nature of blacks, as is indicated in the following passage: some of the students started to comment automatically on . . . like, well, what if he gets violent? like, it just was kind of like entertained by the professor, like, oh, well, you need to make sure where you sit is close to an exit, and you gotta do this and you gotta do that. but i thought to a larger picture as to like this man, he was older and he just was resistant, but he wasn’t violent.  participants spent considerable time discussing how classroom material often portrayed blacks as being violent and aggressive and thus created an “assumption of criminality” because this trait is often associated with criminals. what angered the black student most was the implied danger. the message seemed to be that blacks have the potential to be dangerous and that precautions must be taken, such as in sitting closer to the exit, as was advised by the professor.  
  racial microaggressions and difficult dialogues  in general, our participants reported that microaggressions pushed powerful buttons in them that led to either challenging the perpetrator or deciding to do nothing. regardless of their actions, they reported tension in the classroom, discomfort among white students and often the professor, and generally an unsatisfactory resolution to any difficult dialogues that ensued.  this document is copyrighted by the american psychological association or one of its allied publishers. this article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.  domain 2: reactions to difficult dialogues all focus group participants reported having powerful reactions (cognitive, behavioral and emotional) to the difficult dialogues once microaggressions occurred. in fact, many described how energy depleting such events became and how difficult it was to learn in such an invalidating classroom climate. 1. cognitive. with respect to cognitive reactions, several participants described an internal dialogue in which they wondered whether to “speak or not to speak.” participants often assessed how they would be evaluated and perceived by peers and professors before acting in the classroom context. they frequently thought about the level of emotional support in the classroom and whether or not they had been validated during similar situations. they were aware of potential negative consequences such as lower grades, a public disagreement with the professor, isolation by classmates, and ironically, additional microaggressions, as is illustrated by the following example: . . . you kind of measure the consequences, especially if you’re in a school setting, you know? so that’s really the key factor there, what the consequences are going to be if you speak out and say what’s really on your mind. . .of either getting, you know, a poorer grade . . . .  psychological consequences were equally powerful and involved being perceived as a source of irritation, annoyance, or “having a bone to grind with white people.” as a result, students of color would curtail expressing their true thoughts or feelings or would not persist in their observations or arguments. “. . . after awhile, the teacher would be like um uh [pause] kind of showing like they were getting annoyed because i had a different point of view, so at the end, i was like, well, i don’t want to piss them off, i’d rather not say___.” “. . . whereas i get to then be perceived as the negative naysayer, i must have issues with them, i must not like them . . . .”  consistently, participants indicated that emotional support in the classroom was a crucial factor in deciding whether to confront the racial microaggression or not: “. . . [depending on] how you’re going to be perceived and who’s going to be there to support you . . . who wants to say something if it’s just going to be like just tossed away, you know?” “. . . so even if i feel like i’m not going to be supported, i might, i might say it anyway, but it certainly is easier, you know what i mean? the fact that i have that contingency there to backup what i’m saying.”  2. behavior. participants also reported their conflict about having to change their behavior depending on the situation. when a dialogue on race would occur, participants would immediately assess the environment and believed that they had to behave in a particular way if they wanted to be heard or accepted.  187  context matters. for me, i know that if i’m in class with people and i don’t want to come across as the angry black woman . . . i’m not going to stand up and scream. i’m going to look them in the eye, i’m going to have the tone that i want, i’m going to answer your question, you know what i mean? . . . because to me, i think that um, as much as what you say, it’s how you say it too . . . . in my experiences, it’s how messages have gotten across. i’m personally not going to scream and yell and act, you know what i mean? as if i don’t have no sense ‘cause then it’s like that’s the thing that they’re focusing on and not what i’m saying.  participants also noted that in order to ensure that their message is received the “right way” they cannot be emotional while speaking up in class. unfortunately, many admitted to strong psychological costs at having to be “less than authentic,” and their descriptions left little doubt that their sense of integrity often suffered. why do you have to put on [be inauthentic]—i’m not going to say a facade because that might be poise, might be a natural reaction that you want to do, but if i get emotional about something that i want to say, that’s not fair.  interestingly, our informants were often very tuned in to nonverbal communications of their white classmates in gauging the degree of threat or receptivity to racial topics in the classroom. behaviorally, participants also noticed that white students in the class would have various physical reactions during the difficult dialogues. reports of white students’ behaviors included eyeball rolling, shifting or slouching in chairs, doodling, turning red, avoiding eye contact or looking down, fidgeting, becoming quiet, and the most common, crying. interestingly, crying is frequently interpreted by students of color as an inauthentic reaction and a manipulative ploy by white students to (a) pull for empathy from fellow students and be consoled, (b) avoid the difficult dialogue by deflecting the conversations, and (c) cast the student of color as a “bad guy” (accapadi, 2007). students of color felt that these were telltale nonverbal signs of the anxiety, resistance, and lack of honesty of white students. they were either unwilling or unable to dialogue on race and wanted the topic dropped. 3. emotional. our informants reported experiencing strong emotional reactions to difficult dialogues in the classroom that seemed to fall into three subcategories: (a) “incensed” when they felt their integrity being assailed (angry, frustrated, insulted, offended, annoyed, and frustrated); (b) anxious when they were concerned about personal consequences (tense, fearful, and uncomfortable); and (c) exhausted at having to constantly deal with a never ending onslaught of microaggressions (tired and drained) during a difficult dialogue. for example, 1 participant remarked, . . . we get too incensed, you know? i mean, i don’t think you have any room for sorrow and sympathy when it comes to issues like this [race]. i think . . . you get so worked up and so mad . . . it brings back all these memories . . . .  in addition to feeling attacked or invalidated by the microaggressions, many found their pain accentuated by the defensiveness and reluctance of white students to honestly dialogue about race. as 1 student of color said, “they just don’t get it!” many expressed strong fears about negative consequences that would ensue should they pursue the dialogue. interestingly, it appeared that  
  sue, lin, torino, capodilupo, and rivera  188  strong negative reactions were also attributed to how professors ineffectively dealt with racial dialogues. participants noted that these racial dialogues were “exhausting,” “sucks [them] dry,” and “unfair” having to “constantly be the one to keep on stepping up to the plate to educate people.” one participant noted, . . . i also think it is very exhausting to constantly be the teacher . . . to constantly stand up and preach and be singled out just based on your own life experiences . . . .  this document is copyrighted by the american psychological association or one of its allied publishers. this article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.  domain 3: instructor strategies for facilitating difficult dialogues participants were very cognizant of the strategies that helped facilitate difficult dialogues (i.e., support, validation, and comfort level of instructor) versus those that did not (i.e., ignoring, negating, and avoiding). participants reported the following helpful strategies on the part of the professor: legitimizing the discussion on race, validating feelings of the participants in class, willingness to accept a different racial reality from students of color, comfort in addressing race and racism, and using a direct approach in managing the discussion. for example, student testimonies revealed that . . . just saying, how do you feel . . . [to know that] you have a right to feel this way . . . [it’s] just validating to know it is heard . . . . . . . just for me, i think having professors not get mad at what’s being said, just accepting the reality of different students [is helpful] . . . .  some of the unhelpful strategies reported by the participants included taking a passive approach (i.e., let the class take over the discussion), disengaging (i.e., not initiating, going with superficial responses, and dismissing the importance of the topic), becoming emotional (i.e., “get mad at what was being said [directed toward the student of color]”), or simply ignoring the dialogue (i.e., switching topics). professors who look to students of color to be the racial or ethnic experts were often viewed as unhelpful because (a) students of color are placed in an educational role at the expense of their own growth, and (b) it often reflected the lack of awareness, knowledge, and understanding of the instructor on racial matters. [w]e don’t have that opportunity to grow and challenge ourselves because we’re looked at as ethnic, we’re looked at as knowing and experienced when we come in the door to a certain extent. [o]ur professor. . .doesn’t really know what to do, and he completely let us take over the class and talk about what we wanted to talk about.  participants seemed unanimous in their agreement that professors and white students are often “hung up” because of “not wanting to be perceived as racist/prejudiced.” for example, . . . i’m not speaking for you . . . but the whole reason why a lot of white people take the [5th], is because they don’t want to be perceived as racist, as being prejudiced . . . .  discussion our four main purposes for undertaking the study seemed to reveal important findings and implications. first, many difficult  dialogues on race, from the perspective of students of color, are linked to particular racial microaggressions in the classroom: ascription of intelligence, alien in own land, denial of racial reality, and assumption of criminality. while racial microaggressions were most often delivered verbally and nonverbally by both white students and instructors, they also made their appearance in the course content as well. consistent with many studies, participants experienced an institutional and classroom climate of invalidation, insult, and denigration that resulted in strong disruptive emotions (e.g., anger and frustration), feelings of having their integrity attacked, and a consequent depletion of psychic energy affecting their ability to fully engage in the learning process (solo rzano et al., 2000; sue, capodilupo, & holder, 2008; watt, 2007). second, the occurrence of racial microaggressions set cognitive, behavioral, and emotional processes related to challenging the offensive incident in motion (sue, capodilupo, & holder, 2008). if the decision to challenge was made, it inevitably initiated a difficult dialogue on race that proved uncomfortable for many white students, students of color, and even the teacher. oftentimes, students of color felt caught in a double bind: if they questioned the meaning of the microaggression and initiated a difficult dialogue, the adverse or negative consequences were often painful. however, if they chose to do nothing, they were left with feelings of selling out their integrity (sue, capodilupo, torino, et al., 2007). considerable evidence exists suggesting that people of color can more readily identify the causes and dynamics of a difficult dialogue on race, while their white counterparts often experience confusion and disorientation in such interactions (johnson & longerbeam, 2007; sue & constantine, 2007; watt, 2007). regardless, however, it was reported by our informants that most white professors and students at some level sensed that something was wrong, that the issue dealt with race, and that tension and discomfort were usually present. the uneasiness encouraged white students to avoid the topic for fear of showing their ignorance or bias (henry et al., 2007). third, our participants believed that whether the difficult dialogue was facilitated or hindered seemed to depend upon the racial awareness, knowledge, and skills of the instructor. when the instructor seemed comfortable with addressing race issues, validated feelings experienced by students of color, legitimized a different racial reality, and exhibited good communication and facilitation skills, difficult dialogues proved a valuable learning experience. when professors were unaware of racial dynamics, appeared uncomfortable with race conversations, or ignored or dismissed race issues, the consequences could be quite devastating to students of color. they often indicated that such an approach tended to invalidate their racial realities via additional racial microaggressions. finally, we believe that our findings, along with the existing literature, suggest basic principles that should guide the education and training of teachers in their ability to facilitate difficult dialogues on race (reason, 2007; watt, 2007; willow, 2008; young, 2003). if it is true that open and honest discussions of race will ultimately lead to greater understanding of race and racism, and if participating in difficult dialogues on race enhances greater racial sensitivity and increases harmonious race relations, then classrooms at all levels (kindergarten through 12 grade, higher education, and professional schools) become one of the primary settings  
  racial microaggressions and difficult dialogues  by which to reach our citizens. some of these suggestions are outlined below.  this document is copyrighted by the american psychological association or one of its allied publishers. this article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.  1.  educators at all levels would benefit from experience and training in facilitating difficult dialogues on race. a common and recurrent theme in the focus groups was that successful and unsuccessful dialogues on race depended heavily on the racial sensitivities and skills of the teacher. it was clear that focus group members believed that most of their teachers were ineffective facilitators; most were “frozen or paralyzed” when a difficult dialogue ensued, were “obviously uncomfortable and anxious,” seemed “as confused as their students” about what was happening, and either “reinforced the perspectives of white students” at the expense of students of color or sought to end the dialogue.  2.  educators need to acknowledge that they are no more immune from inheriting the biases, fears, and anxieties about race than any other person (johnson & longerbeam, 2007; sue, 2005). indeed, many of our participants mentioned that teachers seemed unaware of racial issues, what their whiteness (if a white teacher) meant to them, and seemed “uncomfortable in their own skin.” as a result, concerted work in understanding themselves as racial and cultural beings becomes paramount to helping others in difficult dialogues (carter et al., 2007).  3.  consistently, students of color believed that white students often read the emotive state of their professors and “followed their lead.” if they sensed the professor was uncomfortable with topics on race or preferred to deal with it as strictly an intellectual exercise, it only gave permission for them to avoid the topic. furthermore, it often fueled their discomfort and defenses (bell, 2002). for educators to become comfortable with discussing issues of race and racism, it is apparent that education and training needs to move beyond the intellectual and cognitive level of training (utsey et al., 2005). comfort in facilitating difficult dialogues on race requires a strong experiential component that cannot be simply achieved through in-service training or classroom experience. achieving this goal necessitates “lived reality,” such that experiences outside of the classroom involve interaction and dialogue with people (a) who differ in race, culture, and ethnicity and (b) in real-life settings and situations (minority communities, public forums, integrated neighborhoods, etc.; sue, 2003). it means that education and training must provide opportunities for true interracial interactions that often produce discomfort in educators (bell, 2002).  4.  it is obvious that special skills are required to facilitate difficult dialogues on race. facilitation skills, as indicated by one informant, were compared to “group therapy.” while we would be unrealistic to require all educators to become group therapists, it is clear that special training and expertise in teaching has to go beyond simply book learning and lecturing. understanding  189  group dynamics and group processes, knowing how to distinguish between content and process, getting students to listen and hear one another (monologues vs. true dialogues), and acknowledging and validating the many strong feelings (guilt, anger, defensiveness, anxiety, etc.) likely to arise in a difficult dialogue are all skills important in a achieving a successful outcome (willow, 2008; young, 2003). while we hope that these guiding suggestions are helpful, we cannot stress enough the importance of instructor honesty and openness as attributes that ultimately enhance the credibility of professors and has the secondary effect of freeing students to self-disclose and challenge their own beliefs and values (sue & sue, 2008). professors comfortable with acknowledging that they are products of cultural conditioning and have inherited biases and fears about other racial groups have a positive impact on facilitating difficult dialogues on race because it (a) frees facilitators from the constant guardedness and vigilance exercised in denying racism, sexism, and other biases, (b) models truthfulness, openness, and honesty to students on conversations on race, (c) communicates courage in making oneself vulnerable by taking a risk to share with students biases, limitations, and the continuing attempt to deal with racism, and (d) may encourage other students to approach the topic with honesty, because their professor is equally “flawed” (sue, 2003; young, 2003). finally, it is important to mention the limitations of our study. first, our focus groups contained only 14 persons of color; participants were not gender or race balanced; they were selected specifically because they acknowledged having experienced difficult racial dialogues in classrooms; and they were highly educated. while we believe many of the dynamics and implications of difficult dialogues on race can be applied in a number of different settings (public schools, worksite, and other forums) and across many groups, caution must be used in interpreting and generalizing our findings. second, the time-limited nature of the focus groups (90 min) did not allow us to sample the total universe of difficult dialogues and microaggressions. in the taxonomy by sue, capodilupo, et al. (2007), many more racial microaggressive themes were identified, and other difficult dialogues may not be fully represented in the focus group discussions. third, the interactive and free-ranging nature of focus group processes did not allow an analysis of how many members actually shared specific aspects of the domains and themes identified. yet when incidents of difficult dialogues were described by particular individuals, none of the other participants ever expressed any disagreement. in fact, their nonverbals (i.e., nodding of the head and extreme attentiveness) seemed to express shared consensus. last, our participants did not address or present examples when the professor was a person of color. thus our findings apply primarily to white faculty. we believe that the dynamics for both white students and students of color would be quite different were their instructors persons of color. future studies might want to address how the race of the instructor might affect difficult dialogues on race.  references accapadi, m. m. (2007). when white women cry: how white women’s tears oppress women of color. college student affairs journal, 26, 208 –215.  
  this document is copyrighted by the american psychological association or one of its allied publishers. this article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.  190  sue, lin, torino, capodilupo, and rivera  bell, l. a. (2002). sincere fictions: the pedagogical challenges of preparing white teachers for multicultural classrooms. equity and excellence in education, 35, 236 –244. blum, l. (1998). can we talk? interracial dialogue in the classroom. change, 30, 26 –37. bolgatz, j. (2005). talking race in the classroom. new york: educators college press. carter, s. p., honeyford, m., mckaskie, d., guthrie, f., mahoney, s., & carter, g. d. (2007). “what do you mean by whiteness?” college student affairs journal, 26, 152–159. clark, r., anderson, n. b., clark, v. r., & williams, d. r. (1999). racism as a stressor for african americans. american psychologist, 54, 805– 816. dovidio, j. f. (2001). on the nature of contemporary prejudice: the third wave. journal of social issues, 57, 829 – 849. dovidio, j. f., gaertner, s. l., kawakami, k., & hodson, g. (2002). why can’t we all just get along? interpersonal biases and interracial distrust. cultural diversity and ethnicity minority psychology, 8, 88 –102. fassinger, r. e. (2005). paradigms, praxis, problems, and promise: grounded theory in counseling psychology research. journal of counseling psychology, 52, 156 –166. goodman, d. j. (1995). difficult dialogues: enhancing discussions about diversity. college teaching, 43, 47–52. henry, w., cobb-roberts, d., dorn, s., exum, h. a., keller, h., & shircliffe, b. (2007). when the dialogue becomes too difficult: a case study of resistance and backlash. college student affairs journal, 26, 160 –168. hill, c. e., thompson, b. j., hess, s. a., knox, s., williams, e. n., & ladany, n. (2005). consensual qualitative research: an update. journal of counseling psychology, 52, 196 –205. hill, c. e., thompson, b. j., & williams, e. n. (1997). a guide to conducting consensual qualitative research. counseling psychologist, 25, 517–572. johnson, d. r., & longerbeam, s. d. (2007). implications for the privileged identity exploration model in student affairs theory and practice. college student affairs journal, 26, 216 –221. kress, v. e., & shoffner, m. f. (2007). focus groups: a practical and applied research approach for counselors. journal of counseling and development, 85, 189 –195. krueger, r. a. (1994). focus groups: a practical guide for applied research (2nd ed.). thousand oaks, ca: sage. krueger, r. a. (1998). analyzing & reporting focus group results. thousand oaks, ca: sage. pierce, c., carew, j., pierce-gonzalez, d., & willis, d. (1978). an experiment in racism: tv commercials. in c. pierce (ed.), television and education (pp. 62– 88). beverly hills, ca: sage. polkinghorne, d. e. (2005). language and meaning: data collection in qualitative research. journal of counseling psychology, 52, 137–145. president’s initiative on race. (1998). one american in the twenty-first century. washington, dc: u.s. government printing office. reason, r. (2007). rearticulating whiteness: a precursor to difficult dialogues on race. college student affairs journal, 26, 127–135. rowe, m. p. (1990). barriers to equality: the power of subtle discrimination to maintain unequal opportunity. employee responsibilities and rights journal, 3, 153–163. saint-germain, m. a., bassford, t. l., & montano, g. (1993). surveys and focus groups in health research with older hispanic women. qualitative health research, 3, 341–367.  salvatore, j., & shelton, j. n. (2007). cognitive costs of exposure to racial prejudice. psychological science, 18, 810 – 815. sanchez-hucles, j., & jones, n. (2005). breaking the silence around race in training, practice, and research. counseling psychologist, 33, 547– 558. seal, d. w., bogart, l. m., & ehrhardt, a. a. (1998). small group dynamics: the utility of focus group discussions as a research method. group dynamics: theory, research, and practice, 2, 253–266. solo rzano, d., ceja, m., & yosso, t. (2000). critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial climate: the experiences of african american college students. journal of negro education, 69, 60 –73. spanierman, l. b., armstrong, p. i., poteat, v. p., & beer, a. m. (2006). psychosocial costs of racism to whites: exploring patterns through cluster analysis. journal of counseling psychology, 53, 434 – 441. steele, c. m., spencer, s. j., & aronson, j. (2002). contending with group image: the psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. in m. zanna (ed.), advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 23, pp. 379 – 440). new york: academic press. sue, d. w. (2003). overcoming our racism: the journey to liberation. san francisco, ca: jossey-bass. sue, d. w. (2005). racism and the conspiracy of silence: presidential address. counseling psychologist, 33, 100 –114. sue, d. w., bucceri, j. m., lin, a. i., nadal, k. l., & torino, g. c. (2007). racial microaggressions and the asian american experience. cultural diversity & ethnic minority psychology, 13, 72– 81. sue, d. w., capodilupo, c. m., & holder, a. m. b. (2008). racial microaggressions in the life experience of black americans. professional psychology: research and practice, 39, 329 –336. sue, d. w., capodilupo, c. m., nadal, k. l., & torino, g. (2008). racial microaggressions and the power to impose reality. american psychologist, 63, 277–279. sue, d. w., capodilupo, c. m., torino, g. c., bucceri, j. m., holder, a. m. b., nadal, k. l., et al. (2007). racial microaggressions in everyday life: implications for clinical practice. american psychologist, 62, 271–286. sue, d. w., & constantine, m. g. (2007). racial microaggressions as instigators of difficult dialogues on race: implications for student affairs professionals. college student affairs journal, 26, 136 –143. sue, d. w., nadal, k. l., capodilupo, c. m., lin, a. i., rivera, d. p., & torino, g. c. (2008). racial microaggressions against black americans: implications for counseling. journal of counseling and development, 86, 330 –338. sue, d. w., & sue, d. (2008). counseling the culturally diverse: theory and practice. hoboken, nj: wiley. u.s. department of education. (2007). the condition of education, 2007 (nces rep. no. 2007– 064). washington, dc: u.s. government printing office. utsey, s. o., gernat, c. a., & hammar, l. (2005). examining white counselor trainees’ reactions to racial issues in counseling and supervision dyads. counseling psychologist, 33, 449 – 478. watt, s. k. (2007). difficult dialogues, privilege and social justice: uses of the privileged identity exploration (pie) model in student affairs practice. college student affairs journal, 25, 114 –125. willow, r. a. (2008). lived experience of interracial dialogue on race: proclivity to participate. journal of multicultural counseling and development, 36, 40 –51. young, g. (2003). dealing with difficult classroom dialogues. in p. bronstein & k. quina (eds.), teaching gender and multicultural awareness (pp. 337–360). washington, dc: american psychological association.  
       


authors_index: tulshyan, ruchika
primary_title_index: hbr
secondary_title_index: harvard business review
title_index: we need to retire the term microaggressions
abstract_index:
       the term “microaggressions” was coined in the 1970s by harvard university professor chester pierce to describe the subtle, everyday ways that black people experienced discrimination from their white counterparts. use of the term has since become more widespread. it’s powerful to have a commonly understood way to articulate these issues and address the impact they have on the experiences of marginalized people, including in the workplace. as more leaders focus on creating inclusive work cultures and strive to make meaningful change in their organizations, more need to be aware and understand the effects of these exclusionary, biased actions — and they must stop using the term “microaggressions” to describe them. the author explains why the term is inadequate and why the language we use to describe these harmful, accumulating actions is so important.     


secondary_title_index: american journal of orthopsychiatry
title_index: black/white interracial young adults: quest for a racial identity.
full_text_index:
       see discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229051893  microaggressions and the multiracial experience article · january 2011  citations  reads  75  10,130  8 authors, including: kevin l. nadal  yinglee wong  city university of new york - john jay college of criminal justice  city university of new york - john jay college of criminal justice  112 publications 11,083 citations  13 publications 2,258 citations  see profile  see profile  katie griffin  julie sriken  city university of new york - john jay college of criminal justice  regis university  8 publications 946 citations  22 publications 624 citations  see profile  all content following this page was uploaded by kevin l. nadal on 19 may 2014. the user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.  see profile  
  the special issue on behavioral and social science   centre for promoting ideas, usa  www.ijhssnet.com  microaggressions and the multiracial experience* kevin l. nadal (corresponding author) yinglee wong, katie griffin julie sriken, vivian vargas michelle wideman ajayi kolawole john jay college of criminal justice city university of new york 445 w. 59th street, new york, ny 10019,usa phone: 1 (212) 237-8795. e-mail: knadal@jjay.cuny.edu abstract racial microaggressions are subtle statements or behaviors, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile or denigrating messages towards people of color. previous racial microaggression research tends to focus exclusively on monoracial people of color, without examining experiences from multiracial persons. in study 1 (n 262), a quantitative approach was used to measure the frequencies and types of microaggressions multiracial people experience. in study 2 (n 9), a qualitative focus group method and directed content analysis were used to identify, as well as elaborate the array of microaggressions that occurred in the participants’ everyday lives. results from both studies support and identify that multiracial people experience microaggressions that are both similar and unique to monoracial people of color.  key words: microaggressions, multiracial, monoracism, discrimination introduction in recent years, there has been a growing amount of academic literature that focuses on the concept of racial microaggressions, or “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults toward people of color” (sue, capodilupo, torino, bucceri, holder, nadal, & esquilin, 2007, p. 271). while racial microaggressions were originally conceived as “subtle, stunning, often automatic, and non-verbal exchanges which are „put downs‟” (pierce, carew, pierce-gonzalez, & willis, 1978, p. 66), several authors have cited the various types of microaggressions that exist, as well as the effects such incidents have on individuals‟ mental health and everyday life (see sue, 2010 for a review). there have been many studies which have explored the experiences of racial microaggressions from the perspectives of various racial and ethnic groups, including african americans (sue, capodilupo, & holder, 2008; sue, nadal, capodilupo, lin, torino, & rivera, 2008), asian americans (sue, bucceri, lin, nadal, & torino, 2007), and latino/a americans (rivera, forquer, & rangel, 2010). there have also been studies which have found that racial microaggressions negatively affect experiences of students of color (solorzano, ceja, & yosso, 2000; sue, lin, torino, capodilupo, & rivera, 2009), while other forms of microaggressions affect women (capodilupo et al., 2010), lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons (nadal, wong, et al., 2011), and persons with disabilities (keller & galgay, 2010). one critique regarding the literature on microaggressions is that it focuses solely on one racial group at a time, without examining how intersectional identities impact one‟s experiences (capodilupo et al., 2010). for example, when a young asian woman is spoken to in a patronizing way by an older white male supervisor, is such treatment based on her race, her gender, her age, or some combination of all of these? furthermore, a second critique is that the studies on racial microaggressions tend to focus exclusively on monoracial people of color, without considering multiracial persons‟ experiences with microaggressions (johnston & nadal, 2010), aligning with previous literature that cites the common trend to exclude multiracial people (wijeyesinghe, 2001). thus, because of this gap, the purpose of this paper is to examine microaggressions from a multiracial perspective.  brief review of multiracial literature the experiences of multiracial persons began to become visible with the legalization of interracial marriages in the us with the loving vs. virginia case in 1967. ______________________________  *this study was funded by the professional staff congress – city university of new york (psc – cuny) research award program. 36  
  international journal of humanities and social science  vol. 1 no. 7 [special issue –june 2011]  increased media exposure of multiracial persons (e.g., barack obama, tiger woods) has led to a more inclusive view of multiracial people as having a “legitimate racial identity” (rockquemore, brunsma, & delgado, 2009, p. 14). the 2000 u.s. census marked the first time that individuals were given the option of selecting one or more race category, estimating that 2.4% of the population (or 6.8 million people) identified with two races or more (u.s. census, 2000). some scholars have reported that multiracial people, as a collective group, are now the fastest growing minority group in the us (shih & sanchez, 2009) and others proposed that by the year 2050, one in five americans can be identified as multiracial (jackson, 2010; lee & bean, 2004). there have been several studies which have examined the everyday experiences of multiracial people, as well as the types of discrimination they experience. previous literature have discussed common themes such as isolation and disapproval from extended family (e.g., root, 1998), social isolation (brown, 1995), a lack of social recognition (nakashima, 1996), and exclusion from one‟s neighborhood and community (kerwin & ponterotto, 1995). jackson (2007) found that multiracial people describe their experiences with racism as being direct (e.g. being called an “oreo” or the “n” word), or indirect (e.g. overhearing a joke about one of their racial groups). finally, root (2001) reported that multiracial individuals who are of mixed asian/black heritage experience more discrimination than others who are of mixed asian/white heritage, while brackett and colleagues (2006) revealed that multiracial black/white students experienced more prejudice compared to their monoracial black and monoracial white peers. johnston and nadal (2010) proposed a theoretical taxonomy with five categories of microaggressions experienced by multiracial people. exclusion or isolation occurs when a multiracial person a made to feel excluded or isolated based on their mixed race (e.g., a biracial white/black male is told “you aren‟t black enough” by his black friends or family). exoticization and objectification transpires when a multiracial person is made to feel dehumanized or treated like an object (e.g., a biracial white/asian female is constantly asked “what are you?”). assumption of monoracial or mistaken identity arises when a multiracial person is assumed or mistaken to be monoracial or a different racial group. for example, a biracial white/latino person may overhear a joke about latinos among white friends because they may not know he is also latino. denial of multiracial reality occurs when a multiracial person‟s experiences are invalidated by monoracial people (e.g., someone is told that she should stop being so sensitive about race). finally, pathologizing of identity and experiences describes when a multiracial person‟s identity or experiences are viewed as psychologically abnormal (e.g., a multiracial person is told that “she has issues” because she is mixed). while this taxonomy is derived from previous literature, it has yet to be empirically supported; thus, the current study used both quantitative and qualitative approaches to examine the types of microaggressions individuals experience based on their multiracial identities. research questions the following exploratory research questions were created to help conceptualize and guide both quantitative and qualitative research: 1) what type of microaggressions do multiracial people experience? 2) how are the microaggressions experienced by multiracial people similar and/or different than microaggressions experienced by monoracial people? study 1: a quantitative exploration of multiracial people’s experiences with microaggressions a quantitative study was employed to understand multiracial persons‟ perceptions of microaggressions. researchers conducted a secondary analysis of a previously used data set to compare the experiences between multiracial people with monoracial people of color (i.e., monoracial african americans, latinos, and asian americans) and monoracial whites. participants the sample consisted of 262 participants- 191 females (72.9%) and 71 males (27.1%). participants ranged in age from 17 to 54 (m 20.56, sd 4.427). ninety-one participants were latina/os (34.7%), followed by 52 black/ african americans (19.8%), 45 white/european americans (17.2%), 33 multiracial persons (12.6%), and 31 asian americans/ pacific islanders (11.8%). in addition, 195 participants were born within the us (74.4%) and 67 were born abroad (25.6%); however, all but one currently resided in the us. most of the participants (n 189) had a high school diploma (72.1%), 36 had an associate‟s degree (13.7%), 29 had a bachelor‟s degree (11.1%), 7 had a graduate degree (2.7%), and 1 (0.4%) identified middle/ junior high school as one‟s highest level of education. recruitment prior to data collection, approval was attained by the researchers‟ institutional review board. over half of participants were recruited through introductory psychology classes from a large public college in a northeastern metropolitan area; each was given research credit for their participation. 37  
  the special issue on behavioral and social science   centre for promoting ideas, usa  www.ijhssnet.com  the remaining participants were obtained through the general community; recruitment emails were sent to various multicultural organizations (e.g., college student groups and professional networks) and links were posted on social network sites (e.g., facebook.com).  measures demographic form. participants completed an open-ended demographic form asking them to identify their gender, age, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, occupation, highest educational level completed, place of birth, and year spent in the us. these answers were purposely open-ended, so that individuals could self-describe their identities. this decision was made because of the aforementioned literature which has critiqued forms or surveys that force people to “choose boxes” to be insensitive and microaggressive in nature. racial and ethnic microaggressions scale (rems). the rems is a 45-item scale consisting of statements regarding experiences with racial and ethnic microaggressions. using a likert scale, participants reported how often they had experienced a list of microaggressions in the past 6 months. participants‟ answers could range from 0 to 6; a score of “0” meant that the person has not experienced such an incident and a “6” indicated that she or he has experienced such an incident 6 times or more in the past 6 months. example items included “someone wanted to date me only because of my race” and “someone assumed that i would not be intelligent because of my race.” several items were reverse-scored, which meant that higher total scores equaled a greater amount of experiences with microaggressions. the rems (cronbach‟s α 0.928) consists of six subscales: assumptions of inferiority (α 0.894), second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality (α 0.883), microinvalidations (α 0.888), exoticization/assumptions of similarity (α 0.852), environmental microaggression (α 0.850), and workplace/school microaggressions (α 0.850). the rems has been reported to have a moderate positive correlation with the racism and life experiences scale – brief version (r .464, n 376, p .001, two tailed) and a strong positive correlation with the daily life experiences – frequency scale (r .746, n 253, p .001, two tailed; nadal, 2011).  procedures the measures in this study were administered online through www.surveymonkey.com. after completing an informed consent form, participants completed the demographic questionnaire, the rems, and other measures not included in this study. participants completed the survey packet in approximately 30-45 minutes. when the desired sample size was reached, a team of 3 researchers coded the open-ended data from the demographic sheet, categorizing answers into six categories: black, latino, asian, white, multiracial, and other. most answers were easily coded; for example, if a participant wrote “african american,” she/he would be placed in the “black” category and if someone wrote “asian/white,” she/he would be placed in the “multiracial” category. many participants confused race and ethnicity, so the team of coders consensually agreed on where participants would be placed; for example, if someone wrote “dominican” they would be placed in the latino category. when there was doubt, the coders discussed each case (using context clues like ethnicity and place of birth) until they consensually agreed on choosing a category or placing them under “other.” because the purpose of this study was to examine multiracial persons‟ experiences with microaggressions, the data was coded even further. participants who identified as black, asian, or latino were regrouped into “monoracial people of color” (or “monoracial poc”), while the white category was relabeled as “monoracial whites” and the multiracial category remained the same. these classifications were utilized primarily because of the small sample size of multiracial people; however, because multiracial participants were classified as a collective group regardless of racial heritage, the researchers felt it would be appropriate to measure monoracial participants in the same manner.  results one-way anovas were conducted to determine if racial makeup (i.e., whether one is monoracial white, monoracial poc, or multiracial) influenced differences in rems average and subscale scores and dle-f scores. anovas indicated significant differences between groups in rems average scores, f(3,257) 6.358, p .005, η2 0.07; subscale 1 (assumptions of inferiority) average, f(3,257) 4.971, p .005, η2 0.07; subscale 2 (second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality) average f(3,257) 3.897, p .005, η2 0.07; subscale 4 (exoticization and assumptions of similarity) average, f(5,257) 4.029, p .005, η2 0.07; and subscale 5 (environmental microaggressions) average, f(5,255) 6.174, p .005, η2 0.07. employing the bonferroni corrected post-hoc t-test with an alpha level of p .05, some significant differences were found. multiracial people reported significantly higher scores (i.e., more microaggressions) than monoracial whites on rems average (p .00), subscale 1 (p .01), subscale 2 (p .01), subscale 5 (p .00), and subscale 6 (p .02). monoracial poc scored significantly higher than monoracial whites on rems average and subscales 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 (p .00). no differences were found between multiracial people and monoracial poc on rems average or subscale scores. 38  
  international journal of humanities and social science  vol. 1 no. 7 [special issue –june 2011]  study 2: multiracial microaggressions: a qualitative exploration a qualitative study was employed to examine multiracial individuals‟ personal accounts and interpretations of microaggressions. using this mixed-method approach allows participants to share their “lived experiences” which would not be conveyed in a quantitative study. participants there were three focus groups with a total of nine participants (8 women and 1 man). four participants identified as asian/white, three participants identified as black/white, one participant identified as black/latina, and one participant identified as black/latino/white. participants ranged in age from 19 to 34 years (m 25, sd 6.04). participants were recruited using the same procedure in study 1; there were 4 undergraduate students, 2 graduate students, and 3 working professionals. researchers the research team was comprised of 2 undergraduate students, 8 graduate students, and 1 full-time assistant professor of psychology. the research team included one asian male, two asian females, three black females, two white females, two latina females, and one black male; all identified as monoracial, although one identified as multiethnic. the principal investigator of this study has conducted qualitative research for over eleven years, and all research assistants were thoroughly trained on consensual qualitative research and directed content analysis prior to leading or observing focus groups. the research team also discussed their assumptions and biases before data collection. the reason for this step is to comply with standard procedures of qualitative research and to minimize such biases through all stages of the methodology and analysis (hill, thompson, & williams, 1997). the team discussed their bias of supporting johnston and nadal‟s (2010) theoretical taxonomy, while also discussing how their monoracial identities would impact dynamics with participants and analyses of the data.  measures demographic form. each participant completed an open-ended demographic form asking them to identify their age, gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, occupation, highest level of education completed, place of birth, and years spent in the us interview questions. all focus groups followed a semi-structured interview guide with 12 open-ended questions and subsequent probing questions, based on previous qualitative microaggression studies (e.g., capodilupo, et al., 2010; nadal, et al., 2011; sue, bucceri, et al., 2007). for example, one question was “think about a time when you may have been subtly discriminated against because of your mixed race. describe the scenario as best as you can.” follow-up questions included, “how did you react in this situation?” “what do you perceive was the message that was being conveyed to you?” and “how did you feel after the event?” the remaining questions inquired about a number of topics (e.g., experiences with statements that were invalidating and subtly racist behaviors they experienced from monoracial people). procedure each focus group was conducted in a private room at the researchers‟ home institution in the northeastern us between january and june 2010. one interviewer and two observers (each of various monoracial backgrounds) were present for each focus group. each participant completed a consent form and a demographic form; they were also given a list of counseling resources in case they experienced any distress as a result of their participation. participants were informed of audio recording, confidentiality, and the option to cease participation at any time. each focus group session lasted between 60 to 90 minutes, and there were no time limits to answering questions. observers took copious notes of the participants‟ verbal and/or nonverbal communication (e.g., smiling, head nods) and group dynamics (e.g., forming alliances, disagreements, etc.). at the end of each session, the interviewer and observers met to discuss their notes and perceptions of the group session, specifically noting nonverbal behaviors that would not be captured in a transcription of the session. all focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim by the research team; researchers‟ notes were added to the end of each transcript. each participant‟s identity was kept confidential; only the participants‟ first initial was used during the transcribing process. the original audio files were stored in the principal investigator‟s external hard drive, and all other audio copies were destroyed. after transcribing all transcripts, data was analyzed using directed content analysis, which maintains the goal “to validate or extend conceptually a theoretical framework or theory” (hsieh & shannon, 1281). the research team utilized the multiracial microaggressions categories proposed by johnston and nadal (2010) as coding outlines. team members were also encouraged to create new categories of microaggressions or reformulate any of the proposed themes, based on the current data. 39  
  the special issue on behavioral and social science   centre for promoting ideas, usa  www.ijhssnet.com  the directed content analysis followed the subsequent steps. first, each research member worked independently, read each transcript, and coded each statement into one of five domains (i.e., one of the five categories theorized by johnston and nadal, 2010). for example, they used a yellow highlighter to distinguish quotes that were applicable to one domain, and used an orange highlighter for another. if a statement did not fit one of the proposed domains, the researcher highlighted the statement with a different color and hypothesized new domains in which the quote would fit. after the individual coding process, the research team convened to discuss their analysis. if a statement was classified in more than one domain, the team members discussed the statement in question until they consensually agreed on the most appropriate coding domain. if consensus was not reached, the statement was deemed invalid and removed. if a researcher argued that a new domain should be created, the team discussed this until they reached consensus. finally, after all statements were either grouped into the proposed domains, new domains, or removed altogether, the group reviewed the quotes under each domain to identify potential subthemes. the original transcripts and the team‟s organized notes were then reviewed by an external auditor (a professor of psychology and expert on both microaggression and multiracial research) who worked independently from the team. because of group conformity, group think, or researchers‟ individual biases, an auditor can be beneficial in minimizing bias in qualitative research (hill et al., 1997). after reviewing the team‟s notes, the auditor provided thorough feedback and suggestions for the research team via email. the research team reconvened to review the feedback, discussed whether or not they agreed with the feedback, and made appropriate revisions which they resubmitted to the auditor. the auditor reviewed changes submitted by the team, offering final suggestions. the team agreed with this feedback, and a final document was created with examples that best illustrated each domain and subtheme. results six major domains emerged from the transcripts; three of these domains included subthemes. these domains included: 1) exclusion or isolation, 2) exoticization and objectification, 3) assumption of monoracial or mistaken identity, 4) denial of multiracial reality and experiences, 5) pathologizing of identity or experiences, and 6) microaggressions based on stereotypes. five of these domains align with the original taxonomy of multiracial microaggressions proposed by johnston and nadal (2010). pseudonyms and masked ethnicities are used to protect the identities of the participants. domain 1: exclusion or isolation according to johnston and nadal (2010), a microaggression that excludes or isolates is demonstrated through three subthemes: a) questioning authenticity, b) endorsement of monoracial society and norms, and c) second-class status and treatment of multiracial people. first, all of the participants described instances when individuals questioned whether they were authentically part of one of their racial groups. for example, jennifer, a biracial black/white woman shared: i feel like a large, strong sensation of sort of like, am i measuring up as a black person? and i‟m sure there have been times when people have said to me... you know, “you‟re not really black.” i think white people tend to say that but i‟ve heard that from black people as well.”andrea, an asian/white woman, described a similar experience with some white acquaintances: they would always make comments about how my ex-boyfriend had an asian fetish and i was just like, “you‟re saying this to my face, like i‟m here are you kidding?” and they were like “oh well, you‟re like not really asian” and i‟m like “ok so by your definition what am i exactly?” these experiences are just two of many examples where participants were told they “weren‟t [asian/black/latino/white] enough.” second, almost all of the participants reported experiences where they received messages that being monoracial is the norm. tiffany, a biracial latina/black female explained, “when i sign up for research studies that are [for] latino or african americans only, i don‟t know, am considered one or the other? do i go or do i not go?” similarly, isabella, a biracial latina/black woman stated: “college scholarships... there is always a spanish one and a black one. what about the biracial kids? why we don‟t get a scholarship? because you don‟t know if you can just pick one. do you qualify?” in both of these cases, these individuals feel excluded because there were only options for monoracial people. third, participants shared experiences of being belittled or treated poorly due to their multiracial status, particularly by members of their own family. tony, a biracial asian/white male shared: “my grandmother actually... was not very happy my dad married an asian. once i referred to world war ii and she said to me „you‟re all japs because of world war ii!‟” tiffany (latina/black woman) revealed a similar story: my grandfather use to treat me differently, i guess because i'm dark skinned. 40  
  international journal of humanities and social science  vol. 1 no. 7 [special issue –june 2011]  he treated me different from my cousins. cause like if we were at the park, he would buy us all ice cream and i'd be like the last one to get ice cream and like i'd be the last. i'd also get the least amount of juice. in both of these instances, the participants were treated differently because they were multiracial; more specifically, they were treated differently because they weren‟t white or light-skinned. domain 2: exoticization and objectification johnston and nadal (2010) proposed that exoticization and objectification microaggressions could be classified into three subthemes: a) race on display, b) sexual objectification, and c) objectifying multiracial people as the “racialized ideal.” first, participants reported how their unique phenotypes led them to be regularly questioned and feel forced to talk about their race. for example, cathy, an asian/white woman, shared: “people would stop me in the subway and ask me what i was. [one time] i found this couple staring at me funny. eventually they come up to me and they‟re like, „what mix are you?‟” this experience of strangers asking multiracial people about their race was common among all of the participants. participants also shared that they did not perceive their monoracial counterparts to encounter such incidents. second, multiracial participants across all groups reported being sexually objectified because of their phenotype and multiracial background. marissa, a biracial asian/white woman shared “like every guy that has ever come up to me in a bar, ever, [would say] „you‟re so exotic! you‟re like a hybrid!” jennifer described how she felt exoticized by both black and white men, with the following quote demonstrating one of her experiences with black men specifically: “[these] guys who were so proud to be black like you know, [start] reaching to grab you and calling you light skinned, light skinned, light skinned...” this type of objectification was even reported by the only male participant. tony (an asian/white man) shared similar feelings: “for every girl that wanted to date me, it was because i was mixed race. they would actually be enticed and i would be exotic.” all of the participants, regardless of their racial makeup or gender, experienced exoticization in a sexualized way. the women described their frustrated reactions in such situations, while the male participant indicated that it did not bother him. johnston and nadal (2010) cited that multiracial people are often idealized as the “racialized ideal” or the “poster child” for positive race relations. in cathy‟s aforementioned experience, she talks about how the couple reacted after they asked her about her racial background: “i told [them about my racial heritage], and they‟re like, “oh my god.” and they were talking to each other and she says, „we can have one of that!‟ that was disturbing.” rochelle (a multiracial black/latina/white woman) described a situation with her classmate: my friend wrote a paper for english class, and we had to write about someone that was in our class. and so she wrote about me, and you know, and she had to describe me, “her last name‟s [european], her first name is african american, and she speaks spanish. she‟s just such a melting pot!” or something weird like that... and i was like wow. both cathy and rochelle reported having strong, negative reactions in these instances, despite that the enactors probably felt well-intended and non-offensive in their actions. category 3: assumption of monoracial identity (or mistaken identity) multiracial people are often mistaken to be monoracial or a completely different race. such experiences can feel invalidating because one‟s true identities are not being honored or recognized. shannon, a black/white woman, describes how people treat her differently depending on the situation: what is most interesting to me right now is just that ascribed identity, you know. it doesn‟t matter really what i am or how i experience myself, but it has so much to do with how i‟m interacting with the world and sort of the messages i‟m getting from the people around me. and again how that changes where i am geographically. several participants talked about how they are mistaken to be of a certain race or ethnicity that is completely different from their racial heritage. andrea (who is asian/white) explained: when i moved to new york, then suddenly everyone was speaking spanish to me. so for a while, it took a bit for me to make sense of what that was about... whereas now, where i live in the city, it‟s predominantly middle eastern and so now i am getting a lot of people speaking to me in arabic. and it‟s the same thing, i sort of, you know, i have my shield ready to go, i mean usually it‟s just like, oh i‟m not spanish or i‟m not hispanic... but i don't go into anything else. similarly, marissa who is asian and white (irish), shared: everybody thinks i‟m russian. ever since i moved here and it‟s really funny because like i‟ll walk to the grocery store. and this guy that‟s walking says, “anytime you want to speak your russian or practice your russian, you come back in my store.” i‟m like “alright, bye.” [she laughs]. and it just happens almost all the time. i was like “oh my god.” all participants discussed various ways they “prepare” for these incidents. 41  
  the special issue on behavioral and social science   centre for promoting ideas, usa  www.ijhssnet.com  category 4: denial of multiracial reality and experiences johnston and nadal (2010) describe examples of multiracial people who are denied an opportunity to choose their own identities, as well as multiracial individuals who are invalidated by others about their experiences with race. cathy (asian/white) discussed how her monoracial white friends invalidate her: like everyone with me is like “oh [cathy], just get over it, like come on.” and i‟m like no, that‟s really not cool and they just don‟t take it to heart... but like day to day it‟s like “come on, you can‟t be that offended, like you‟re white.” similarly, andrea shares how she feels misunderstood by monoracial individuals from both of her racial heritage groups, “i‟ll try and speak to my asian friends about it or my white friends about it or my mom about it. they kind of have no idea what i‟m talking about.” participants shared how monoracial people did not understand some of the struggles that they faced, and how sometimes they appeared not to care. category 5: pathologizing of identity or experiences the final category identified in johnston and nadal‟s (2010) taxonomy is the pathologizing of identity or experiences, which includes two subthemes: a) psychopathology and b) family pathology. these types of microaggressions occur when a multiracial person mixed-race or family is stereotyped as bizarre, abnormal or pathological. psychopathology microaggressions can be demonstrated by denise (an asian/white female) who described the reaction she receives when people respond to her as if her very existence was bizarre. she said, “people are just looking at me like, that‟s crazy, like, “you look like [this], your last name is [this], you‟re claiming you‟re [this]... like you‟re all over the place.” rochelle shared comparable sentiments: “um, basically why don‟t people understand? they think you‟re going crazy. like why am i the only one in the world that gets this?” family psychopathology can be exemplified by cathy, who gets frustrated when people assume things about her parents‟ relationship: [this monoracial asian woman] said she was disgusted by asian women that just demean themselves by being with white men because they thought that it would move them upward in society and that it was appalling to her. she met my dad and didn‟t date him because he was white. she had her own life and it just happened to be that way. in all of these incidents, a message is sent that multiracial individuals and mixed race families negative or problematic. category 6: microaggressions based on racial stereotypes while not found in the original taxonomy proposed by johnston and nadal (2010), the present study revealed that in addition to multiracial microaggressions, these individuals also experience microaggressions based on their phenotype or one of their racial groups. previous research has found that african americans are often assumed to be criminals while asian americans are presumed to be foreigners (sue, capodilupo, et al., 2007). similar themes occurred with this sample; for example, cathy (who is asian/white) explained, “people from my block ask „where are you from?‟ i‟m like „los angeles.‟ „um no, no really where are you from?‟ i‟m like „los angeles.‟” jennifer (who is black/white) recalled: i‟ve even heard in college once there was a white guy who had a crush on me and his white friend was like “oh, you have a crush on [jennifer]? i don‟t trust her.” you know, i‟m like “why” he didn‟t know me, so why didn‟t he trust me? these and other examples reported by the participants provided evidence that multiracial people not only experience microaggressions based on their multiracial identity but also based on each individual race with which they identify and/or are perceived.  discussion results from these two studies support that multiracial people experience microaggressions, extending the theoretical model of multiracial microaggressions proposed by johnston and nadal (2010). in the first study, the frequencies and types of microaggressions that multiracial people experience were quantitatively measured. results indicated that the multiracial people experience potentially as many microaggressions than monoracial poc, as revealed by their similar scores on the rems. moreover, results support that both monoracial poc and multiracial people report significantly more microaggressions than monoracial whites, suggesting that microaggressions impact both of these populations more than monoracial whites. in the second study, participants were able to identify racial microaggressions in their own words, describing experiences that were blatant, conscious, and intentional, as well as microaggressions that were more subtle or unconscious. they were able to identify various microaggressions that occurred through interpersonal interactions, as well as environmental manifestations that they may notice in their everyday lives. 42  
  international journal of humanities and social science  vol. 1 no. 7 [special issue –june 2011]  participants‟ examples of microaggressions were both similar and different from monoracial people of color. first, like monoracial poc, multiracial people experience themes of feeling exoticized, being treated like a second-class citizen, or being assumed to be a foreigner. second, participants‟ reactions to microaggressions aligned with previous literature that has cited the emotional and psychological consequences of microaggressions. finally, similar to participants in prior studies, participants developed coping skills and strategies in order to prevent microaggressions (e.g., avoiding dating certain types of people) or to be prepared to respond to microaggressions when they occur (e.g., knowing how to respond to someone who assumes you speak a certain language). however, there are unique experiences that these multiracial individuals reported which have not emerged in previous microaggression literature with monoracial people of color. for instance, participants described being excluded or isolated by one‟s own family. one participant shared how she felt her grandfather favored her other cousins because of their lighter skin tones, monoracial identities, or both. perhaps future research can explore how skin tone, social class, and other factors may induce microaggressions with family systems. other examples of microaggressions that may be somewhat unique to multiracial people include instances when individuals are “complimented” for being a “racialized ideal” or when multiracial people are assumed to be psychologically abnormal or from a bizarre or pathological family. these microaggressions and others like them are important to note because the enactor of such statements and behaviors are often monoracial people of color. while majority of microaggression literature has focused primarily on interactions between dominant groups (e.g., whites, men, heterosexuals) and target groups (e.g., people of color, women, lgbt people), it may be important for future research to investigate ways that people from target groups can be microaggressive toward each other. nadal, issa, griffin, hamit, and lyons (2010, p. 307) refer to this concept as a “cycle of microaggressions” in which “some individuals who enact microaggressions onto others may actually be the recipients of microaggressions themselves.” because monoracial people of color are victims of microaggressions and other forms of oppression, it may be difficult for them to recognize their own monoracial privilege and monoracist biases. there are some limitations to be considered. for the first study, the sample was not balanced in terms of geographic location and education level, likely because most were recruited from an undergraduate population in the northeast. in addition, since the researchers conducted a secondary analysis based on a previous data set used to measure racial microaggressions for all groups, multiracial persons were not effectively recruited. third, because many participants confused race and ethnicity, the consensual coding process by the researchers may have impacted the accuracy of the participant‟s race. for example, place of birth or ethnicity may not accurately reflect a person‟s race. yet, as aforementioned, the researchers chose this method instead of forcing participants to check a box, which has been cited as a microaggression itself. for the second study, the sample size was small, with a total of 9 participants, which may not be representative of all multiracial people. furthermore, although researchers discussed biases prior to conducting the study, researchers‟ life experiences may have influenced the analyses. additionally, the use of a directed content analysis approach is a limitation, in that the data is approached from an informed position. several steps were taken to account for this limitation, including the use of an external auditor and consensual agreement. finally, focus group dynamics could have influenced participants‟ responses; however, this method was used so that participants could stimulate others to recall a myriad of experiences.  references brackett, k. p., marcus, a., mckenzie, n. j., mullins, l. c., tang, z., & allen, a. m. (2006). the effects of multiracial identification on students‟ perceptions of racism. the social science journal, 43(3), 437-444. brown, u. m. (1995). black/white interracial young adults: quest for racial identity. american journal of orthopsychiatry, 65, 125-130. doi:10.1037/h0079587 capodilupo, c. m., nadal, k. l., corman, l., hamit, s., lyons, o., & weinberg, a. (2010). the manifestation of gender microaggressions. in d. w. sue (ed.), microaggressions and marginality: manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 193-216). new york: wiley & sons. hill, c. e., thompson, b. j., & williams, e. n. (1997). a guide to conducting consensual qualitative research. the counseling psychologist, 25(4), 517-572. doi: 10.1177/0011000097254001 hsieh, h-f., & shannon, s. e. (2005). three approaches to qualitative content analysis. qualitative health research, 15(9), 1277-1288. doi:10.1177/1049732305276687 jackson, k. f. (2007). beyond race: examining the cultural identity of multiracial individuals. dissertation abstracts international, section a: humanities and social sciences, 68(5-a), 2172 jackson, k. f. (2010). ethical considerations in social work research with multiracial individuals. journal of social work values and ethics, 7(1), 1-10. 43  
  the special issue on behavioral and social science   centre for promoting ideas, usa  www.ijhssnet.com  johnston, m. p. & nadal, k. l. (2010). multiracial microaggressions: exposing monoracism in everyday life and clinical practice. in d. w. sue (ed.), microaggressions and marginality: manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 123-144). new york: wiley & sons. keller, r. m., & galgay, c. e. (2010). microaggressions experienced by people with disabilities in us society. in d. w. sue (ed.), microaggressions and marginality: manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 241-268). new york: wiley & sons. kerwin, c. & ponterotto, j. g. (1995). biracial identity development: theory and research. in j. g. ponterotto, j. m. casas, l. a. suzuki, & c. m. alexander (eds.), handbook of multiracial counseling (pp. 199-217). thousand oaks, ca: sage. lee, j. & bean, f. d. (2004). america‟s changing color lines: immigration, race/ethnicity, and multiracial identification. annual review of sociology, 30, 221-242. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.30.012703.110519 nadal, k. l. (2011). the racial and ethnic microaggressions scale (rems): construction, reliability, and validity. manuscript under review. nadal, k. l., issa, m. a., griffin, k., hamit, s., & lyons, o. (2010). religious microaggressions in the united states: mental health implications for religious minority groups. in d. w. sue (ed.), microaggressions and marginality: manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp.287-310). new york: wiley & sons. nadal, k. l., wong, y., issa, m. a., meterko, v., leon, j., wideman, m. n. (2011). sexual orientation microaggressions: processes and coping mechanisms for lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals. journal of lgbt issues in counseling, 5(1), 1-26 nakashima, c.l. (1996). voices from the moment: approaches to multiraciality. in m. p. p. root (ed.), the multiracial experience: racial borders as the new frontier (pp. 79-97). thousand oaks, ca: sage. pierce, c., carew, j., pierce-gonzalez, d., & willis, d. (1978). an experiment in racism: tv commercials. in c. pierce (ed.), television and education (pp. 62–88). beverly hills, ca: sage. rivera, d. p., forquer, e. e., & rangel, r. (2010). microaggressions and the life experience of latina/o americans. in d. w. sue (ed.), microaggressions and marginality: manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 5984). new york: wiley & sons. rockquemore, k. a., brunsma, d. l., & delgado, d. j. (2009). racing to theory or retheorizing race? understanding the struggle to build a multiracial identity theory. journal of social issues,65(1),13-34. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.01585.x root, m. p. p. (1998). experiences and processes affecting racial identity development: preliminary results from the biracial sibling project. cultural diversity and mental health, 4(3), 237-247. root, m. p. p. (2001). factors influencing the variation in racial and ethnic identity of mixed-heritage persons of asian ancestry. in t. k. williams-leon and c. l. nakashima (eds.), the sum of our parts: mixed heritage asian americans (pp. 61-70). philadelphia, pa: temple university. shih, m. & sanchez, d. (2009). when race becomes even more complex: toward understanding the landscape of multiracial identity and experiences. journal of social issues, 65(1), 1-11. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.01584.x solorzano, d., ceja, m., & yosso, t. (2000). critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial climate: the experiences of african american college students. journal of negro education, 69(1/2), 60-73. sue, d. w. (2010). microaggressions in everyday life: race, gender, and sexual orientation new york: wiley & sons.  sue, d. w., bucceri, j. m., lin, a. i., nadal, k. l., & torino, g. c. (2007). racial  microaggressions  and  the  asian american experience. cultural diversity and ethnic minority psychology, 13(1), 72-81. doi:10.1037/1099-9809.13.1.72  sue, d. w., capodilupo, c. m., & holder, a. m. b. (2008). racial microagressions in the life experience of black americans. professional psychology: research and practice, 39(3), 329-336. doi:10.1037/07357028.39.3.329 sue, d. w., capodilupo, c. m., torino, g. c., bucceri, j. m., holder, a. m., nadal, k. l., & esquilin, m. e. (2007). racial microaggressions in everyday life: implications for counseling. the american psychologist, 62(4), 271-286. doi:10.1037/0003066x.62.4.271 sue, d. w., lin, a. i., torino, g. c., capodilupo, c.m., & rivera, d. p. (2009). racial microaggressions and difficult dialogues in the classroom. cultural diversity and ethnic minority psychology, 15(2), 183-190. sue, d. w., nadal, k. l., capodilupo, c. m., lin, a. i., torino, g. c., & rivera, d. p. (2008). racial microaggressions against black americans: implications for counseling. journal of counseling and development, 86(3), 330-338. u.s. census bureau (2000). the two or more races population: 2000. retrieved from http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-6.pdf wijeyesinghe, c.l. (2001). racial identity in multiracial people. in c. l. wijeyesinghe & b.w. jackson (eds.), new perspectives on racial identity development: a theoretical and practical anthology (pp.129-152). new york: university press.  44  view publication stats  
       


secondary_title_index: journal of counseling psychology
title_index:
       the racial and ethnic microaggressions scale (rems): construction, reliability, and validity.     

full_text_index:
       see discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51603122  the racial and ethnic microaggressions scale (rems): construction, reliability, and validity article in journal of counseling psychology · august 2011 doi: 10.1037/a0025193 · source: pubmed  citations  reads  382  27,226  1 author: kevin l. nadal city university of new york - john jay college of criminal justice 112 publications 11,083 citations see profile  all content following this page was uploaded by kevin l. nadal on 19 may 2014. the user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.  
  journal of counseling psychology 2011, vol. 58, no. 4, 470 – 480   2011 american psychological association 0022-0167/11/ 12.00 doi: 10.1037/a0025193  the racial and ethnic microaggressions scale (rems): construction, reliability, and validity kevin l. nadal john jay college of criminal justice—city university of new york racial microaggressions are subtle statements and behaviors that unconsciously communicate denigrating messages to people of color. in recent years, a theoretical taxonomy and subsequent qualitative studies have introduced the types of microaggressions that people of color experience. in the present study, college- and internet-based samples of african americans, latina/os, asian americans, and multiracial participants (n 661) were used to develop and validate the racial and ethnic microaggression scale (rems). in study 1, an exploratory principal-components analyses (n 443) yielded a 6-factor model: (a) assumptions of inferiority, (b) second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality, (c) microinvalidations, (d) exoticization/assumptions of similarity, (e) environmental microaggressions, and (f) workplace and school microaggressions, with a cronbach’s alpha of .912 for the overall model and subscales ranging from .783 to .873. in study 2, a confirmatory factor analysis (n 218) supported the 6-factor model with a cronbach’s alpha of .892. further analyses indicate that the rems is a valid measure of racial microaggressions, as evidenced by high correlations with existing measures of racism and participants’ feedback. future research directions and implications for practice are discussed. keywords: microaggressions, racism, discrimination, scale construction  moreover, it is necessary for psychologists to be cognizant of the types of racial discrimination their clients of color may experience, as well as the ways their clients may cope with such experiences. although racism has been found to have detrimental effects on people of color, researchers have suggested that interpersonal racism has decreased, as exemplified by the fact that race-based hate crimes are viewed as socially unacceptable and have reduced significantly over the past few decades (nadal, 2008). so although it may have been commonplace for lynchings, cross burnings, and racial assaults to have occurred 30 years ago, it is less socially acceptable to condone violent acts of racism in contemporary times. many authors have posited that because the united states has become more politically correct, most individuals are much more aware of racism and tend to avoid engaging in racist acts (see sue, 2010, for a review). however, although individuals may not consciously be racist, their biases and prejudices may manifest in more subtle and unconscious ways. for example, although most people self-report that they are not racist and that they uphold egalitarian values, they may unconsciously maintain negative feelings toward racial and ethnic minority groups (gaertner & dovidio, 2006). as a result, although interpersonal racism may no longer be as overt as it may have been in the past, racism may now take on more subtle forms (sue et al., 2007). this new form of discrimination has been identified as symbolic racism (sears, 1988), modern racism (mcconahay, 1986), aversive racism (dovidio, gaertner, kawakami, & hodson, 2002), and racial microaggressions (pierce, carew, pierce-gonzalez, & willis, 1978). in recent years, there has been an increase in the term microaggressions in the fields of psychology, education, and counseling. sue and colleagues (2007) have described several categories of microaggressions that exist, including racial microinsults (i.e.,  there have been numerous studies that have demonstrated the negative impacts that racism and racial discrimination may have on individuals’ physical and mental health. studies have reported the relationship between racial discrimination and psychological stress (fang & myers, 2001; moradi & risco, 2006), high blood pressure (harrel, hall, & taliaferro, 2003; steffen, mcneilly, anderson, & sherwood, 2003), depression (lambert, herman, bynum, & ialongo, 2009; santana, almeida-filho, roberts, & cooper, 2007), sleeping problems (steffan & bowden, 2006), substance abuse (wei, alvarez, ku, russell, & bonett, 2010), eating disorders (mastria, 2002), and posttraumatic stress disorder (flores, tschann, dimas, pasch, & de groat, 2010; pieterse, carter, evans, & walter, 2010). given these factors, it is clear that understanding and preventing racial discrimination is important in order to promote the physical and mental health of people of color.  this article was published online first august 29, 2011. i thank the american psychological association promoting psychological research and training on health disparities issues (prodigs) for funding this project. i send a very special thank you to my research assistants katie griffin, and yinglee wong for assisting in the construction of this scale. i also acknowledge my other research team members, including kristin davidoff, sahran hamit, marie-anne issa, jayleen leon, vanessa meterko, michael tobio, vivian vargas, and michelle wideman for their contributions. finally, i thank derald wing sue, david rivera, and my colleagues at teachers college-columbia university for their inspiration and support as well as their commitment to microaggression research. correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to kevin l. nadal, department of psychology, john jay college of criminal justice— city university of new york, 445 west 59th street, new york, ny 10019. e-mail: knadal@jjay.cuny.edu 470  
  racial and ethnic microaggressions scale  verbal and nonverbal behaviors that send denigrating messages to people of color) and racial microinvalidations (i.e., unconscious verbal statements in which the perpetrator may have good intentions, but which convey negative messages to people of color). furthermore, sue and colleagues (2007) presented an original taxonomy of racial microaggressions, citing various themes of ways that microaggressions may manifest in everyday life. one theme includes alien in one’s own land (i.e., experiences in which people of color may feel like perpetual foreigners). for example, telling an asian american “you speak good english” could be considered a microaggression because such a statement implies that the asian american is foreign-born, although she or he was born in the united states. another theme is assumption of criminality (i.e., experiences in which people of color are stereotyped to be deviant or criminals). for example, a store owner who follows an african american around in a store while she or he is shopping could be considered a microaggression because such behavior insinuates that african americans are going to steal from them. other themes included second-class citizen (e.g., when customers of color receive substandard service to whites), ascription of intelligence (e.g., when people of color are assumed to be less intellectual or uneducated), assumption of inferiority (e.g., when people of color are assumed to be poor or hold substandard careers), colorblindness (e.g., when someone claims that they “don’t see race”), and denial of racial reality (e.g., when someone defensively denies that she or he is racist or engaged in racist behaviors). a number of qualitative studies have examined racial microaggressions experienced by african americans (sue et al., 2008; watkins, labarrie, & appio, 2010), latina/os (rivera, forquer, & rangel, 2010), asian americans (sue, bucceri, lin, nadal, & torino, 2010), indigenous peoples (hill, kim, & williams, 2010), and students of color (sue, lin, torino, capodilupo, & rivera, 2009). the original microaggressions taxonomy presented by sue and colleagues (2007) has led to literature on microaggressions toward other populations including multiracial people (johnston & nadal, 2010; nadal, wong, griffin, et al., 2011), women (capodilupo et al., 2010; nadal, 2010), lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (lgbt) people (nadal, issa, et al., 2011; nadal, rivera, & corpus, 2010; nadal, wong, et al., 2011), religious minorities (nadal, issa, griffin, hamit, & lyons, 2010), and persons with disabilities (keller & galgay, 2010). this literature supported that people of color and other minority groups experience a number of microaggressions in their everyday lives and that these microaggressions have negative impacts on their mental health. despite the positive contributions to the literature, qualitative methods have been used all of these aforementioned studies (often with small sample sizes). thus, it is imperative for researchers to produce quantitative studies to empirically support the presence of microaggressions and their influences on mental health, physical health, and other variables like self-esteem, self-efficacy, and performance. harrell (2000) created the daily life experiences (dle) measure, which consists of 20 items and measures microaggressions that may occur in everyday life. however, there are no subscales in this measure, and it does reflect the breadth and categories of microaggressions that have been highlighted in the microaggression taxonomy and subsequent studies. moreover, other instruments that measure modern racism (mcconahay,  471  1986), perceived ethnic discrimination (brondolo et al., 2005) and race-related stress (liang, li, & kim, 2004; utsey, 1998; utsey & ponterotto, 1996) may include some examples of microaggressions but do not take account of the types of microaggressions that have been described in recent literature (e.g., environmental microaggressions or microinvalidations). thus, the purpose of the present study was to create a quantitative instrument on racial microaggressions that could measure the microaggressions that people of color experience in their everyday lives.  study 1: principal components analysis and initial reliability and validity in this first study, i describe the development of items for a measure on racial microaggressions, which includes an exploratory principal components analysis, as well as initial reliability of the measure. i also describe ways that validity was tested, namely through participants’ evaluations and correlations with the racism and life experiences scale-brief (rales-b; utsey, 1998). i also describe two scoring methods that were used.  method development of initial pool of items. on the basis of the original taxonomy on racial microaggressions presented by sue and colleagues (2007), as well as the previous research on african americans (sue et al., 2008; watkins et al., 2010), latina/os (rivera et al., 2010), asian americans (sue et al., 2010), indigenous people (hill et al., 2010), and students of color (sue et al., 2009), a team of 13 researchers gathered to create an initial pool of items for a racial microaggression measure. (the description of the research team is highlighted below.) first, the researchers worked autonomously, with the task of producing as many items as they could, using the previously described themes (from both the original taxonomy and the subsequent research studies) as stimulation. for example, with the theme alien in one’s own land, a researcher independently produced as many items that corresponded with this theme. using the eight aforementioned categories, each researcher generated about 50 –100 possible items independently. after working independently and creating individual lists, the team gathered together and discussed each of their lists of items. a recorder took note of all of the items and made note of repeated items, as well as items that the team consensually decided to discard. then, the team voted on the items that were most representative of the eight original categories (i.e., there were approximately 15–20 items per category). a subteam of four researchers worked together to discuss grammatical structure and wording of each item and produced and presented a list of 140 items to the team. the team discussed the items and offered minor suggestions; the list was then given to an auditor. this auditor, a professor who is an expert in microaggression literature, worked independently from the team, and checked the representativeness of each category (i.e., did the items characterize each category effectively?) and the grammatical structure and meaning of each item. upon receiving the auditor’s feedback, the team removed some of the confusing or inappropriate items as recommended, resulting in a final list of 131 items. finally, the team randomized the items into one random, uncategorized list, which is henceforth referred to as the racial and ethnic microaggression scale-initial version (rems-i).  
  472  nadal  participants. the sample included a total of 443 participants; 335 were women, 108 were men, and none identified as transgender. the mean age of the sample was 24.83 (sd 8.627), with a range of 18 – 66. the sample was racially diverse, with 34% asian americans/ pacific islanders, 31% latina/os, 18% black african americans, 11% multiracial, and 6% who did not identify with any of these categories or did not report race. the sample was also ethnically diverse, with the largest samples including filipino american (21%), african american (12%), dominican american (7%), puerto rican (6%), mexican/chicano/a american (5%), and two ethnicities or more (14%). eighty-five percent of the sample identified as heterosexual, whereas 6% identified as gay/lesbian, 3% as bisexual, and the remaining in other ways. the largest religious groups were catholic (41%), christian (19%), and agnostic or without a religion (15%). fifty-eight percent identified as living in a northeastern state; 20% of participants were from the west coast, 14% were from the midwest, and the remainder were from the southwest, southeast, or hawai’i (2.0%). the sample had a diverse range of educational levels: about 49% had a high school diploma, 11% had an associate’s degree, 23% had a bachelor’s degree, and 18% had a graduate degree. finally, the majority of the sample was born within the united states (76.5%), whereas 22% of the participants were born outside of the united states. recruitment. participants who identified as black/african american, latina/o, asian american, pacific islander, arab american, or multiracial were eligible to participate in the study. participants were recruited in two ways: (a) through a psychology 101 undergraduate pool and (b) through online listservs and community websites. students from the psychology 101 classes were required to participate in research experiments as a part of class; these participants received credit for attending and participating in focus groups, regardless of activity of participation or quality of their answers. a community sample was recruited by sending mass e-mails to various community listservs. listservs included, but were not limited to, nonprofit community centers, racial minority professional organizations, and historically black, latina/o, or asian american sororities and fraternities. a snowball sampling methodology was encouraged, in which participants were asked to advertise the study to their respective networks. measures. demographic sheet. an open-ended demographic questionnaire asked participants to self-identify their gender, age, race, ethnicity, immigration status, religious background, level of education, and occupation. open-ended answers are used to allow individuals to choose their own identities, instead of limiting participants to choose a predetermined box. this decision was made because of previous authors (e.g., johnston & nadal, 2010) who have cited that forcing people to “choose” a box to be a microaggression in itself. the rems-i. the rems-i consists of 131 items that identify various racial microaggressions. respondents were instructed to indicate the number of times that a microaggression occurred in the past 6 months, with 1 i did not experience this event in the past six months, 2 i experienced this event 1–3 times in the past six months, 3 i experienced this event 4 – 6 times in the past six months, 4 i experienced this event 7–9 times in the past six months, and 5 i experienced this event 10 or more times in the past six months.  the rales-b. the rales-b is a short (and more widely used) version of the racism and life experiences-selfadministration version (rales-s; utsey, 1998). the nine-item instrument is a self-report measure of perceptions of racism by a person of color and the impact and stress that racism has on an individual’s personal life (utsey, 1998). the scale measures the degree to which an individual believes that racism affects one’s self and one’s racial group. four items comprise the racism-group score (measuring the stress that race may cause people of one’s same racial/ethnic group), whereas five items comprise the racism-self score; a total score measures the racism and life experiences score. utsey and ponterotto (1996) reported that the rales-b racism-self score and rales-b racism-group score had a cronbach’s alpha of .90 and .83, respectively (n 55). high validity was exemplified by the significant and positive correlation (rs .24 –.46, p .01) between the rales-b with the index of race-related stress (irrs), another measure of racism (utsey & ponterotto, 1996). the present study yielded a cronbach’s alpha of .862 for the total rales-b scale and .878 and .673 for the racism-self and racism-group scores, respectively. rems evaluation. at the conclusion of the rems-i, participants were asked three open-ended questions. these questions included the following: 1. describe what you believe these questions were trying to measure. 2. write three keywords or key phrases that can be used to label the various experiences that are described above. 3. do you remember any questions or experiences that were not written in a clear or concise manner? if so, please list them. procedure. after receiving approval from the institutional review board of the principal investigators’ institution, all measures were made available through the website www.surveymonkey.com. first, participants were presented with an informed consent form to read, which indicated their voluntary participation, as well as potential risks and benefits to the study. next, participants filled out the demographic questionnaire followed by the rems, the rales, and the rems-evaluation. each research session lasted 30 – 45 min. at the completion of the survey, participants received a debriefing statement, which indicated the purpose of the statement, as well as the principal investigator’s contact information.  results to test the rems-i and create possible subscales, the researchers first conducted an exploratory principal components analysis. an exploratory principal components analysis was used initially instead of a confirmatory factor analysis because of the large number of items that were included, as well as the uncertainty of which factors would emerge from the several aforementioned microaggression studies. thus, using tabachnick and fidell’s (2001) suggestion of .32 as a sufficient loading, and guadagnoli and velicer’s (1988) recommendation of .40 or greater as adequate, items with factor loadings of .45 or greater would be included. additionally, following costello and osborne’s (2005) recommendation of identifying and removing cross-loadings, items with loadings of .50 or above on more than one component would be removed.  
  racial and ethnic microaggressions scale  the principal components analysis resulted in a kaiser-meyerolkin (kmo) coefficient of .894 (well above the recommended .50) and a bartlett’s test of sphericity 2 of 8155.78 (df 990, p .001), suggesting significant sampling adequacy. thus, an orthogonal method was chosen. first, 131 items were entered into the principal-components factor analysis on spss version 18, with a varimax rotation and eigenvalues greater than 1. this procedure yielded 28 components, with eigenvalues ranging from 1.01 to 32.94. next, researchers examined each of these 28 components and assessed whether a number of items had a factor loading greater than .45. after eliminating items with weak loadings and cross-loadings, a total of 79 items remained. in order to reach the predetermined number of factors to extract (6), these 79 items were submitted to a second principal components analysis, with a varimax rotation, a kaiser normalization, and eigenvalues greater than 1. using this orthogonal rotation was chosen because not all correlations were significant, and many had r scores that were less than .15 (de vellis, 2003); using such a varimax rotation is further supported by finch (2006), who found that both orthogonal and oblique rotations are equally effective. this procedure resulted in eight components, which were then evaluated by the researchers to determine whether the groupings of items made conceptual sense. six components were retained, each with a range of five to nine items each. the other two components did not produce substantial items with loadings greater than .45 and did not make conceptual sense. furthermore, retaining these six components aligned with the number of components determined by using the monte carlo principal components analysis for parallel analysis—a standalone realbasic program that allows specification of three to 300 variables, 100 –2,500 participants, and 1–1,000 replications (watkins, 2006). results from 11 variables, 443 participants, and 100 replications were produced in 33 s by a windows nt personal computer and yielded six random components with eigenvalues greater than 1. these six components accounted for 12.70%, 4.00%, 3.42%, 3.13%, 1.84%, and 1.61% of the variance, respectively, and were labeled as component 1: assumptions of inferiority, component 2: second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality, component 3: microinvalidations, component 4: exoticization/assumptions of similarity, component 5: environmental microaggressions, and component 6: workplace and school microaggressions. according to an analysis of postrotation sums of squared loadings, components account for 11.25%, 10.93%, 10.33%, 9.51%, 8.50%, and 7.34% of the total variance. (see table 1 for loadings, commonalities, and variance accounted for.) components 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 were all significantly positively correlated with each other (r .219 –.589, p .01). component 5 was significantly negatively correlated with components 1, 2, 3, and 4 (r .173 to .117, p .01); however, there was no significant correlation between components 5 and 6 (see table 2). supporting internal consistency reliability, the 45-item rems produced a coefficient alpha of 0.928 (m 1.6702, sd 0.543). each subscale produced a coefficient alpha well over .80 — subscale 1: assumptions of inferiority ( .894, m 1.4052, sd 0.754), subscale 2: second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality ( .883, m 1.2981, sd 0.668), subscale 3: microinvalidations ( .888, m 1.5249, sd 0.780), subscale 4: exoticization/ assumptions of similarity ( .852, m 1.6573, sd 0.883), subscale 5: environmental microaggres-  473  sions ( .850, m 3.205, sd 0.870), and subscale 6: workplace and school microaggressions ( .850, m 1.2894, sd 0.691). the rems-45 produced high internal reliabilities with all major racial groups—black/african americans ( .918), latina/os ( .905), asian americans ( .909), and multiracial persons ( .922). means and reliabilities for the scale and subscales for four major racial groups are included in table 3. testing for concurrent validity, the rems-45 was positively correlated with the rales-b (r .464, n 376, p .001). five of the six subscales were also positively correlated with the rales-b—subscale 1: assumptions of inferiority (r .343, n 376, p .001), subscale 2: second-class citizen and assumption of criminality (r .351, n 376, p .001), subscale 3: microinvalidations (r .380, n 376, p .001), subscale 4: exoticization/assumptions of similarity (r .216, n 376, p .001), and subscale 6: workplace and school microaggressions (r .433, n 376, p .001). subscale 5: environmental microaggressions was not significantly correlated with the rales-b. the same five rems subscales also correlated highly with both the rales-b individual and rales-b group subscales. one way that i tested an element of construct validity, or whether the scale is accurately measuring microaggressions, was by using the rems evaluation. participants were asked to describe what they thought the questions were trying to measure, as well as three keywords that represented the items that were listed. using a content analysis method (see hsieh & shannon, 2005, for a review), a subteam of five researchers worked independently, thoroughly read each answer, and categorized each answer into themes (i.e., descriptions that were based on keywords or ideas). the team reconvened and discussed their findings, and the team consensually agreed on major categories, which were sent to an auditor who checked for accuracy and provided feedback. finally, the team reviewed and classified each item into one of the major themes and tallied the number of responses under each category. for answers that may have fit under more than one theme, the researchers consensually agreed on a theme that each response fit best. the most frequently used words included (a) racism (n 99), discrimination (n 70), stereotype (n 45), ignorance (n 40), and prejudice (n 35). five major themes emerged, with 60 or more responses that were categorized under each theme. theme 1: experiences with racism (n 255) illustrated descriptions that explicitly used the word racism (on interpersonal, institutional, societal, or abstract levels). for example, one participant wrote “i believe the questions were measuring the amount of racism an average person encounters during the aforementioned 6 month period,” whereas another wrote “i think the study is trying to find out whether or not i believe racism still exists.” theme 2: experiences of race and ethnicity (n 140) described responses that discussed treatment of people of color, without necessarily describing such situations as positive or negative. for example, one participant wrote “i believe that the questions wanted to measure how people belonging to my culture are treated in today’s society.” theme 3: perceptions of race-related situations (n 90) included descriptions that discussed the idea of perceptions of race by self or by others. for example, one participant shared “[this is a study about] perceptions of daily interactions that carry racial or  
  nadal  474  table 1 principal component analysis loadings and commonalities for study 1 (n 443) component item  5  6  h2  1  2  3  4  0.82 0.75 0.74 0.72 0.69 0.61 0.51 0.49  0.23 0.25 0.29 0.19 0.18 0.24 0.13 0.28  0.11 0.12 0.17 0.19 0.06 0.08 0.01 0.25  0.17 0.04 0.13 0.8 0.24 0.02 0.02 0.69 0.12 0.01 0.23 0.72 0.2 0.01 0.22 0.68 0.09 0.07 0.33 0.66 0.23 0.04 0.29 0.57 0.45 0.13 0.03 0.57 0.26 0.12 0.12 0.52  0.19 0.2  0.81 0.81  0.12 0.02  0.09 0.14  0.08 0.05  0.19 0.77 0.03 0.72  0.12 0.3 0.36 0.35 0.08  0.74 0.12 0.74 0.17 0.72 0.07 0.65 0.03 0.55 0.15  0.14 0.01 0.02 0.24 0.09  0.07 0.02 0.08 0.13 0.02  0.31 0.16 0.13 0.08 0.29  0.07 0.05 0.16 0.03 0.17  0.17 0.18 0.06 0.02 0.03  component 1: assumptions of inferiority; pov 11.23 32 38 21 17 9 36 5 22  someone assumed that i would have a lower education because of my race. someone assumed that i was poor because of my race. someone assumed that i would not be educated because of my race. someone acted surprised at my scholastic or professional success because of my race. someone assumed that i would not be intelligent because of my race. someone assumed that i held a lower paying job because of my race. someone assumed that i grew up in a particular neighborhood because of my race. someone told me that i was “articulate” after she/he assumed i wouldn’t be.  6 31 8  someone avoided walking near me on the street because of my race. someone clenched her/his purse or wallet upon seeing me because of my race. someone avoided sitting next to me in a public space (e.g., restaurants, movie theaters, subways, buses) because of my race. someone avoided eye contact with me because of my race. someone’s body language showed they were scared of me, because of my race. someone assumed that i would physically hurt them because of my race. i received substandard service in stores compared to customers of other racial groups.  component 2: second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality; pov 10.93  40 2 34 11  0.69 0.68 0.71 0.67 0.5  component 3: microinvalidations; pov 10.32 27 30 39 7 26 33 4 14 10  someone told me that they “don’t see color.” someone told me that they do not see race. someone told me that people should not think about race anymore. someone told me that she or he was color-blind. i was told that people of color do not experience racism anymore. someone of a different racial group has stated that there is no difference between the two of us. i was told that i should not complain about race. i was told that people of all racial groups experience the same obstacles. i was told that i complain about race too much.  0.16 0 0.11 0.18 0.31 0.09 0.16 0.18  0.84 0.1 0.84 0 0.8 0.08 0.72 0.04 0.62 0.05 0.61 0.53 0.47 0.47  0.11 0.02 0.79 0.08 0.03 0.77 0.11 0.1 0.7 0.07 0.16 0.57 0.03 0.14 0.57  0.29 0.08 0.14 0.01 0.27 0.03 0.03 0.06  0.18 0.2 0.25 0.25  0.51 0.79 0.53 0.7  component 4: exoticization/assumptions of similarity; pov 9.51 3 29 45 35 42 23 13 20 43  someone assumed that i spoke a language other than english. someone asked me to teach them words in my “native language.” someone assumed that i speak similar languages to other people in my race. someone assumed that i ate foods associated with my race/culture every day. someone told me that all people in my racial group look alike. someone told me that all people in my racial group are all the same. someone wanted to date me only because of my race. someone did not believe me when i told them i was born in the u.s. someone objectified one of my physical features because of my race.  0.1 0.12 0.17 0.26 0.13 0.21  0.06 0.24 0.08  0.1 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.05 0.12 0.19 0.16 0.1 0.22 0.01 0.11 0.23 0.05 0.22 0.25  0.74 0.15 0.02 0.67 0.74 0.07 0.05 0.59 0.71 0.01 0.11 0.58 0.69 0.12 0.09 0.58 0.6 0.07 0.08 0.62 0.59 0.13 0.15 0.62 0.51 0.2 0.46 0.55 0.51 0.1 0 0.47 0.49 0.12 0.14 0.62  component 5: environmental microaggressions; pov 8.50 37 24 19 28 18 41 12  i observed people of my race portrayed positively in movies. i observed people of my race portrayed positively in magazines. i observed people of my race portrayed positively on television. i read popular books or magazines in which a majority of contributions featured people from my racial group. i observed that people of my race were the ceos of major corporations. i observed that someone of my race is a government official in my state. i observed people of my race in prominent positions at my workplace or school.   0.01 0.07 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.09 0.14  0.12 0.09 0.08  0.05 0.02 0.07 0.02 0.06 0.12  0.84 0.08 0.72 0.85 0.01 0.75 0.78 0.03 0.66  0.12 0.12 0.02 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.17 0.18 0.12 0.09 0.06 0.05  0.7 0.01 0.58 0.69 0.08 0.62 0.55 0.04 0.56 0.55 0.09 0.6  component 6: workplace and school microaggressions; pov 7.34 25 15 1 16 44  an employer or co-worker was unfriendly or unwelcoming toward me because of my race. my opinion was overlooked in a group discussion because of my race. i was ignored at school or at work because of my race. someone assumed that my work would be inferior to people of other racial groups. an employer or co-worker treated me differently than white co-workers.  note. pov percentage of variance accounted for (after rotation).  0.35 0.18 0.09 0.41 0.38  0.27 0.16 0.34 0.15 0.29  0.06 0.3 0.18 0.16 0.12  0.02 0.01 0.13 0.09 0.05 0.09 0.06 0.11 0.03 0.09  0.76 0.67 0.65 0.64 0.62  0.77 0.66 0.61 0.64 0.63  
  racial and ethnic microaggressions scale  475  table 2 intercorrelations among factors of the racial and ethnic microaggression scale in study 1 (n 406) factor  1  2  3  4  5  6  1. assumptions of inferiority — 2. second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality .550ⴱⴱ — 3. microinvalidations .470ⴱⴱ .381ⴱⴱ — 4. exoticization/assumptions of similarity .339ⴱⴱ .258ⴱⴱ .285ⴱⴱ — 5. environmental microaggressions  .115ⴱ .148ⴱⴱ .173ⴱⴱ .127ⴱⴱ — ⴱⴱ ⴱⴱ ⴱⴱ 6. workplace and school microaggressions .589 .563 .515 .219ⴱⴱ 0.02 — ⴱ  p .05.  ⴱⴱ  p .01.  racist assumptions,” whereas another participant stated, “they are trying to measure how our specific ethnicity/race plays a role into how others treat us and how those experiences appear racist or not to us. the questions explore how race/ethnicity can affect our daily activities and how we perceive those interactions from people outside our own race/ethnicity.” theme 4: stereotypes (n 65) classified descriptions that discussed the ideas of stereotyping, prejudice, or negative portrayals of people of color. for example, one participant stated, “the questions were trying to show racial stereotyping experiences.” theme 5: microaggressions and subtle discrimination (n 138) was used to discuss descriptions directly using the word microaggression or that describe the “subtle,” “covert” or “everyday” forms of discrimination. for example, one participant shared, “this study measures how much we are ex-  posed to microaggressions and how we perceive them,” whereas another shared “[this study is about] the constant subtle and not-so-subtle ways we are treated differently because of our racial identity.” another participant shared, “individually these seem to be small or minor incidents, but collectively they add up and lead to a particular experience in this country for people of color,” whereas another participant shared “i think these questions were designed to discover what kinds of racial interactions or conflicts people may have on a daily basis and how often people face racial discrimination.” recoding of scores. upon completion of data collection, the researchers decided to recode participants’ answers into dichotomous variables. because the pilot study yielded less variance than expected, researchers altered the scoring system into a checklist  table 3 psychometric properties for racial and ethnic microaggression scale (rems-45) for study 1 (n 406) participant’s race total m n sd asian m n sd black m n sd latino/a m n sd multiracial m n sd  rems average  subscale 1  subscale 2  subscale 3  subscale 4  subscale 5  subscale 6  1.67 406 0.54  .928  1.41 402 0.75  .894  1.30 404 0.67  .883  1.52 403 0.78  .888  1.66 404 0.88  .852  3.21 382 0.87  .850  1.29 404 0.69  .850  1.94 138 0.47  .909  1.39 137 0.60  .857  1.30 137 0.47  .835  1.55 137 0.74  .909  1.62 137 0.86  .806  4.27 129 0.69  .821  1.39 137 0.60  .817  2.05 74 0.49  .918  1.72 74 0.87  .932  1.64 74 0.83  .895  1.87 74 0.81  .895  1.61 74 0.90  .910  3.89 73 0.87  .866  1.51 74 0.70  .853  2.09 127 0.51  .905  1.76 125 0.88  .891  1.46 126 0.73  .899  1.75 126 0.75  .820  1.84 126 0.95  .830  4.12 118 0.72  .800  1.41 126 0.71  .828  1.99 46 0.49  .922  1.56 46 0.76  .795  1.45 46 0.67  .896  1.68 46 0.86  .813  1.35 46 0.76  .842  4.23 42 0.82  .771  1.66 46 1.02  .933  note. data represent means and reliability. rems subscale 1: assumptions of inferiority; rems subscale 2: second-class citizen and assumption of criminality; rems subscale 3: microinvalidations; rems subscale 4: exoticization/assumptions of similarity; rems subscale 5: environmental microaggressions; rems subscale 6: workplace and school microaggressions; rems racial and ethnic microaggression scale.  
  476  nadal  form. if an individual did not experience the event in the past 6 months, her or his score was recoded to a 0, and if an individual did experience the event at least once, her or his score was recoded to a 1. this step was also taken because there were some items (e.g., “someone wanted to date me only because of race”) that were viewed as unlikely to have occurred several times in the past 6 months for most participants. the rems-45 with the new scoring system, which is now referred to as the rems-checklist, yielded a coefficient alpha of .912. reliability of subscales include the following: subscale 1: assumptions of inferiority ( .873), subscale 2: second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality ( .821), subscale 3: microinvalidations ( .841), subscale 4: exoticization/ assumptions of similarity ( .783), subscale 5: environmental microaggressions ( .785), and subscale 6: workplace and school microaggressions ( .792). subscales 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 were all positively correlated with each other, with r scores ranging from .328 to .606 (p .01). however, subscale 5 (environmental microaggressions) was not significantly correlated with any of the other subscales. given this new scoring system, the researchers conducted a confirmatory factor analysis using the mplus 5.21 program (muthe n & muthe n, 2009). the hypothesized model consisted of six first-order latent variables representing the six subscales from the principal-components factor analysis. the model yielded a 2 of 1822.31 (df 930, p .001), which is large enough to reject the null of a good fit. however, although this is statistically significant, it is common for large sample sizes to result in significant chi-squares (bentler & bonett, 1980). thus, the adequacy of model fit was determined using consensus among three indices recommended by hu and bentler (1999): the comparative fit index (cfi), the standardized root-mean-square residual (srmr), and the root-mean-square error of approximation (rmsea). according to hu and bentler, cfi values of .95 and higher, srmr values of .08 or lower, and rmsea values of .06 and lower indicate a relatively good fit of the model to the data, whereas cfi values of .90 –.94, srmr values of .09 –.10, and rmsea values of .07–.10 indicate an acceptable fit. rmsea score less than .05 is considered excellent. the present model resulted in a cfi .78, indicating an unacceptable fit. however, the model resulted in an srmr of .067 and an rmsea of .05, which suggests a good fit of the model. thus, two of these three methods suggest that the present model is a good fit, and one model even suggesting an excellent fit. the rems-checklist resulted in an increase in r scores with the rales-b (r .489, n 376, p .001). five of the six subscales were also positively correlated with the rales-b—subscale 1: assumptions of inferiority (r .418, n 376, p .001), subscale 2: second-class citizen and assumption of criminality (r .427, n 376, p .001), subscale 3: microinvalidations (r .376, n 376, p .001), subscale 4: exoticization/ assumptions of similarity (r .237, n 376, p .001), and subscale 6: workplace and school microaggressions (r .466, n 376, p .001). with this sample, subscale 5: environmental microaggressions was still not significantly correlated with the rales- b. the same five rems subscales also correlated highly with both the rales-b individual and rales-b group subscales.  study 2: confirmatory factor analysis, reliability, and validity the purpose of study 2 was to conduct a confirmatory factor analysis with a new sample. reliability for the new measure was also tested, and validity was measured by testing correlations with the dle scale (harrell, 2000).  method participants. participants were recruited in the same manner as the first sample, and they followed the same procedures as well. the second sample included a total of 218 participants; 166 were women, 51 were men, none identified as transgender, and one did not report gender. the mean age of the sample was 20.56 (sd 4.427), with a range of 17–54. again, the sample was racially diverse, with 35% latina/os, 20% black/african americans, 13% multiracial persons, 12% asian americans/pacific islanders, and 4% who did not identify with any of these categories. the largest ethnic groups included african american (12.5%), dominican (10.3%), puerto rican (8.4%), chinese (4.2%), filipino (3.4%), and individuals with two or more ethnicities (15.6%). the majority of the sample was heterosexual (84.0%), whereas 5.3% of the participants was gay/lesbian, 3.8% was bisexual, and 1.5% did not disclose their sexual orientations or described themselves differently. the largest religious groups were catholic (36.1%), christian (19%), and muslim (4.2%), and 28% reported being nonreligious. the majority of the sample (92%) lived in a northeastern state and, in addition, (74%) were born in the united states. the educational background of this sample was different than the first, with 71.5% having an associate’s degree, 14% having a bachelor’s degree, and 11% having a graduate degree. measures. demographic sheet. the same open-ended demographic questionnaire was used for participants to self-identify their gender, age, race, ethnicity, immigration status, religious background, level of education, and occupation. the rems-checklist. initially, the scoring system was altered from the first sample. respondents were instructed to indicate the number of times that a microaggression occurred in the past 6 months, with 0 i did not experience this event in the past six months, 1 i experienced this event 1 time in the past six months, 2 i experienced this event 2 times in the past six months, 3 i experienced this event 3 times in the past six months, 4 i experienced this event 4 times in the past six months, and 5 i experienced this event 5 or more times in the past six months. similar to the first sample, researchers recoded the rems-45 into the dichotomous scoring system of the rems-checklist (i.e., 0 i did not experience this event in the past six months and 1 i experienced this event at least once in the past six months). daily life experiences-frequency (dle-f) scale. the dle-f is a subscale of the rales-s (harrell, 2000). the 20-item scale is a self-report measure of perceptions of racism by a person of color and the impact that racism has on an individual’s personal life (utsey, 1998). the frequency scale (which was used in this study) assesses racial microaggressions or daily experiences that may occur in an individual’s life. the dle has been tested on all major racial groups and has produced high reliability coefficients (harrell, 2000). the present study yielded a cronbach’s alpha of .941 for the dle-f scale.  
  racial and ethnic microaggressions scale  results to test the validity of rems-45, the researchers conducted a confirmatory factor analysis with a new sample, using the mplus 5.21 program (muthe n & muthe n, 2009). the hypothesized model consisted of six first-order latent variables representing the six subscales (i.e., eight indicators for assumptions of inferiority, seven indicators for second-class citizen andassumptions of criminality, nine indicators for microinvalidations, nine indicators for exoticization/assumptions of similarity, seven indicators for environmental microaggressions, and five indicators for workplace and school microaggressions) and one second-order latent variable representing the total rems-45 score. similar to the confirmatory factor analysis from the first sample, the model yielded a significant 2 of 1400.37 (df 930, p .001), which is large enough to reject the null of a good fit. although the present model resulted in a cfi of .815 (which is slightly higher than the first sample, but would still be considered a poor fit), it also yielded in an srmr score of .071, and an rmsea score of .05, which would indicate a good or excellent fit. thus, as noted in table 4, two of the three fit indices support the rems-45, and its subscales are adequate measures of racial microaggressions. in terms of internal consistency reliability, the second sample of the rems-checklist produced a coefficient alpha of .882 (m 0.556, sd 0.18). each subscale produced a coefficient alpha well above .70 —subscale 1: assumptions of inferiority ( .862, m 0.421, sd 0.34), subscale 2: second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality ( .820, m 0.418, sd 0.29), subscale 3: microinvalidations ( .792, m 0.467, sd 0.27), subscale 4: exoticization/assumptions of similarity ( .715, m 0.724, sd 0.21), subscale 5: environmental microaggressions ( .768, m 0.288, sd 0.27), and subscale 6: workplace and school microaggressions ( .747, m 0.423, sd 0.28). subscales for all african americans, latina/os, asian americans, and multiracial people were high, with alpha ranges from .762 to .928. subscales 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 were significantly positively correlated with each other, ranging from .313 to .602. subscale 5 was significantly negatively correlated with all five other subscales, with r scores ranging from .285 to  168. all intercorrelations, cronbach’s alphas, means, and standard deviations are reported in table 5. concurrent validity of the rems-checklist was supported through significant correlations with the dle-f scale (r .698, n 253, p .001). all six subscales produced high correlations with the dle-f—subscale 1: assumptions of inferiority (r .567, n 253, p .001), subscale 2: second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality (r .611, n 253, p .001),  table 4 goodness-of-fit indicators for the competing models of the 45-item rems-checklist (n 262) model  df   2  cfi  rmsea  srmr  five-factor one-factor  930 945  1400.74 1951.5  0.812 0.597  0.050 0.072  0.071 0.084  note. rems-checklist racial and ethnic microaggression scalechecklist; cfi comparative fit index; rmsea root-mean-square error of approximation; srmr standardized root-mean-square residual.  477  subscale 3: microinvalidations (r .505, n 253, p .001), subscale 4: exoticization/assumptions of similarity (r .461, n 253, p .001), subscale 5: environmental microaggressions (r .209, n 253, p .001), and subscale 6: workplace and school microaggressions (r .643, n 253, p .001).  discussion the goal of the present study was to create a measure that evaluates the types of racial microaggressions that individuals experience in their everyday lives. both theory and statistical methods were used in this study to identify 45 microaggression incidents and to categorize them into six major subscales: (a) assumptions of inferiority, b) second-class citizen andassumption of criminality, (c) microinvalidations, (d) exoticization/assumptions of similarity, (e) environmental microaggressions, and (f) workplace and school microaggressions. the overall scale and the subscales support both theoretical literature (sue et al., 2007) and qualitative studies (hill et al., 2010; rivera et al., 2010; sue et al., 2010, 2008; watkins et al., 2010), which posit that people of color experience microaggressions in their everyday lives and are able to identify such instances as being racially related. results through two large samples provided evidence of reliability through satisfactory internal consistency estimates and evidence of validity through correlations with other scales, suggesting that the rems is an adequate measure of racial microaggressions. first, through exploratory principal components analyses, researchers were able to identify six components with eigenvalues over 1. all of the items that were produced under each component made conceptual sense, and a confirmatory factor analysis with a new sample supported that the overall scale was acceptable. second, the rems was found to be correlated with both the rales-b and the dle (two scales frequently used to measure experiences of racism and discrimination), supporting the validity of the measure. furthermore, participants were overwhelmingly able to identify that the rems was a measure of racial discrimination, further suggesting that the scale was measuring what it was intended to measure. the rems was also found to be a reliable measure across four major racial groups, namely, asian americans, latina/o americans, black/african americans, and multiracial people. high coefficient alphas (all over .80) in two independent samples indicate the reliability of the overall scale and its subsequent subscales, indicating its appropriate use for individuals of all racial minority groups. the six subscales paralleled several of the racial microaggression categories that have been described in previous literature. the experiences of being assumed to be inferior or a criminal were expressed in studies with black/african american samples (sue et al., 2008; watkins et al., 2010) and latina/os (rivera et al., 2010). the experiences of being exoticized were described by both asian americans (sue et al., 2010) and latina/os (rivera et al., 2010), whereas being treated as a second-class citizen was reported across all of the aforementioned samples. the workplace and school microaggressions subscale supports a previous study that examined microaggressions in the classroom or school environment (sue et al., 2009). finally, microinvalidations and environmental microaggressions have been discussed in previous theoretical literature (sue et al., 2007), as well as in studies with microaggres-  
  nadal  478  table 5 intercorrelations and psychometric properties for racial and ethnic microaggression scale-checklist for study 2 (n 262) variable rems average subscale 1 subscale 2 subscale 3 subscale 4 subscale 5 subscale 6  rems average —  1  2 ⴱⴱ  .815 —  3 ⴱⴱ  .719 .602ⴱⴱ —  4 ⴱⴱ  .691 .413ⴱⴱ .421ⴱⴱ —  5 ⴱⴱ  .697 .552ⴱⴱ .313ⴱⴱ .369ⴱⴱ —   .083  .246ⴱⴱ  .284ⴱⴱ  .285ⴱⴱ  .202ⴱⴱ —  6 ⴱⴱ  .774 .586ⴱⴱ .522ⴱⴱ .488ⴱⴱ .506ⴱⴱ  .168ⴱⴱ —    m  sd  0.882 0.862 0.82 0.792 0.715 0.768 0.747  0.556 0.421 0.418 0.467 0.724 0.288 0.423  0.18 0.34 0.29 0.27 0.21 0.27 0.28  note. rems racial and ethnic microaggression scale; rems subscale 1 assumptions of inferiority; rems subscale 2 second-class citizen and assumption of criminality; rems subscale 3 microinvalidations; rems subscale 4: exoticization/assumptions of similarity; rems subscale 5: environmental microaggressions; rems subscale 6 workplace and school microaggressions. ⴱⴱ p .01.  sions with women, lgbt populations, and persons with disabilities (see sue, 2010, for a review). the present study also suggests that experiences and perceptions of microaggressions are complex. some items from our initial pool loaded heavily on more than one factor and were therefore removed from the scale. this result indicates that there are some microaggressions that may be classified under more than one category and perhaps may have an array of interpretations for the individuals who experience them. for example, one of the original items “i was ignored when trying to get the attention of a waiter, bartender, or store clerk because of my race” loaded highly on the assumptions of inferiority factor as well as the second-class citizen and assumption of criminality factor. perhaps an individual did not receive good service because the waiter or bartender assumed her or him to be poor or uneducated, or perhaps the individual was ignored because the waiter or bartender assumed her or him to be a criminal. accordingly, it is possible that there are some experiences of microaggressions that did not emerge into the final scale because of the complexities of dynamics and interpretation. similarly, some items did not load highly on any of the principal components as well; some of these include “i have been accused of being too loud or “i have been accused of being too quiet.” perhaps these items did not load well because some individuals may interpret such experiences as being racially related, whereas some may view these as critiques of one’s personality. nonetheless, future analyses of the original 131 items may be helpful in understanding additional components that did not emerge from these studies. the environmental microaggression subscale did not correlate significantly with the other subscales with the first sample, and had significant but smaller correlations than the other subscales with the second sample. perhaps this discrepancy is because the items were written inversely, measuring positive perceptions of race, instead of identifying negative or active experiences with racism or microaggressions. it is also conceivable that environmental microaggressions may be measured differently because such experiences manifest differently than the experiences listed in the other subscales. although the other subscales measure microaggressions that occur interpersonally, environmental microaggressions represent perceptions that individuals have of the environment around them. perhaps interpersonal and environmental microaggressions have differential impacts on individual’s mental health.  there are a few limitations to the present study. first, the two samples may not be representative of all individuals, as many of the participants were college students recruited through psychology 101 classes, and many other participants were recruited through racial and ethnic organizations. similarly, because much of the data were collected online, the integrity of the data is unknown because participants were not supervised, and there were no provisions made to follow up with participants. second, because the study requires participants to self-report their experiences with microaggressions, it is difficult to assess the true quantity or quality of microaggressions that these individuals may or may not experience. perhaps further development of the scale can replicate other scales measuring experiences with racial discrimination (e.g., harrell, 2000; liang et al., 2004) and inquire about how bothersome these events were for the individuals. third, in the exploratory principal components analysis, the prerotated model indicated that the entire scale accounts for only about 27% of the total variance, with a single component (assumptions of inferiority) accounting for the largest proportion of the variance at only 12.70%. perhaps this lower number may be due to the notion that the scale examines racial microaggressions from a diverse group of people of color or that the items that were chosen do not fully represent the vast amount of racial microaggressions that people may experience. perhaps it may be difficult to measure microaggressions for people of various racial and ethnic groups because their racial and phenotypic appearances may yield different types of microaggressive incidents. thus, it is possible that the various types of microaggressions do not correlate with each other and that individuals will less likely experience all of the microaggressions listed in the rems. finally, although the confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the overall model was a good fit (with a significant chi-square, rmsea, and srmr), it is possible that the rems can be condensed or altered even further, in order to achieve a higher cfi score. future research directions and implications for practice. there are many implications that the rems has for the field of psychology. first and foremost, as the only known measure that examines racial microaggressions using the taxonomy provided by sue and colleagues (2007), the rems could be a useful instrument to examine the impact that racial microaggressions have on individuals’ well-being, particularly their mental and physical health. one of the main critiques regarding previous racial microaggres-  
  racial and ethnic microaggressions scale  sion studies is that they used qualitative methods and consisted of small samples. using these statistical methods to measure racial microaggressions can assist researchers in investigating the relationship of microaggressions with various psychological constructs. perhaps future researchers can test alternative factor models of racial microaggressions in the future by adding or altering items or subscales to the rems, or running a cfa with other factors presented in the original taxonomy by sue and colleagues (2007). second, these two studies indicate that individuals are able to identify racial microaggressions and are able to label them as being race related. this finding is important because of the aforementioned studies that have reported the relationship between perceived racial discrimination and psychological stress, mental health disorders, and even physical health. however, because none of these previous studies focused on microaggressions specifically, future researchers may use the rems to investigate other variables as well. perhaps future empirical studies can examine the influence of racial microaggressions on mental health variables like depressive symptoms, anxiety, or self-esteem. studies may examine how racial identity, ethnic identity, or gender may influence one’s ability to recognize microaggressions, and further research may explore how microaggressions may impact personality development, coping mechanisms, and resiliency. with the potential research that may emerge with this new scale, there are many implications for practice as well. clinicians must be aware of the various types of microaggressions that their clients experience as well as the ways that their clients cope with such instances. examining these microaggressions can help psychotherapists to conceptualize their clients’ presenting problems, while preparing for the most effective ways to combat and handle microaggressions when they occur. clinicians, supervisors, educators, and researchers must be cognizant of the ways that microaggressions may occur in all professional settings, and they must advocate for their clients, supervisees, students, and others to be aware of racial microaggressions as well. finally, given the everchanging global society, psychologists and other practitioners must educate other lay people about microaggressions (against all marginalized groups) in order to prevent both blatant and subtle forms of discrimination from occurring in everyday life.  references bentler, p. m., & bonett, d. g. (1980). significant tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structure. psychological bulletin, 88, 588 – 606. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588 brondolo, e., kelly, k. p., coakley, v., gordon, t., thompson, s., levy, e . . . tobin, j. n. (2005). the perceived ethnic discrimination questionnaire: development and preliminary validation of a community version. journal of applied social psychology, 35, 335–365. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02124.x capodilupo, c. m., nadal, k. l., corman, l., hamit, s., lyons, o., & weinberg, a. (2010). the manifestation of gender microaggressions. in d. w. sue (ed.), microaggressions and marginality: manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 193–216). new york, ny: wiley & sons. costello, a. b., & osborne, j. w. (2005). best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. practical assessment research & evaluation, 10, 1–9. devellis, r. f. (2003). scale development: theory and applications. thousand oaks, ca: sage.  479  dovidio, j. f., gaertner, s. l., kawakami, k., & hodson, g. (2002). why can’t we all just get along? interpersonal biases and interracial distrust. cultural diversity and ethnic minority psychology, 8, 88 –102. doi: 10.1037/1099-9809.8.2.88 fang, c. y., & myers, h. f. (2001). the effects of racial stressors and hostility on cardiovascular reactivity in african american and caucasian men. health psychology, 20, 64 –70. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.20.1.64 finch, h. (2006). comparison of the performance of varimax and promax rotations: factor structure recovery for dichotomous items. journal of educational measurement, 43, 39 –52. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.2006 .00003.x flores, e., tschann, j. m., dimas, j. m., pasch, l. a., & de groat, c. l. (2010). perceived racial/ethnic discrimination, posttraumatic stress symptoms, and health risk behaviors among mexican american adolescents. journal of counseling psychology, 57, 264 –273. doi:10.1037/ a0020026 gaertner, s. l., & dovidio, j. f. (2006). understanding and addressing contemporary racism: from aversive racism to the common ingroup. journal of social issues, 61, 615– 639. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2005 .00424.x guadagnoli, e., & velicer, w. f. (1998). relation of sample size to the stability of component patterns. psychological bulletin, 103, 265–275. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.265 harrel, j. p., hall, s., & taliaferro, j. (2003). physiological responses to racism and discrimination: an assessment of the evidence. american journal of public health, 93, 243–248. harrell, s. p. (2000). a multidimensional conceptualization of racismrelated stress: implications for the well-being of people of color. american journal of orthopsychiatry, 70, 42–57. doi:10.1037/h0087722 hill, j. s., kim, s., & williams, c. d. (2010). the context of racial microaggressions against indigenous peoples: same old racism or something new? in d. w. sue (ed.), microaggressions and marginality: manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 105–122). new york, ny: wiley & sons. hsieh, h-f., & shannon, s. e. (2005). three approaches to qualitative content analysis. qualitative health research, 15, 1277–1288. doi: 10.1177/1049732305276687 hu, l., & bentler, p. (1999). cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. structural equation modeling, 6, 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 johnston, m. p., & nadal, k. l. (2010). multiracial microaggressions: exposing monoracism in everyday life and clinical practice. in d. w. sue (ed.), microaggressions and marginality: manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 123–144). new york, ny: wiley & sons. keller, r. m., & galgay, c. e. (2010). microaggressions experienced by people with disabilities in us society. in d. w. sue (ed.), microaggressions and marginality: manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 241– 268). new york, ny: wiley & sons. lambert, s. f., herman, k. c., bynum, m. s., & ialongo, n. s. (2009). perceptions of racism and depressive symptoms in african american adolescents: the role of perceived academic and social control. journal of youth and adolescence, 38, 519 –531. doi:10.1007/s10964-0099393-0 liang, c. t. h., li, l. c., & kim, b. s. k. (2004). the asian american race-related stress inventory: development, factor analysis, reliability, and validity. journal of counseling psychology, 51, 103–114. mastria, m. r. (2002). ethnicity and eating disorders. psychoanalysis & psychotherapy, 19, 59 –77. mcconahay, j. b. (1986). modern racism, ambivalence, and the modern racism scale. in j. f. dovidio & s. l. gaertner (eds.), prejudice, discrimination and racism (pp. 91–126). orlando, fl: academic press. moradi, b., & risco, c. (2006). perceived discrimination experiences and mental health of latina/o american persons. journal of counseling psychology, 53, 411– 421.  
  480  nadal  muthe n, l. k., & muthe n, b. o. (2009). mplus user’s guide (version 5.21). los angeles, ca: author. nadal, k. l. (2008). preventing racial, ethnic, gender, sexual minority, disability, and religious microaggressions: recommendations for promoting positive mental health. prevention in counseling psychology: theory, research, practice and training, 2, 22–27. nadal, k. l. (2010). gender microaggressions and women: implications for mental health. in m. a. paludi (ed.), feminism and women’s rights worldwide, volume 2: mental and physical health (pp. 155–175). santa barbara, ca: praeger. nadal, k. l., issa, m-a., griffin, k., hamit, s., & lyons, o. (2010). religious microaggressions in the united states: mental health implications for religious minority groups. in d. w. sue (ed.), microaggressions and marginality: manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 287– 310). new york, ny: wiley & sons. nadal, k. l., issa, m., leon, j., meterko, v., wideman, m., & wong, y. (2011). sexual orientation microaggressions: “death by a thousand cuts” for lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. journal of lgbt youth, 8, 1–26. nadal, k. l., rivera, d. p., & corpus, m. j. h. (2010). sexual orientation and transgender microaggressions in everyday life: experiences of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgender individuals. in d. w. sue (ed.), microaggressions and marginality: manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 217–240). new york, ny: wiley & sons. nadal, k. l., wong, y., griffin, k., sriken, j., vargas, v., wideman, m., & kolawole, a. (2011). microaggressions and the multiracial experience. international journal of humanities and social sciences, 1, 36 – 44. nadal, k. l., wong, y., issa, m., meterko, v., leon, j., & wideman, m. (2011). sexual orientation microaggressions: processes and coping mechanisms for lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals. journal of lgbt issues in counseling, 5, 21– 46. pierce, c., carew, j., pierce-gonzalez, d., & willis, d. (1978). an experiment in racism: tv commercials. in c. pierce (ed.), television and education (pp. 62– 88). beverly hills, ca: sage. pieterse, a. l., carter, r. t., evans, s. a., & walter, r. a. (2010). an exploratory examination of the associations among racial and ethnic discrimination, racial climate, and trauma-related symptoms in a college student population. journal of counseling psychology, 57, 255–263. doi:10.1037/a0020040 rivera, d. p., forquer, e. e., & rangel, r. (2010). microaggressions and the life experience of latina/o americans. in d. w. sue (ed.), microaggressions and marginality: manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 59 – 83). new york, ny: wiley & sons. santana, v., almeida-filho, n., roberts, r., & cooper, s. p. (2007). skin colour, perception of racism and depression among adolescents in urban brazil. child and adolescent mental health, 12, 125–131. doi:10.1111/ j.1475-3588.2007.00447.x sears, d. o. (1988). symbolic racism. in p. a. katz & d. a. taylor (eds.),  view publication stats  eliminating racism: profiles in controversy (pp. 53– 84). new york, ny: plenum press. steffen, p. r., & bowden, m. (2006). sleep disturbance mediates the relationship between perceived racism and depressive symptoms. ethnicity & disease, 16, 16 –21. steffen, p. r., mcneilly, m., anderson, n., & sherwood, a. (2003). effects of perceived racism and anger inhibition on ambulatory blood pressure in african americans. psychosomatic medicine, 65, 746 –750. doi:10.1097/01.psy.0000079380.95903.78 sue, d. w. (2010). microaggressions in everyday life: race, gender, and sexual orientation. new york, ny: wiley & sons. sue, d. w., bucceri, j. m., lin, a. i., nadal, k. l., & torino, g. c. (2010). racial microaggressions and the asian american experience. asian american journal of psychology s, 88 –101. doi:10.1037/1948-1985 .s.1.88 sue, d. w., capodilupo, c. m., torino, g. c., bucceri, j. m., holder, a. m., nadal, k. l., . . . esquilin, m. e. (2007). racial microaggressions in everyday life: implications for counseling. american psychologist, 62, 271–286. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.62.4.271 sue, d. w., lin, a. i., torino, g. c., capodilupo, c. m., & rivera, d. p. (2009). racial microaggressions in the classroom. cultural diversity and ethnic minority psychology, 15, 183–190. doi:10.1037/a0014191 sue, d. w., nadal, k. l., capodilupo, c. m., lin, a. i., rivera, d. p., & torino, g. c. (2008). racial microaggressions against black americans: implications for counseling. journal of counseling & development, 86, 330 –338. tabachnick, b. g., & fidell, l. s. (2001). using multivariate statistics. boston, ma: allyn & bacon. utsey, s. o. (1998). assessing the stressful effects of racism: a review of instrumentation. journal of black psychology, 24, 269 –288. doi: 10.1177/00957984980243001 utsey, s. o., & ponterotto, j. g. (1996). development and validation of the index of race-related stress (irrs). journal of counseling psychology, 43, 490 –501. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.43.4.490 watkins, m. w. (2006). determining parallel analysis criteria. journal of modern applied statistical methods, 5, 344 –346. watkins, n. l., labarrie, t. l., & appio, l. m. (2010). black undergraduates experience with perceived racial microaggressions in predominantly white colleges and universities. in d. w. sue (ed.), microaggressions and marginality: manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 25–58). new york, ny: wiley & sons. wei, m., alvarez, a. n., ku, t., russell, d. w., & bonett, d. g. (2010). development and validation of a coping with discrimination scale: factor structure, reliability, and validity. journal of counseling psychology, 57, 328 –344. doi:10.1037/a0019969  received september 28, 2010 revision received july 5, 2011 accepted july 14, 2011 䡲  
       


secondary_title_index: behaviour research and therapy
title_index:
       religious obsessions and compulsions in a non-clinical sample: the penn inventory of scrupulosity (pios)     

full_text_index:
       journal for the scientific study of religion  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale daniel koch  leihua edstrom  college of behavioral sciences northwest university  college of behavioral sciences northwest university  both religiosity and spirituality have been shown to have positive effects on multiple aspects of well-being, mental health, and healing. religiosity and spirituality are also positive mediating factors in healing from abuse broadly. religious or spiritual abuse has the capacity for harming one’s religiosity and/or spirituality. when abuse occurs in a religious setting, it has the effect of making it less likely that religion and/or spirituality can be used as a coping strategy to heal from that very abuse. little is known about the underlying factors that constitute the larger concept of spiritual abuse. a total of 66 survey prompts were pulled from the existing quantitative and qualitative literature on spiritual abuse, focusing on both external events and internal states that often result from spiritual abuse. exploratory factor analysis was conducted on survey responses (n 3222), resulting in six factors: (1) maintaining the system, (2) internal distress, (3) embracing violence, (4) controlling leadership, (5) harmful godimage, and (6) gender discrimination. the resulting 27-item scale, which includes 11 additional “critical items,” can be used in clinical settings to get quick, detailed information about a client’s exposure to spiritual abuse and possible resulting consequences.  keywords: spiritual abuse, religious abuse, trauma, harm, scale development.  although the terms “religiosity” and “spirituality” (r/s) are often used interchangeably, research is showing that they are distinct but overlapping concepts (dill 2017). both, however, have been shown to have positive effects on multiple aspects of well-being, mental health, and healing. religiosity is associated with both overall quality of life and even inherent protection against disease, possibly the result of an increase in optimism, lifestyle modification, avoidance of risky behavior, strong social support networks, and/or induction of positive affect (mishra et al. 2015). both religiosity and spirituality are associated in children and adolescents with better social support, role identity, positive religious coping, and sanctions against risky behaviors (hill and pargament 2008). religious and spiritual coping allows believers to look for spiritual support from god or other divine beings, social support from coreligionists, and to make meaning out of negative events, which can promote resilience and well-being (holder, coleman, and wallace 2010; van dyke et al. 2009). this type of coping and meaning-making can contribute to an increase in happiness (holder, coleman, and wallace 2010), better adjustment, and lower levels of risky behavior (good & willoughby 2006). religiously involved adolescents report lower rates of misbehavior at school and higher levels of hope, love, purpose, and fidelity than less religious peers (markstrom 1999). religiosity has been found to be a protective factor against a range of negative events and outcomes, including gang involvement for females (marsal 2009), adolescent early sexual activity (laflin, wang, and barry 2008), and adolescent substance abuse (merrill, salazar, and gardner 2001).  correspondence should be addressed to dan koch, college of behavioral sciences, northwest university, 6710 108th ave ne kirkland, wa 98033. e-mail: daniel.koch19@northwestu.edu  journal for the scientific study of religion (2022) 61(2):476–506  2022 the society for the scientific study of religion.  
  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  477  r/s is a positive mediating factor in healing from abuse broadly (bryant-davis et al. 2012). involvement in organized religion at the time of familial abuse is associated with lower posttraumatic stress symptomatology (elliot 1994). adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse who self-report a relationship with god or a higher power have reduced depressive symptoms and more self-acceptance, hope, sense of personal growth, and resolution of the abuse than those who do not (gall et al. 2007). fifty-five percent of men in a study of african americans used spirituality to cope with the trauma of surviving childhood violence, more than any other coping mechanism (bryant-davis 2005). according to an overview of relevant literature by bryantdavis et al. (2012), coping through religious and spiritual channels is instrumental in organizing a pathway for either growth or decline after traumatic experiences in both children and adolescents. conversely, the inherent power of religion and spirituality can also lead to abuse and corresponding trauma. the terms “spiritual abuse” and “religious abuse” are used interchangeably by researchers. oakley, kinmond, and humphreys (2018) define spiritual abuse as a form of emotional and psychological abuse characterized by systemic patterns of coercion and control in religious contexts; spiritual abuse is distinguished from broad emotional abuse by its common inclusion of specifically religious elements, like the quoting of scripture or the giving of a “divine rationale” for mistreatment. (much like r/s abuse, there is no consensus definition of emotional abuse, but pearl (1994) proposed the following categories: rejecting, isolating, terrorizing, ignoring, corrupting, verbally assaulting, and overpressuring.) swindle (2017) casts a wider net and identifies three broad categories of religious abuse: abuse perpetrated by religious leaders, abuse perpetrated by a religious group or person representing a religious group, and abuse with a religious or spiritual component. other definitions focus on specific forms of religious or spiritual abuse, like using scripture or religious language to justify domestic abuse (cares and cusick 2012; warford 2014), any sexual or physically abusive act done by a clergy member (doyle 2006), and theologically sanctioned mistreatment of lgbtq persons (foster, bowland, and vosler 2015). taken together, r/s abuse is distinguished from other types of abuse by a religious component of one sort or another. as conceived for this article, combining the approaches of oakley, kinmond, and humphreys (2018) and swindle (2017), spiritual abuse is defined as a type of emotional and psychological abuse perpetrated by a religious leader or group and/or with a religious or spiritual component, usually involving coercion or control. it is separable from other types of abuse that may co-occur or take place in a religious context or by a religious figure, like clergy sexual abuse or domestic violence excused through the quoting of scripture. a survivor of clergy sexual abuse, then, is understood for our purposes to have been abused both sexually and spiritually. the sexual abuse can be expected to have effects on the survivor similar to other instances of sexual abuse, while the spiritual abuse will likely affect whether or how they are able to practice their faith. based on the existing qualitative research, the negative effects of spiritual abuse can be very serious. ward (2011) found evidence of persistent physical illness in multiple respondents, including major surgery, chronic hospital visits, gallstones, biliary colic of the liver, and inflamed esophagus, understood to be a result of stress-induced exhaustion from spending time in spiritually abusive environments. swindle (2017) found that all seven of her participants reported some level of emotional trauma; psychological consequences included depression, anger, fear, feeling stuck, confusion, and decreased self-worth. one participant was shunned and banned from all church group activities when it was discovered that she was being treated with depression medication and seeing a psychiatrist (swindle 2017). many of the respondents in a survey by oakley and kinmond (2014) reported leaders who demanded complete, unquestioning obedience; a consensus that a leader is divinely appointed to that position can leave abusers unchallenged. abuse by religious figures appears to be quite destructive. stevens et al. (2019) found that college students who alleged sexual abuse by religious figures were just as symptomatic as  
  478  journal for the scientific study of religion  those abused by their parents. it can be inferred from this finding that religious leaders have a strong, near-parent-level potential for abusive harm, but more research is needed to support this inference. there are also concerns related to secondary trauma for clinicians working with r/s abused clients. in a small study of five counselors who had worked with spiritually abused clients, gubi and jacobs (2009) found symptoms of secondary traumatic stress disorder and visceral traumatization, including anger, sadness, outrage, grief, cynicism, and helplessness. encouragingly, working with these clients also profoundly deepened the counselor’s relationship with god (gubi and jacobs 2009). increasing visibility and training around r/s abuse may lead to protections and benefits not only for survivors but practitioners as well. however defined, trauma occurring in an r/s setting has the effect of reducing a victim’s ability to use r/s as a coping strategy, at least for those who exercise their r/s in organized contexts (panchuk 2018). this may be the result of religious leaders explicitly claiming to represent god (ward 2011) or simply of the abuse occurring in a religious context and, therefore, carrying traumatic connotations for the survivor. given the broad evidential support for the role of r/s in healing from trauma, it is especially pernicious that r/s abuse takes place in religious settings of such strong potential for growth and healing.  study rationale only one scale has been developed to measure religious or spiritual abuse (keller 2016), and this scale has not been used in any subsequent peer-reviewed research. other scales measure various types of abuse, but not r/s abuse specifically. the cumulative trauma scale (kira et al. 2008) was developed to measure overall trauma among a middle eastern refugee population. the child abuse and trauma scale (sanders and becker-lausen 1995) measures childhood and adolescent experiences. the trauma history screen (carlson et al. 2011) includes a handful of items that could be religion-related, like sexual abuse or being “suddenly abandoned by a spouse, partner, parent, or family” but does not ask about the cause of the abandonment. the trauma symptom checklist (briere and runtz 1989) measures a respondent’s current trauma levels and contains helpful subsets of trauma, but no items ask specifically about anything religious. other trauma-related screens and scales similarly lack any specific religious component. this project aims to create a scale measuring exposure to potentially spiritually abusive experiences. the creation of such a scale may provide myriad potential benefits. practitioners of clients whom they suspect may have been the victims of r/s abuse could administer the scale as part of their intake process, enabling them to quickly check their client’s score against established, valid, and reliable norms. a reliable measurement of exposure to potential spiritual abuse and its effects can also be used extensively for research purposes, looking for relationships between spiritual abuse and any number of other psychological, health, or other measures.  research question the research question for this project is: “which types of r/s abuse most succinctly capture the phenomenon of being broadly exposed to r/s abuse?” the hypothesis is that factor analysis will reveal 30 items across fewer than 10 factors that can reliably comprise a shorter scale for broad exposure to religious and spiritual abuse and its common effects.  
  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  479  method initial survey item generation prompts were pulled from the existing quantitative and qualitative literature on religious and spiritual abuse (kvarfordt 2010; nobakht & dale 2017; oakley and kinmond 2014; rodriguezcarballeira et al. 2015; swindle 2017; ward 2011, winell n.d.), as well as from personal conversations with survivors of religious and spiritual abuse. these conversations brought to light specific examples of potential abuse not contained in any of the available literature. types of abuse include abuse inflicted by narcissistic persons, financial coercion, developmentally inappropriate children’s teachings, pressure to stay in physically abusive marriages, neglect of needed medical care, sexual discrimination, shunning/shaming, and more. each item can be conceived of as either being potentially spiritually abusive (inflicting emotional abuse by a religious leader or group and/or with a religious or spiritual component, usually involving coercion or control) or as a theorized effect of spiritual abuse, based on the reports of self-described survivors of spiritual abuse in the qualitative literature. the goal with survey item generation was to balance comprehensiveness across both potential themes and alternate phrasings with efficiency for participants. given that spiritual abuse has received so little empirical research, as wide of a net as possible was warranted to achieve content validity, while aiming for a survey length that could be completed in no more than 15 min, based on qualtrics’s internal estimate. after removing redundant items, a total of 66 prompts were selected (see appendix a for the final survey): prompts about potentially abusive experiences and prompts about personal feelings as the result of those experiences. for the former, prevalence is measured by asking “how often have you experienced the above in a church or christian group setting?” (5-point likert scale: never, once or twice, sometimes, often, all the time). for the latter, prevalence is measured by asking “at any point, how often have you experienced the above as a result of negative religious experiences?” (5-point likert scale: never, once or twice, sometimes, often, all the time). given the large number of survey prompts in section 1, these prompts were presented in a randomized order. this ensured that even if many respondents did not complete the entirety of section 1 of the survey, all prompts would be answered by roughly the same number of respondents. participants only respondents who select yes to the following prompts were allowed to continue to the survey: (1) are you 18 years or older? (2) have you identified as a christian at some point in your life and/or were you raised christian? to avoid confusion for currently identifying christians, the negative option read “no, i have never identified as a christian and i was not raised christian.” the survey was advertised through various podcast feeds (in audio form during a podcast episode), as well as email lists, facebook groups, and other online groups associated with progressive christian podcasts based throughout the united states. listeners/readers were encouraged to invite others to take part in the survey, so long as they satisfied the above criteria. the link was also posted on the researcher’s own social media accounts with a similar encouragement to invite others who satisfied the study criteria. a total of 4914 participants clicked on the link to the survey. of those, 1692 either did not meet screening requirements or did not answer any questions beyond the informed consent page.  
  480  journal for the scientific study of religion  the survey did not require that participants answer every question to be counted, so partially completed forms were included. study procedures interested parties were directed to a qualtrics page that contained a description of the survey, informed consent, and the survey itself. upon entering the website, visitors were informed of the study description and that they were free to discontinue the survey at any time. in addition, resources were provided for anyone requiring help as a result of negative emotional experiences related to taking the survey. following an indication of consent, participants were presented with the survey. the online questionnaire began with section 1, focused on external experiences, followed by section 2, focused on internal experiences, and concluding with demographic information: age, gender, sexual orientation, race, “i was raised in a christian home” scored “yes” or “no,” the denomination of the church or group where the individual experienced the greatest incidence of negative religious experiences, the racial makeup of that church or group’s congregation, the racial makeup of that church or group’s leadership, the gender makeup of that church or group’s leadership, the participant’s level of “sincere personal involvement” with the group, their current religious identity, and their frequency of progressive christian podcast listening. all responses were anonymous, and no incentives, monetary or otherwise, were offered.  results exploratory factor analysis was used to generate pearson correlations between all the prompts and determine the underlying factors present in the larger construct of spiritual abuse. once factors were identified, prompts with high factor loadings were selected for a shorter set of prompts that comprised the final spiritual harm & abuse scale (shas). one rule adopted in designing the scale was the law of parsimony, requiring that the least number of questions be chosen without compromising reliability or validity. data preparation for analysis a total of 3222 responses were included for analysis, which far exceeds the recommended ratio of at least 10 participants per item for the scale under construction (nunnally 1978). as there were 66 items on the survey, a minimum of 660 respondents would have been required for proper exploratory factor analysis to be completed. data from the third screening question (“how many episodes of progressive christian podcasts do you listen to per week?”) were recoded due to this being an open prompt. numbers written out in letters (“two”) were recoded as numerals (“2”), and ranges (“3–4”) were recoded as the mean number in the range (“3.5”). worded responses were similarly recoded into numerals for the prompt “your age (in years).” sample characteristics demographics questions were answered by almost all participants (n 3064) and the results are in table 1. compared to the general u.s. population, the respondent pool was largely white (86%) and protestant (57%). the average respondent saw themselves as slightly theologically liberal (m 4.5, range 1 7). about four in five identified as straight (82%), and most were raised in a christian home (87%).  
  481  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  table 1: demographic information variable gender  sexual orientation  race  raised in a christian home? denomination or a grouptype  frequency  %  cisgender male cisgender female transgender male transgender female other prefer not to say straight gay/lesbian bisexual asexual queer don’t know white/european american hispanic/latino origin black/african american asian american indian/alaska native native hawaiian/pacific islander other yes no  1320 1635 8 12 49 36 2626 102 174 44 67 51 2786 73 51 47 7  41 50.7 0.2 0.4 1.5 1.1 81.5 3.2 5.4 1.4 2.1 1.6 86.5 2.3 1.6 1.5 0.2  4  0.1  92 2795 266  2.9 86.7 8.3  catholic charismatic/pentecostal baptist mainline nondenominational orthodox christian mormon christian church other than above evangelistic/missions organization college christian organization christian youth organization christian media company christian school/university christian political/activist group local bible study/small group christian group other than above  118 448 585 316 751 11 130 301  3.7 13.9 18.2 9.8 23.3 0.3 4 9.3  110  3.4  55 15 8 124 3  1.7 0.5 0.2 3.8 0.1  23 49  0.7 1.5  mean range st. dev.  (continued)  
  482  journal for the scientific study of religion  table 1: (continued) variable religious identity protestant catholic mormon orthodox christian other religious tradition atheist agnostic nothing in particular age theological self- very conservative to very description liberal  frequency  %  1833 66 57 79 51 128 325 518  56.9 2 1.8 2.5 1.6 4 10.1 16.1  mean range st. dev.  39.5 4.49  18–88 1–7  12.72 1.55  a  denotes denomination or christian group type where respondent experienced the greatest incidence of negative religious experience.  addressing the research question to address the research question “which factors underlie the construct of spiritual abuse?” exploratory factor analysis was conducted on the results from all items. frequencies were calculated on each item, and it was determined that a few items should be dropped from the analysis due to almost entirely low scores. according to tinsley and tinsley (1987), when most people respond in a similar manner to a variable, it can reduce correlation coefficients and result in less well-defined factors. following this advice, items with a mean score of 1.5 or below (out of 5) were dropped, resulting in a total of 61 remaining items. the dropped items spanned multiple types of abusive experiences, but two specific domains of abuse were dropped entirely: sexual orientationrelated and race-related abuse. individual “critical items” were added for each of these abuse types to ensure that clinicians would not miss these potentially important client experiences. exploratory factor analysis the kaiser–meyer–olkin (kmo) test was run on the 61 items to determine the degree of shared variance between the items. the kmo was 0.987, well above the 0.5 threshold required to proceed. alpha factoring with varimax rotation was then run on the 61 items. alpha factoring is most appropriate in situations where the variables in the study are not assumed to be definitive but rather are a group of variables out of a larger set of possible variables (rovai et al. 2014). considering that the 61 remaining prompts were taken from scant qualitative research, anecdotes, and personal experience, many other variables might have also been included to measure and describe the concept of spiritual abuse. best practices, in this case, include running both varimax and promax rotations, rather than making a priori assumptions about the degree of correlation between the underlying factors of the concept being studied (tinsley & tinsley, 1987). each rotation produced nearly identical results, and the varimax results are presented in full in table 2. factors with an eigenvalue of 1 or greater were retained (see all eigenvalues in appendix c). this resulted in six total factors, explaining 62% of variance cumulatively. each factor was examined based on the items that loaded most strongly and labeled as followed:  r maintaining the system r internal distress r embracing violence  
  being shunned or ignored by my pastor or church/group the leadership or group not only protecting but elevating abusive individuals my church community abandoning me in a difficult time seeing the leadership or group protecting abusive individuals being blamed for harm that i suffered, rather than blaming those who harmed me being pressured to forgive an abuser while the abuse was ongoing seeing the pastor or group blame the victim of abuse for the abuse itself seeing others shamed or shunned by the pastor/leader or group being shamed by my pastor or the group for raising questions or concerns being “cut off” or shunned by more religious family members being shamed by my pastor or the group for poor spiritual/moral performance witnessing women being pressured to stay in unfaithful or abusive marriages seeing specific members being pressured to give money despite well-known personal financial hardship feeling special when in my pastor/leader’s good graces; feeling ignored when i wasn’t  prompt  0.115 0.303 0.289 0.288  0.367 0.223 0.254 0.125 0.214 0.356 0.342 0.175 0.270 0.153 0.138 0.403  0.635 0.627 0.620 0.598 0.595 0.548 0.535 0.528 0.521 0.509 0.474 0.468  0.153  0.282  0.438  0.251  0.255  0.265  0.288  0.395  0.087 0.288  0.344 0.219  violence, horror, and punishment  0.656 0.639  maintaining internal the system distress  table 2: varimax rotated factor loadings for all survey prompts by factor  0.352  0.447  0.157  0.385  0.150  0.333  0.336  0.186  0.081  0.156  0.129 0.161  0.145 0.181  controlling leadership  0.074  0.128  0.119  0.172  0.139  0.061  0.043  0.109  0.181  0.186  0.140 0.099  0.056 0.080  harmful god-image  (continued)  0.046  0.089  0.258  0.063  0.079  0.192  0.103  0.223  0.229  0.246  0.117 0.218  0.018 0.184  gender discrimination  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  483  
  nightmares about my negative religious experiences developing mental or physical ailments as a result of stress from conforming to the group/leader’s expectation being expected to consult my pastor/leader before making nonreligious decisions being asked to give up personal, vocational, and/or educational goals by a pastor or group leader being deterred from seeking mental health treatment, counseling, and/or medication behavior being excessively monitored by my pastor or group members seeing that anyone who disagreed with my church/pastor was consequently portrayed as evil anxiety attacks triggered by religious stimuli love or acceptance only being offered if spiritual or moral performance was high prayer replacing needed medical interventions mental or physical problems being interpreted as spiritual/moral weakness seeing scripture used to justify abusive parent–child behavior  prompt  table 2: (continued)  0.329 0.407  0.172 0.175 0.231 0.295 0.315 0.427 0.393 0.153 0.331 0.219  0.455 0.451  0.450 0.440 0.437 0.435 0.433 0.426 0.425 0.414 0.394 0.387  maintaining internal the system distress  0.647  0.354 0.426  0.247 0.343  0.371  0.288  0.384  0.176  0.191  0.247 0.200  violence, horror, and punishment  0.082  0.284 0.320  0.055 0.365  0.408  0.455  0.222  0.398  0.489  0.085 0.248  controlling leadership  0.144  0.144 0.146  0.290 0.146  0.096  0.154  0.204  0.165  0.167  0.270 0.246  harmful god-image  (continued)  0.181  0.092 0.158  0.110 0.192  0.126  0.115  0.142  0.155  0.076  0.098 0.111  gender discrimination  484 journal for the scientific study of religion  
  being made to feel like i was crazy or weird for having doubts or questions my pastor/leader explicitly claiming to speak on god’s behalf being made to feel less spiritually advanced/mature than my pastor/leadership discouragement of critical thinking by my church or pastor threatening divine punishment to keep group members in line feeling unable to express unhappiness seeing scripture used to justify physical violence anger upon reflecting on negative religious experiences being taught that i would be risking hell if i left my particular church/group seeing scripture used to justify physical punishment or other types of severe discipline personally avoiding religious activities or settings to reduce distressing feelings experiencing extreme pressure to take on a role of pastor, missionary, or other spiritual leader feeling that i wasted years of my life in a particular church or set of beliefs being denied opportunities to serve/volunteer because of my gender  prompt  table 2: (continued)  0.473 0.196 0.412 0.397 0.223 0.487 0.187 0.587 0.221 0.190 0.558 0.284 0.512 0.118  0.381 0.371 0.371 0.356 0.355 0.339 0.333 0.328 0.310 0.308 0.306 0.300 0.292 0.278  maintaining internal the system distress  0.113  0.318  0.230  0.284  0.634  0.294 0.635 0.326 0.387  0.498  0.414  0.308  0.304  0.370  violence, horror, and punishment  0.117  0.274  0.421  0.203  0.098  0.283 0.070 0.204 0.339  0.359  0.382  0.409  0.451  0.372  controlling leadership  0.070  0.221  0.172  0.212  0.118  0.103 0.130 0.176 0.220  0.190  0.046  0.055  0.156  0.095  harmful god-image  (continued)  0.715  0.091   0.025  0.152  0.111  0.169 0.088 0.159 0.147  0.119  0.149  0.188  0.072  0.179  gender discrimination  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  485  
  feeling isolated having unrealistic demands placed on my moral or religious behavior being treated as “less than” because of my gender feeling unable to raise questions and issues terror or horror being used to motivate religious decisions hearing cultural references in sermons that were not commonly known to members of my racial or ethnic subculture feeling as if god harmed me directly having trouble navigating life outside my church/community sadness over the loss of my faith/religious community being explicitly taught to distrust my intuitions self-hatred or self-loathing vivid descriptions of hell, satan, or demons being taught to young children that are developmentally inappropriate and/or anxiety-provoking being explicitly taught to distrust my emotions a lack of self-worth seeing others treated as “less than” because of their sexual orientation vivid descriptions of the end of the world being taught to young children that are developmentally inappropriate and/or anxiety-provoking  prompt  table 2: (continued)  0.685 0.434 0.188 0.548 0.289 0.034  0.263 0.526 0.611 0.486 0.544 0.304  0.486 0.600 0.393 0.307  0.272 0.272 0.269 0.265 0.262 0.261  0.244 0.236 0.228 0.228 0.223 0.213  0.213 0.213 0.212 0.208  maintaining internal the system distress  0.669  0.462 0.228 0.438  0.152 0.479 0.230 0.678  0.147 0.157  0.080  0.139 0.366 0.596  0.201 0.443  violence, horror, and punishment  0.250  0.265 0.095 0.304  0.142 0.283 0.095 0.245  0.102 0.179  0.119  0.095 0.341 0.290  0.091 0.426  controlling leadership  0.134  0.110 0.373 0.075  0.112 0.093 0.410 0.146  0.647 0.264  0.048  0.083 0.021 0.156  0.201 0.178  harmful god-image  (continued)   0.015  0.153 0.081 0.245  0.085 0.155  0.001  0.020  0.032 0.057  0.025  0.818 0.180 0.037  0.079 0.138  gender discrimination  486 journal for the scientific study of religion  
  0.368 0.402 0.350 0.390 0.597  0.202 0.147 0.143 0.137 0.077  maintaining internal the system distress  0.134 0.200 0.207  0.486  0.379  violence, horror, and punishment  0.140 0.196 0.132  0.371  0.441  controlling leadership  0.687 0.565 0.301  0.157  0.130  harmful god-image  0.090 0.111 0.047  0.123  0.144  gender discrimination  note: participants were asked “how often have you experienced the following in a church or christian group setting?” for external events and “at any point, how often have you felt or experienced the below as a result of negative religious experiences?” for internal states/experiences. n 3222. items included in the final 27-item scale are presented in boldface.  being expected to follow my pastor/leader’s personal rules/advice around dating, marriage, and sex being made to feel shame over naturally occurring sexual desires (not actions) feeling betrayed by god distrust of god a lack of spiritual direction or purpose  prompt  table 2: (continued)  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  487  
  488  journal for the scientific study of religion  table 3: descriptive statistics for full scale and each factor item full 27-item scale maintaining the system internal distress embracing violence controlling leadership harmful god-image gender discrimination  cronbach’s alpha  mean  st. dev.  0.95 0.87 0.91 0.86 0.84 0.84 0.87  63.92 10.35 22.45 9.83 12.32 6.14 4.17  24.04 5.09 7.92 4.53 5.25 3.02 2.66  r controlling leadership r harmful god-image r gender discrimination while factor titles for 1, 3, 4, and 6 describe the type of potentially abusive external events that victims may experience, the title of factor 2, “internal distress,” describes internal states that often result from spiritual abuse. item 5, “harmful god-image,” also describes personal feelings relating to god as a villain in a person’s story. items measuring racial and sexual discrimination and medical care were removed earlier due to low mean scores. although discrimination based on race or sexual orientation is just as pernicious as gender discrimination, the items’ low mean scores make a mathematical argument for inclusion on the final scale more difficult since it is naturally less common across the entire population than gender discrimination. inclusion in a critical items section of the final instrument allows for the assessment of discrimination on the basis of race or sexual orientation. another item, “being deterred from seeking mental health treatment,” is clinically important and is, therefore, included as a “critical item.” individual items were then sorted by factor loadings, with only items loading at 0.42 or higher (varimax rotation) per factor being retained. because the final scale is intended primarily for use in clinical settings, perceived clinical relevance was additionally considered when choosing which items to include on the final scale while being sure to maintain high reliability scores. factorspecific reliability analyses were performed repeatedly, removing one or two items at a time, to reduce the number of items needed per factor. descriptive statistics for each factor and the full 27-item scale are given in table 3. two similarly worded and highly correlated (0.86) items in the embracing violence category were combined into one prompt for the final scale. the same was done for two items in the maintaining the system category (0.79 correlation). ten clinically relevant items removed during scale reduction and one item for clergy sexual abuse were included in a list of check-box “critical items” to alert a clinician of potentially fruitful areas for clinical discussion: (1) i was treated as “less than” because of my race or sexual orientation (2) i was pressured to stay in an abusive marriage by religious leaders (3) i was deterred from seeking mental health care (4) i was sexually abused by a clergy member (5) i was taught that i would be risking hell if i left my particular church (6) i was taught to distrust my emotions or intuitions (7) mental or physical problems were interpreted as spiritual or moral weakness (8) love or acceptance was only offered if i performed well enough spiritually/morally (9) i was made to feel like i was the crazy one for having doubts or questions  
  489  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  table 4: descriptives for critical items item  mean  std. dev.  being treated as “less than” because of my sexual orientation being taught that i would be risking hell if i left my particular church/group being deterred from seeking mental health treatment, counseling, and/or medication mental or physical problems being interpreted as spiritual/moral weakness being denied opportunities to serve because of my sexual orientation love or acceptance only being offered if spiritual or moral performance was high being treated as “less than” because of my skin color being made to feel like i was crazy or weird for having doubts or questions developing mental or physical ailments as a result of stress from conforming to the group/leader’s expectation being encouraged to remain in an abusive marriage by religious leaders being “cut off” or shunned by more religious family members being explicitly taught to distrust my emotions being explicitly taught to distrust my intuitions  1.34 2.20  .973 1.465  2.04  1.252  2.78  1.336  1.27 2.61  .878 1.355  1.11 2.72  .481 1.367  2.15  1.332  1.49 1.82 3.12 2.92  .991 1.177 1.392 1.403  n 3184.  (10) i developed physical ailments from the stress of conforming to the leader or group’s expectations (11) i was “cut off” by more religious family members some of these critical items were not endorsed by many participants (1 and 2 in particular). however, these are clinically important because of their potentially significant effects on a client. the remaining items were endorsed more regularly, and were, therefore, included in factor analysis, but failed to load highly enough on any of the six factors. their clinical significance, however, appears to be high enough to include them on this list for clinical consideration. for example, it would be useful for a clinician to know if their client was consistently presented with the idea that mental health issues were actually demons or the result of sinful decisions on their part. descriptive statistics for the critical items included in the original survey are presented in table 4. item-total descriptives are included in table 5. the 27 items on the final scale, sorted by their category, are as follows: maintaining the system (1) being shunned or ignored by my pastor or group (2) being pressured to forgive an abuser while the abuse was ongoing (3) seeing the leadership or group protecting or elevating abusive individuals (4) being blamed for harm that i suffered, rather than blaming those who harmed me (5) my church community abandoning me in a difficult time embracing violence (1) vivid descriptions of hell, satan, demons, or the end of the world being taught to young children that are developmentally inappropriate and/or anxiety-provoking  
  a lack of spiritual direction or purpose feeling betrayed by god personally avoiding religious activities or settings to reduce distressing feelings feeling as if god harmed me directly self-hatred or self-loathing sadness over the loss of my faith/religious community anger upon reflecting on negative religious experiences a lack of self-worth distrust of god feeling isolated having trouble navigating life outside my church/community my pastor/leader explicitly claiming to speak on god’s behalf my church community abandoning me in a difficult time behavior being excessively monitored by my pastor or group members being expected to follow my pastor/leader’s personal rules/advice around dating, marriage, and sex being expected to consult my pastor/leader before making nonreligious decisions being pressured to forgive an abuser while the abuse was ongoing  item  table 5: item-total statistics for all 27 scale items  512.615 513.150 499.567 519.610 505.947 508.913 500.706 504.610 508.868 505.911 510.781 504.163 506.118 501.956 499.272 512.009 508.842  63.93 63.06 62.77 62.48 62.79 63.17 62.49 63.33 63.02 63.42 63.23 62.22 63.67 63.68  scale variance if item deleted  62.55 63.45 62.55  scale mean if item deleted  0.618  0.615  0.668  0.669 0.708  0.564 0.653 0.606 0.765 0.682 0.622 0.700 0.620 0.621  0.590 0.588 0.733  corrected item-total correlation  (continued)  0.951  0.951  0.950  0.950 0.950  0.951 0.950 0.951 0.949 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.951  0.951 0.951 0.949  cronbach’s alpha if item deleted  490 journal for the scientific study of religion  
  being denied opportunities to serve/volunteer because of my gender seeing the leadership or group protecting abusive individuals being shunned or ignored by my pastor or church/group vivid descriptions of hell, satan, or demons being taught to young children that are developmentally inappropriate and/or anxiety-provoking being treated as “less than” because of my gender experiencing extreme pressure to take on a role of pastor, missionary, or other spiritual leader being blamed for harm that i suffered, rather than blaming those who harmed me seeing scripture used to justify abusive parent–child behavior terror or horror being used to motivate religious decisions seeing scripture used to justify physical violence  item  table 5: (continued)  516.827 506.096 512.366 500.991  510.219 508.282 503.447 502.372 503.376 510.612  63.29 63.52 62.78  63.32 63.21 63.47 63.19 63.01 63.39  scale variance if item deleted  63.62  scale mean if item deleted  0.680 0.607  0.689  0.724  0.505 0.576  0.681 0.603 0.664  0.446  corrected item-total correlation  0.950 0.951  0.950  0.949  0.952 0.951  0.950 0.951 0.950  0.952  cronbach’s alpha if item deleted  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  491  
  492  journal for the scientific study of religion  (2) seeing scripture used to justify physical violence (3) terror or horror being used to motivate religious decisions (4) seeing scripture used to justify abusive parent–child behavior controlling leadership (1) being expected to consult my pastor/leader before making nonreligious decisions (2) behavior being excessively monitored by my pastor or group members (3) my pastor/leader explicitly claiming to speak on god’s behalf (4) being expected to follow my pastor/leader’s personal rules/advice around dating, marriage, and sex (5) experiencing extreme pressure to take on a role of pastor, missionary, or other spiritual leader gender discrimination (1) being denied opportunities to serve because of my gender (2) being treated as “less than” because of my gender internal distress (1) feeling isolated as a result of negative religious experiences (2) a lack of self-worth as a result of negative religious experiences (3) sadness over the loss of my faith/religious community (4) self-hatred or self-loathing as a result of negative religious experiences (5) having trouble navigating life outside my religious community (6) a lack of spiritual direction or purpose as a result of negative religious experiences (7) anger upon reflecting on negative religious experiences (8) personally avoiding religious activities or settings to reduce distressing feelings harmful god-image (1) feeling betrayed by god (2) feeling as if god harmed me directly (3) distrust of god factor correlations each factor is significantly correlated with each of the other factors, although to varying degrees. it would be expected that each would be correlated to some degree with each other since each factor is theoretically within the larger umbrella of spiritual abuse and its effects. correlations for all factors are presented in table 6. discussion the results supported the hypothesis that fewer than 30 items across fewer than 10 factors would be found to comprise a spiritual abuse scale with adequate reliability. in the end, 27 items over six factors were found to comprise the new shas:  r maintaining the system r internal distress r embracing violence  
  1 0.695** 0.715** 0.740** 0.416** 0.676**  maintaining the system  note: correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).  maintaining the system internal distress embracing violence controlling leadership harmful god-image gender discrimination  factor  table 6: factor correlation matrix  1 0.773** 0.756** 0.534** 0.587**  internal distress  1 0.764** 0.413** 0.627**  embracing violence  1 0.412** 0.572**  controlling leadership  1 0.247**  harmful god-image  1  gender discrimination  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  493  
  494  journal for the scientific study of religion  r controlling leadership r harmful god-image r gender discrimination there is likely to be convergent validity with the sole existing similar scale. for the spiritual abuse questionnaire (saq), keller (2016) found the following four factors: abuse of power, conditionality, spiritual injury, and suppression of expression. some overlap can be seen between the two sets of factors. for example, spiritual injury is indicated in both internal distress and harmful god-image, and abuse of power has face validity with both controlling leadership and maintaining the system. future research should evaluate correlations between these two scales and their subscales. the highest factor correlation is between controlling leadership and embracing violence (0.764), which may indicate that controlling leaders are more likely to use fear and terror to motivate religious decisions and loyalty. they may also be more likely to support or tolerate violence, either real-life or biblical accounts of violence, to maintain their authority and power. more research should be done to support this conclusion, however. the next highest correlation is between controlling leadership and internal distress (0.756). it may be that internal distress is caused by church communities with controlling leadership. however, the causal relationship may go the other way as well: those who experience internal distress may rate their current or former church leadership as more authoritarian than those who do not experience such distress. third, some other cause may be responsible for elevated scores on both scales for many individuals. between the six factors and the additional “critical items” on the screener, all major abuserelated themes from the qualitative work of both swindle (2017) and ward (2011) appear to have at least one correlate on the shas, as shown in table 7. the resulting scale can be used in clinical settings to quickly check a client’s exposure to spiritual abuse and possible resulting consequences. it can be administered in roughly the same amount of time as short measures like the beck anxiety inventory. final scale/screener the results of this research will comprise a scale and clinical screener for use by clinicians, potentially providing myriad benefits. practitioners with clients whom they suspect may have been the victims of r/s abuse could administer the scale as part of their intake process, quickly able to check their client’s score against established, valid, and reliable norms. the first section will comprise the 27 items, split into two sections. subsection 1, focused on external events, will consist of 16 items under a heading that reads “how often have you experienced the following in a church or christian group setting?” with possible answers scored 1 5 on a likert scale: never, once or twice, sometimes, often, all the time. subsection 2, focused on internal states, will consist of 11 items under a heading that reads “in recent years, how often have you experienced the following as a result of negative religious experiences?” with possible answers scored 1 5 on a likert scale: never, once or twice, sometimes, often, all the time. section 2 will contain a heading “finally, please check all that apply to your experience in christian churches or groups throughout your life.” the 11 critical items will be listed with a check box next to each. a scoring key will be included for the first section. total scores and subscale scores for each of the six factors will be explained, with basic levels of severity indicated for a general population, based on mean and standard deviation information from this research. clinicians will, therefore, be able to quickly assess how much potential spiritual abuse their client has been exposed to, as well as one or more focus areas based on subscale scores. the final screener is included as appendix b.  
  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  495  table 7: convergent validity between the sas and themes from the qualitative literature on spiritual abuse qualitative literature item  sas factor or critical item  *  emotional trauma betrayal*  rules prioritized over people/devalued*  abuse of power/use of the sacred to control or manipulate* isolation* gender bias/discrimination* stigma*  victim-blaming*  leadership representing god  spiritual bullying   acceptance via performance   spiritual neglect the expanding external/internal  tension  manifestation of internal states  internal distress factor harmful god-image factor; maintaining the system factor maintaining the system factor; controlling leadership factor; critical item #8––“love or acceptance was only offered if i performed well enough spiritually/morally” maintaining the system factor; embracing violence factor; critical item #2––“i was pressured to stay in an abusive marriage by religious leaders” internal distress factor gender discrimination factor critical item #5––“i was taught that i would be risking hell if i left my particular church”; critical item #11––“i was ‘cut off’ by more religious family members” maintaining the system factor controlling leadership factor controlling leadership factor; embracing violence factor; multiple critical items critical item #8––“love or acceptance was only offered if i performed well enough spiritually/morally” maintaining the system factor internal distress factor internal distress factor; critical item #10––“i developed physical ailments from the stress of conforming to the leader or group’s expectations”  note: * swindle 2017.   ward 2011.  limitations and future research one limitation of the shas is that it was developed on a largely white and protestant/former protestant population. it is possible that major types or subthemes of spiritual abuse not captured here are more prominent in catholic or non-white christian settings, especially given that r/s can be such central forces in many of those groups. this would be a fruitful area of future study. research looking at spiritual abuse among the lgbtq community might also yield insights specific to that population. future research could also distinguish normed scores of this scale for different populations and denominations. much additional analysis could also be done on the prevalence data contained in the survey responses. comparisons could be made to the other existing western quantitative spiritual abuse survey (oakley and kinmond 2014). future research can look for correlations between exposure to r/s abuse and other religionrelated measures, for example, the religious involvement scale (piedmont et al. 2009), the penn  
  496  journal for the scientific study of religion  inventory of scrupulosity (abramowitz et al. 2002), the death anxiety scale (templer 1970), the hell anxiety scale (cranney et al. 2018), and others. comparisons can also be made with other trauma-related scales, like the child abuse and trauma scale, the trauma history screen, and the cumulative trauma scale. validity can also be established for both this new scale and the spiritual abuse questionnaire (keller 2016) by correlating the two. the final screener has the potential to both improve therapy for innumerable clients who have experienced negative religious experiences and to contribute a knowledge base for any future clinical training around working with spiritually abused clients. the scale may also contribute to future research that could be critical in understanding not only the mechanisms and experience of spiritual abuse but also perhaps the enduring power of religion, both to heal and harm.  references abramowitz, jonathan s., jonathan d. huppert, adam b. cohen, david f. tolin, shawn p. cahill 2002. religious obsessions and compulsions in a non-clinical sample: the penn inventory of scrupulosity (pios). behaviour research and therapy 40(7):825–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0005-7967(01)00070-5 briere, john and marsha runtz. 1989. the trauma symptom checklist (tsc-33): early data on a new scale. journal of interpersonal violence 4(2): 151–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/088626089004002002 bryant-davis, thema. 2005. coping strategies of african american adult survivors of childhood violence. professional psychology: research and practice 36: 409–14. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.36.4.409 bryant-davis, thema., monica u. ellis, elizabeth burke-maynard, nathan moon, pamela a. counts, gera anderson. 2012. religiosity, spirituality, and trauma recovery in the lives of children and adolescents. professional psychology: research and practice 43(4): 306–14. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029282 carlson, eve, stever r. smith, patrick a. palmieri, constance dalenberg, joself i. ruzek, rachel kimerling, thomas a. burling, david a. spain. 2011. development and validation of a brief self-report measure of trauma exposure: the trauma history screen (pdf). psychological assessment 23: 463–77. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022294 cares, alison c., gretchen r. cusick. 2012. risks and opportunities of faith and culture: the case of abused jewish women. journal of family violence 27: 427–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-012-9435-3 cranney, stephen, joseph leman, thomas a. fergus, wade c. rowatt. 2018. hell anxiety as non-pathological fear. mental health, religion & culture 21(9–10): 867–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2018.1443436 dill, leconte j. 2017. “wearing my spiritual jacket”: the role of spirituality as a coping mechanism among african american youth. health education & behavior 44(5): 696–704. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198117729398 doyle, thomas p. 2006. clericalism: enabler of clergy sexual abuse. pastoral psychology 54: 189–213. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11089-006-6323-x. elliott, diana m. 1994. the impact of christian faith on the prevalence and sequelae of sexual abuse. journal of interpersonal violence 9: 95–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/088626094009001006 foster, kirk, sharon e. bowland, anne nancy vosler. 2015. all the pain along with all the joy: spiritual resilience in lesbian and gay christians. american journal of community psychology 55: 191–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10464-015-9704-4 gall, terry lynn, viola basque, marizete demasceno-scott, gerard vardy. 2007. spirituality and the current adjustment of adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse. journal for the scientific study of religion 46: 101–17. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1468-5906.2007.00343.x good, marie, teena willoughby. 2006. the role of spirituality versus religiosity in adolescent psychosocial adjustment. journal of youth and adolescence 35: 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-005-9018-1 gubi, peter madsen, rachel jacobs. 2009. exploring the impact on counsellors of working with spiritually abused clients. mental health, religion & culture 12(2): 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674670802441509 hill, peter c., kenneth i. pargament. 2008. advances in the conceptualization and measurement of religion and spirituality: implications for physical and mental health research. psychology of religion and spirituality s(1): 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1037/1941-1022.s.1.3 holder, mark d., ben coleman, judi m. wallace. 2010. spirituality, religiousness, and happiness in children aged 8–12 years. journal of happiness studies 11: 131–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-008-9126-1 keller, kathryn h. 2016. development of a spiritual abuse questionnaire. ph.d. dissertation, texas woman’s university. kira, ibrahim a., linda lewandowski, thomas templin, vidya ramaswamy, bulent ozkan, jamal mohanesh. 2008. measuring cumulative trauma dose, types, and profiles using a development-based taxonomy of traumas. traumatology 14(2): 62–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534765608319324  
  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  497  kvarfordt, connie l. 2010. spiritual abuse and neglect of youth: reconceptualizing what is known through an investigation of practitioners’ experiences. journal of religion & spirituality in social work: social thought 29(2): 143–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/15426431003708287 laflin, molly t., jing wang, maxine barry. 2008. a longitudinal study of adolescent transition from virgin to nonvirgin status. journal of adolescent health 42: 228–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.08.014 markstrom, carol a. 1999. religious involvement and adolescent psychosocial development. journal of adolescence 22: 205–21. https://doi.org/10.1006/jado.1999.0211 marsal, elizabeth. 2009. spirituality as a protective factor against female gang membership. journal of human behavior in the social environment 19: 231–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911350802694584 merrill, ray m., richard d. salazar, nicole w. gardner. 2001. relationship between family religiosity and drug use behavior among youth. social behavior and personality 29: 347–57. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2001.29.4.347 mishra, shri k., elizabeth togneri, byomesh tripathi, bhavesh trikamji. 2015. spirituality and religiosity and its role in health and diseases. journal of religion and health 56(4): 1282–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-015-0100-z nobakht, habib n.,karl y. dale. 2017. the importance of religious/ritual abuse as a traumatic predictor of dissociation. journal of interpersonal violence 33(23): 3575–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517723747 nunnally, j. c. 1978. psychometric theory (2nd ed.). mcgraw-hill. oakley, lisa r. and kathryn s. kinmond. 2014. developing safeguarding policy and practice for spiritual abuse. journal of adult protection 16(2): 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1108/jap-07-2013-0033 oakley, lisa r., kathryn s. kinmond, justin humphreys. 2018. spiritual abuse in christian faith settings: definition, policy and practice guidance. journal of adult protection 20(3/4): 144–54. https://doi.org/10.1108/jap-03-20180005 panchuk, michelle. 2018. the shattered spiritual self: a philosophical exploration of religious trauma. res philosophica 95(3): 505–30. doi:10.11612/resphil.1684 pearl, peggy. 1994. emotional abuse. in child maltreatment: a clinical guide and reference, edited by j. a. monteleone and a. e. brodeur. g.w. medical pub. piedmont, ralph l., joseph w. ciarrochi, gabriel s. dy-liacco, joseph e. williams. 2009. the empirical and conceptual value of the spiritual transcendence and religious involvement scales for personality research. psychology of religion and spirituality 1(3): 162–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015883 rovai, a. p., baker, j. d., ponton, m. k. 2014. social science research design and statistics: a practitioner’s guide to research methods and ibm spss analysis. rodriguez-carballeira, alvaro s., omar almendros, carmen martin-pena, javier escartina,, clara porrua-garcia. 2015. group psychological abuse: taxonomy and severity of its components. european journal of psychology applied to legal context 7(1): 31–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpal.2014.11.001 sanders, barbara, evvie becker-lausen. 1995. the measurement of psychological maltreatment: early data on the child abuse and trauma scale. child abuse & neglect 19(3): 315–23. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0145-2134(94)00131-6 stevens, jessica m., meline a. arzoumanian, brittany greenbaum, b. morgan schwab, constance j. dalenberg. 2019. relationship of abuse by religious authorities to depression, religiosity, and child physical abuse history in a college sample. psychological trauma: theory, research, practice, and policy 11(3): 292–9. https://doi.org/10.1037/ tra0000421 swindle, paula j. 2017. a twisting of the sacred: the lived experience of religious abuse. doctoral dissertation. retrieved fromproquest. (12186). templer, donald i. 1970. the construction and validation of a death anxiety scale. journal of general psychology 82(2): 165–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1970.9920634 tinsley, h. e., tinsley, d. j. 1987. uses of factor analysis in counseling psychology research. journal of counseling psychology (4): 414. van dyke, cydney j., david s. glenwick, john j. cecero j, se-kang kim. 2009. the relationship of religious coping and spirituality to adjustment and psychological distress in urban early adolescents. mental health, religion, and culture 12: 369–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674670902737723 ward, david j. 2011. the lived experience of spiritual abuse. mental health, religion & culture 14(9): 899–915. https: //doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2010.536206 warford, patricia. 2014. facing nabal: working with men who abuse. priscilla papers 28(1): 11–3. winell, marlene. (n.d.). understanding religious trauma syndrome: trauma from religion. retrieved from https://legacy. babcp.com/review/rts-trauma-from-religion.aspx  appendix a: varieties of church experience survey questionnaire part 1: external events section 1 deals with how often you have experienced various external events in church or christian group settings. your answers are completely anonymous.  
  498  journal for the scientific study of religion  for each item, please answer: how often have you experienced the following in a church or christian group setting? (with possible answers being never, once or twice, sometimes, often, and all the time). (1) my pastor/leader explicitly claiming to speak on god’s behalf (2) being asked to give up personal, vocational, and/or educational goals by a pastor or group leader (3) seeing that anyone who disagreed with my church/pastor was consequently portrayed as evil (4) my church community abandoning me in a difficult time (5) being treated as “less than” because of my sexual orientation (6) discouragement of critical thinking by my church or pastor (7) behavior being excessively monitored by my pastor or group members (8) seeing specific members being pressured to give money despite well-known personal financial hardship (9) being taught that i would be risking hell if i left my particular church/group (10) being expected to follow my pastor/leader’s personal rules/advice around dating, marriage, and sex (11) prayer replacing needed medical interventions (12) being expected to consult my pastor/leader before making nonreligious decisions (13) feeling unable to raise questions and issues (14) being pressured to forgive an abuser while the abuse was ongoing (15) being denied opportunities to serve/volunteer because of my gender (16) seeing the leadership or group protecting abusive individuals (17) feeling special when in my pastor/leader’s good graces; feeling ignored when i wasn’t (18) being deterred from seeking mental health treatment, counseling, and/or medication (19) being shunned or ignored by my pastor or church/group (20) feeling unable to express unhappiness (21) seeing scripture used to justify physical punishment or other types of severe discipline (22) being explicitly taught to distrust my emotions (23) mental or physical problems being interpreted as spiritual/moral weakness (24) being made to feel less spiritually advanced/mature than my pastor/leadership (25) having unrealistic demands placed on my moral or religious behavior (26) being made to feel shame over naturally occurring sexual desires (not actions) (27) threatening divine punishment to keep group members in line (28) being denied opportunities to serve because of my sexual orientation (29) seeing others shamed or shunned by the pastor/leader or group (30) being shamed by my pastor or the group for poor spiritual/moral performance (31) love or acceptance only being offered if spiritual or moral performance was high (32) vivid descriptions of hell, satan, or demons being taught to young children that are developmentally inappropriate and/or anxiety-provoking (33) being treated as “less than” because of my skin color (34) being explicitly criticized for not taking my faith seriously enough (35) medical care being postponed or not given at all for religious reasons (36) the leadership or group not only protecting but elevating abusive individuals (37) being treated as “less than” because of my gender (38) experiencing extreme pressure to take on a role of pastor, missionary, or other spiritual leader (39) being blamed for harm that i suffered, rather than blaming those who harmed me (40) seeing scripture used to justify abusive parent–child behavior (41) being explicitly taught to distrust my intuitions  
  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  499  (42) rarely hearing sermon illustrations common to my racial or ethnic subculture (43) being made to feel like i was crazy or weird for having doubts or questions (44) developing mental or physical ailments as a result of stress from conforming to the group/leader’s expectation (45) terror or horror being used to motivate religious decisions (46) seeing the pastor or group blame the victim of abuse for the abuse itself (47) being encouraged to remain in an abusive marriage by religious leaders (48) vivid descriptions of the end of the world being taught to young children that are developmentally inappropriate and/or anxiety-provoking (49) seeing scripture used to justify physical violence (50) being shamed by my pastor or the group for raising questions or concerns (51) witnessing women being pressured to stay in unfaithful or abusive marriages (52) being “cut off” or shunned by more religious family members (53) seeing others treated as “less than” because of their sexual orientation questionnaire part 2: internal events section 2 measures how often you have experienced various internal states as a result of negative experiences in church or christian group settings. your answers are completely anonymous. for each item, please answer: at any point, how often have you felt or experienced the below as a result of negative religious experiences? (with possible answers being never, once or twice, sometimes, often, and all the time). (1) anxiety attacks triggered by religious stimuli (2) a lack of spiritual direction or purpose (3) feeling betrayed by god (4) personally avoiding religious activities or settings to reduce distressing feelings (5) feeling as if god harmed me directly (6) self-hatred or loathing (7) sadness over the loss of my faith/religious community (8) feeling that i wasted years of my life in a particular church or set of beliefs (9) anger upon reflecting on negative religious experiences (10) a lack of self-worth (11) distrust of god (12) feeling isolated (13) nightmares about my negative religious experiences (14) having trouble navigating life outside my church/community questionnaire part 3: demographics finally, please answer some demographic questions. your answers are completely anonymous. (1) your age (in years): (2) your gender: (cisgender male, cisgender female, transgender male, transgender female, other, prefer not to answer) (3) your sexual orientation: (straight/heterosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual, questioning, queer, other, prefer not to say) (4) your race: (caucasian/white, black/african american, asian/pacific islander, latino/hispanic, mixed race, other, prefer not to say) (5) were you raised in a christian home? (y/n) (6) the denomination or group type that most accurately describes the church or group where you experienced the greatest incidence of negative religious experiences is:  
  500  journal for the scientific study of religion  catholic, charismatic/pentecostal, baptist, mainline (methodist, lutheran, episcopal/anglican, presbyterian, united church of christ, etc.), nondenominational, orthodox christian (greek, russian, ethiopian, etc.), mormon, christian church other than above, evangelistic/missions organization (billy graham association, ywam, fellowship of christian athletes, teen missions, african inland mission, wycliffe bible translators, youth for christ, etc.), college christian organization (cru/campus crusade for christ, intervarsity, navigators, etc.), christian youth organization (younglife, awana, teen challenge, etc.), christian media company (publisher, record label, etc.), christian school or university, christian political/activist group, chistian aid/social services group (world vision, samaritan’s purse, catholic relief services, etc.), local bible study or small group, christian group other than above. (7) the racial makeup of that same church’s congregation or group’s membership (referred to in the above question) could best be described as... (predominantly white, mixed race, predominantly people of color) (8) the racial makeup of that church or group’s leadership could best be described as... (predominantly white, mixed race, predominantly people of color) (9) the gender makeup of that church or group’s leadership could best be described as: (all male, mostly male, mixed gender, mostly female, all female) (10) “i was very involved in that church or christian group.” agree or disagree? (likert 1–7: strongly disagree to strongly agree) (11) how do you religiously identify today? protestant, catholic, mormon, orthodox christian, other religious tradition (jewish, muslim, hindu, buddhist, etc.), atheist, agnostic, nothing in particular  
  501  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  appendix b: spiritual harm and abuse scale –clinical screener (shas-cs) client name: _____________________________  date: ____________  instructions: below, you will find a series of statements about potentially harmful experiences you may have had throughout your life in christian churches or groups (missions organizations, christian schools, parachurch organizations, etc.). please indicate the extent to which you experienced each across your lifelong church/group experience: 1 never, 2 once or twice, 3 sometimes, 4 often, 5 all the time.  1. being expected to consult my pastor/leader before making nonreligious decisions 2. behavior being excessively monitored by my pastor or group members 3. my pastor/leader explicitly claiming to speak on god’s behalf 4. being expected to follow my pastor/leader’s personal rules/advice around dating, marriage, and sex 5. experiencing extreme pressure to take on a role of pastor, missionary, or other spiritual leader 6. vivid descriptions of hell, satan, demons, or the end of the world being taught to young children 7. seeing scripture used to justify physical violence 8. terror or horror being used to motivate religious decisions 9. seeing scripture used to justify abusive parent–child behavior 10. being shunned or ignored by my pastor or group 11. being pressured to forgive an abuser while the abuse was ongoing 12. seeing the leadership or group protecting or elevating abusive individuals 13. being blamed for harm that i suffered, rather than blaming those who harmed me 14. my church community abandoning me in a difficult time 15. being denied opportunities to serve because of my gender 16. being treated as “less than” because of my gender  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  1 1  2 2  3 3  4 4  5 5  1  2  3  4  5  1 1  2 2  3 3  4 4  5 5  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  the following are internal states that you may have experienced as a result of negative religious experiences. please indicate the extent to which you experienced each as a result of negative religious experiences throughout your life: 1 never, 2 once or twice, 3 sometimes, 4 often, 5 all the time .  
  502  17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.  journal for the scientific study of religion  feeling isolated a lack of self-worth sadness over the loss of my faith/religious community self-hatred or self-loathing having trouble navigating life outside my religious community a lack of spiritual direction or purpose anger upon reflecting on negative religious experiences personally avoiding religious activities or settings to reduce distressing feelings feeling betrayed by god feeling as if god harmed me directly distrust of god  1 1 1 1 1  2 2 2 2 2  3 3 3 3 3  4 4 4 4 4  5 5 5 5 5  1 1 1  2 2 2  3 3 3  4 4 4  5 5 5  1 1 1  2 2 2  3 3 3  4 4 4  5 5 5  finally, please check all of the following that has ever applied to your experience in christian churches or groups:  i was treated as “less than” because of my race or sexual orientation  i was pressured to stay in an abusive marriage by religious leaders  i was deterred from seeking mental health care  i had unwanted sexual experiences in a religious context  i was taught that i would be risking hell if i left my particular church  i was taught to distrust my emotions or intuitions  mental or physical problems were interpreted as spiritual or moral weakness  love or acceptance was only offered if i performed well enough spiritually/morally  i was made to feel like i was the crazy one for having doubts or questions  i developed physical ailments from the stress of conforming to the leader or group’s expectations  i was “cut off” by more religious family members  
  total  29.118 2.564 1.941 1.447 1.380 1.115  factor  mts id ev cl hgi gd  47.735 4.204 3.182 2.372 2.262 1.828  % of variance  47.735 51.938 55.120 57.492 59.754 61.582  cumulative %  initial eigenvalues  appendix c: eigenvalues for exploratory factor analysis  28.697 2.133 1.541 1.079 0.997 0.714  total 47.044 3.496 2.527 1.768 1.634 1.171  % of variance 47.044 50.541 53.067 54.836 56.470 57.641  cumulative %  extraction sums of squared loadings  9.354 8.324 7.619 4.728 2.867 2.269  total  15.334 13.646 12.491 7.750 4.701 3.719  % of variance  15.334 28.980 41.471 49.221 53.922 57.641  cumulative %  rotation sums of squared loadings  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  503  
  504  journal for the scientific study of religion  appendix d: full demographic information  variable gender  cisgender male cisgender female transgender male transgender female other prefer not to say sexual orientation straight gay/lesbian bisexual asexual queer don’t know race white/european american hispanic/latino origin black/african american asian american indian/alaska native native hawaiian/pacific islander other raised in a christian yes home? no catholic denomination or group typea charismatic/pentecostal baptist mainline nondenominational orthodox christian mormon christian church other than above evangelistic/missions organization college christian organization christian youth organization christian media company christian school/university christian political/activist group local bible study/small group christian group other than above  frequency % mean range st. dev. 1320 1635 8 12 49 36 2626 102 174 44 67 51 2786 73 51 47 7 4 92 2795  41 50.7 0.2 0.4 1.5 1.1 81.5 3.2 5.4 1.4 2.1 1.6 86.5 2.3 1.6 1.5 0.2 0.1 2.9 86.7  266 118  8.3 3.7  448 585 316 751 11 130 301  13.9 18.2 9.8 23.3 0.3 4 9.3  110  3.4  55 15 8 124 3 23 49  1.7 0.5 0.2 3.8 0.1 0.7 1.5  
  505  development of the spiritual harm and abuse scale  religious identity  age number of progressive christian podcasts listened to weekly racial makeup of church’s congregation where participant experienced greatest incidence of negative religious experiences  racial makeup of church’s leadership where participant experienced greatest incidence of negative religious experiences  gender makeup of church’s congregation where participant experienced greatest incidence of negative religious experiences  protestant catholic mormon orthodox christian other religious tradition atheist agnostic nothing in particular  1833 66 57 79 51 128 325 518  56.9 2 1.8 2.5 1.6 4 10.1 16.1 39.5 1.48  predominantly white  2632  86.5  mixed race predominantly people of color predominantly white  356 54 2807  11.7 1.8 92.2  mixed race predominantly people of color all male  184 53 1254  6 1.7 41.1  mostly male mixed gender mostly female all female  1129 639 24 3  37 21 0.8 0.1  18–88 0–30  12.72 2.32  
  506  journal for the scientific study of religion  self-reported involvement in that church/group personal feelings about the bible  theological self-description a  “very involved” strongly disagree to strongly agree “the bible is the word of god and to be taken literally, word for word” “the bible is the inspired word of god but not everything should be taken literally, word for word” “the bible is an ancient book of fables, legends, history and moral precepts recorded by man” very conservative to very liberal  174  5.7  2011  65.8  870  28.5  5.54  1–7  1.99  4.49  1–7  1.55  denotes denomination or christian group type where respondent experienced the greatest incidence of negative religious experience.  
  copyright of journal for the scientific study of religion is the property of wiley-blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. however, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.  
       


title_index: rems_packet_2016
full_text_index:
       racial and ethnic microaggressions scale (rems)  kevin l. nadal, ph.d. before the rems is copied, distributed, or used, permission must be obtained from its author for more information about the rems, please read: nadal, k. l. (2011). the racial and ethnic microaggressions scale (rems): construction, reliability, and validity. journal of counseling psychology, 58(4), 470–480.  kevin l. nadal, ph.d. professor of psychology john jay college of criminal justice city university of new york 524 w. 59th street new york, ny 10019 (212) 237-8795 knadal@jjay.cuny.edu  i would like to send a very special thank you to katie griffin and yinglee wong for assisting in the construction of this scale. i’d also like to recognize my other research team members including sahran hamit, marie-anne issa, jayleen leon, vanessa meterko, michael tobio, vivian vargas, and michelle wideman for their contributions as well.  
  racial and ethnic microaggressions scale (rems) kevin l. nadal, ph.d. john jay college of criminal justice- city university of new york instructions: think about your experiences with race. please read each item and think of how many times this event has happened to you in the past six months. 0 i did not experience this event. 1 i experienced this event 1 time in the past six months. 2 i experienced this event 2 times in the past six months. 3 i experienced this event 3 times in the past six months. 4 i experienced this event 4 times in the past six months. 5 i experienced this event 5 or more times. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.  i was ignored at school or at work because of my race. someone’s body language showed they were scared of me, because of my race. someone assumed that i spoke a language other than english. i was told that i should not complain about race. someone assumed that i grew up in a particular neighborhood because of my race. someone avoided walking near me on the street because of my race. someone told me that she or he was colorblind. someone avoided sitting next to me in a public space (e.g., restaurants, movie theaters, subways, buses) because of my race. 9. someone assumed that i would not be intelligent because of my race. 10. i was told that i complain about race too much. 11. i received substandard service in stores compared to customers of other racial groups. 12. i observed people of my race in prominent positions at my workplace or school. 13. someone wanted to date me only because of my race. 14. i was told that people of all racial groups experience the same obstacles. 15. my opinion was overlooked in a group discussion because of my race. 16. someone assumed that my work would be inferior to people of other racial groups. 17. someone acted surprised at my scholastic or professional success because of my race. 18. i observed that people of my race were the ceos of major corporations. 19. i observed people of my race portrayed positively on television. 20. someone did not believe me when i told them i was born in the us. 21. someone assumed that i would not be educated because of my race. 22. someone told me that i was “articulate” after she/he assumed i wouldn’t be. 23. someone told me that all people in my racial group are all the same. 24. i observed people of my race portrayed positively in magazines. 25. an employer or co-worker was unfriendly or unwelcoming toward me because of my race. 26. i was told that people of color do not experience racism anymore. 27. someone told me that they “don’t see color.” 28. i read popular books or magazines in which a majority of contributions featured people from my racial group.  
  29. someone asked me to teach them words in my “native language.” 30. someone told me that they do not see race. 31. someone clenched her/his purse or wallet upon seeing me because of my race. 32. someone assumed that i would have a lower education because of my race. 33. someone of a different racial group has stated that there is no difference between the two of us. 34. someone assumed that i would physically hurt them because of my race. 35. someone assumed that i ate foods associated with my race/culture every day. 36. someone assumed that i held a lower paying job because of my race. 37. i observed people of my race portrayed positively in movies. 38. someone assumed that i was poor because of my race. 39. someone told me that people should not think about race anymore. 40. someone avoided eye contact with me because of my race. 41. i observed that someone of my race is a government official in my state 42. someone told me that all people in my racial group look alike. 43. someone objectified one of my physical features because of my race. 44. an employer or co-worker treated me differently than white co-workers. 45. someone assumed that i speak similar languages to other people in my race.  
  racial and ethnic microaggressions scale (rems) kevin l. nadal, ph.d. john jay college of criminal justice- city university of new york 1. to calculate the rems total score: a. b. c.  convert items 12, 18, 19, 24, 28, 37, 41 into inverse scores. (e.g., if “5” is marked, convert to “1.” if “4” is marked, convert to “2,” etc.). including the converted scores, add all scores for all 45 items for the total score. divide the total score by 45 to obtain the scale score.  2. to calculate the rems subscale scores: a.  assumptions of inferiority subscale: add items #s 5, 9, 17, 21, 22, 32, 36, 38 divide the total by 8 to obtain the subscale score.  b.  second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality subscale: add items #s 2, 6, 8, 11, 31, 34, 40 divide the total by 7 to obtain the subscale score.  c.  microinvalidations subscale: add items #s 4, 7, 10, 14, 26, 27, 30, 33, 39 divide the total by 9 to obtain the subscale score.  d.  exoticization and assumptions of similarity subscale: add items #s 3, 13, 20, 23, 29, 35, 42, 43, 45 divide the total by 9 to obtain the scale score.  e.  environmental microaggressions subscale: add items #s 12, 18, 19, 24, 28, 37, 41 divide the total by 7 to obtain the scale score.  f.  workplace and school microaggressions subscale: add items #s 1, 15, 16, 25, 44 divide the total by 7 to obtain the scale score.  
  racial and ethnic microaggressions scale (rems) psychometric properties pilot study consisted of participants (n 506) from the following racial groups: asian americans (n 157), latino/a americans (n 131), black/african americans (n 80), white/european americans (n 63), multiracial/multiethnic persons (n 48), others (n 25), not reported (n 2). all racial groups (n 506) rems total scale (α .928) (m 1.6702, sd .543) subscale 1: assumptions of inferiority (α .894, m 1.4052, sd .754) subscale 2: second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality (α .883, m 1.2981, sd .668) subscale 3: microinvalidations (α .888, m 1.5249, sd .780) subscale 4: exoticization and assumptions of similarity (α .852, m 1.6573, sd .883) subscale 5: environmental microaggressions (α .850, m 3.205, sd .870) subscale 6: workplace and school microaggressions (α .850, m 1.2894, sd .691) asian americans (n 157) rems total scale (α .911) (m 1.5426, sd .454) rems assumptions of inferiority (α .857, m 1.2190, sd .628) rems second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality (α .835, m 1.1658, sd .501) rems microinvalidations (α .886, m 1.3836, sd .795) rems exoticization and assumptions of similarity (α .806, m 1.6245, sd .860) rems environmental microaggressions (α .821, m 3.4341, sd .724) rems workplace and school microaggressions (α .817, m 1.26, sd .669) latinos (n 135) rems total scale (α .938) (m 1.7647, sd .558) rems assumptions of inferiority (α .899, m 1.5330, sd .823) rems second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality (α .897, m 1.3118, sd .729) rems microinvalidations (α .832, m 1.5556, sd .723) rems exoticization and assumptions of similarity (α .832, m 1.8413, sd .949) rems environmental microaggressions (α .799, m 3.2349, sd .798) rems workplace and school microaggressions (α .874, m 1.2429, sd .662) african americans (n 80) rems total scale (α .936) (m 1.7766, sd .565) rems assumptions of inferiority (α .932, m 1.6419, sd .880) rems second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality (α .895, m 1.5676, sd .800) rems microinvalidations (α .895, m 1.7793, sd .830) rems exoticization and assumptions of similarity. (α 910, m 1.61, .896) rems environmental microaggressions (α .866, m 2.94, sd .919) rems workplace and school microaggressions (α .853, m 1.4459, sd .719) multiracial (n 48) rems total scale (α .929) (m 1.6327, sd .518) rems assumptions of inferiority (α .725, m 1.2772, sd .629) rems second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality (α .896, m 1.2826, sd .707) rems microinvalidations (α .951, m 1.3986, sd .827) rems exoticization and assumptions of similarity (α .842, m 1.3454, sd .756) rems environmental microaggressions (α .771, m 3.4082, sd .768) rems workplace and school microaggressions (α .933, m 1.3652, sd .88975) whites (n 63) rems total scale (α .844) (m 1.5651, sd .543) rems assumptions of inferiority (α .741, m 1.1853, sd .454) rems second-class citizen and assumptions of criminality (α .810, m 1.1505, sd .450) rems microinvalidations (α .813, m 1.3889, sd .54144) rems exoticization and assumptions of similarity (α .836, m 1.4861, sd .710) rems environmental microaggressions (α .886, m 2.754, sd 1.16) rems workplace and school microaggressions (α .214, m 1.1143, sd .321)  
  validity: the rems-total has been significantly correlated with the racism and life experiences scale- brief version (rales-b) (r .425, n 376, p .001). subscale correlations are as follows:  rems total rems subscale 1: assumptions of inferiority rems subscale 2: second-class citizen and assumptions of c i i subscale lit rems 3: microinvalidations rems subscale 4: exoticization and assumptions of similarity rems subscale 5: environmental microaggressions rems subscale 6: workplace and school microaggressions correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)  rales-b total  rales-b individual  rales-b group  .425** .402** .379** .396** .221** .097 .436**  .402** .357** .375** .411** .203** .080 .455**  .327** .370** .293** .290** .235** .094 .311**  
       


secondary_title_index: the oxford handbook of psychology and spirituality
title_index: the numinous motivation inventory
full_text_index:
       see discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377756051  the numinous motivation inventory: a second-generation measure of spirituality chapter · january 2024 doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190905538.013.11  citations  reads  3  173  1 author: ralph l piedmont center for professional studies 190 publications 7,881 citations see profile  all content following this page was uploaded by ralph l piedmont on 01 february 2024. the user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c h a p t e r  c11  11   he numinous motivation inventory: t a second- generation measure of spirituality  ralph l. piedmont  abstract over the past 25 years, i have been engaged in a program of research aimed at determining whether an empirically sustainable definition of the numinous could be obtained. the first step in this process was the development of an empirical model for establishing the viability of a numinous construct. from there, this epistemology was developed in light of an ontological model i created which outlined the theoretical origins, function, and expression of numinous constructs in our mental life. this ontological model gives direction and focus to the development of explicit measures of the numinous. the numinous motivation inventory (nmi) benefits from these two developments and represents a second- generation measure of numinous functioning. the purpose of this chapter is to present the conceptual foundations and empirical development of the nmi. its psychometric integrity and empirical predictiveness demonstrates its value over a previous generation measure. the value of the numinous, as operationalized through the nmi, is outlined and its potential for expanding the field discussed. key words: spiritual assessment, psychology of religion and spirituality, big 5 and spirituality, the numinous, mental health  c11p1  measurement is an essential aspect of all scientific endeavors. being able to accurately assess the phenomenon of interest is foundational to the testing of relevant models, assessment of the trait in individuals, and documenting the ultimate utility of the construct in the mental life of people. measures operationalize and quantify constructs and provide the venue through which the scientific process can move forward. the psychology of religion and spirituality (prs) has never suffered from a lack of measures (see hill & hood, 1999), and the plethora of instruments is a testimony to the interest assigned to this area by researchers. however, the field has its share of issues and limitations, including a lack of an organizing definition that can integrate findings across studies and measures (gorsuch, 1984) and weaknesses in construction techniques (kapuscinski & masters, 2010). nonetheless, the diversity of scales supports a wide- ranging scientific enterprise. the purpose of this chapter is to introduce the numinous motivation inventory (nmi), a new instrument that capitalizes  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 263  263  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p2  on recent theoretical and empirical developments in the field. rather than just another measure in a broad inventory of scales, the nmi is considered to be a second- generation scale, one that builds on advances already made in the field. this chapter will accomplish three things. first, it will overview research using the assessment of spirituality and religious sentiments (aspires; piedmont 2010, 2012) scale, a trait- based measure of religious and spiritual motivations based off of the five- factor model (ffm) of personality (digman, 1990; mccrae, 2010; mccrae & costa, 1997; mccrae & john, 1992). the aspires represents the first- generation measure of the numinous. second, working from the results of this research, an ontological model detailing the psychological origins, importance, and motivations inherent to spiritual functioning is presented. finally, the nmi’s development and validation data are presented to document how and why this measure represents a second- generation scale. the excitement around this measure is that it begins to demonstrate a unified empirical direction the field can move toward in order to create a cumulative database of findings.  c11s1  overview  c11p3  building on more than 25 years of research experience with the aspires scale (piedmont, 2010), much has been learned about the psychological nature of spiritual and religious motivations (or what i will refer to as the numinous). originally, the aspires was developed to assess numinous qualities as trait- based motivational constructs (see piedmont, 2010, for an overview of the development of this scale). this approach identified several important empirical requirements about what a spirituality scale would need to represent in order to be considered a viable, distinct psychological construct. these requirements included (see piedmont & wilkins, 2020, for a review of all nine empirical criteria):  c11p4  1. spirituality would need to be understood as completely psychological in nature, so it would be independent of any theological/ spiritual/ denominational influence. 2. spirituality would be understood as a universal, individual- differences construct appropriate for understanding all individuals, regardless of faith status, denominational membership, and cultural worldview. 3. spirituality would be a trait- based construct that could be examined, understood, and validated in a manner consistent with other trait- based constructs 4. spirituality is understood as an intrinsic motivation that drives, directs, and selects behavior. as such it would be measurable across different information sources (e.g., self- report and observer ratings) and predict a wide range of life outcomes. 5. spirituality would represent a unique, independent dimension of personality that does not overlap with the domains of the ffm of personality and thus would provide incremental validity in predicting relevant outcomes.  c11p5  c11p6 c11p7  c11p8  264  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 264  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p9  6. as a basic source of motivation, spirituality would evidence a causal predictive influence on psychosocial outcomes that is independent of other personality motivations.  c11p10  a large literature has accrued that supports the validity of these assumptions (e.g., fox & piedmont, 2020; piedmont et al., 2020; piedmont & wilkins, 2020). the aspires was found to be independent of the ffm domains; generalizes across cultures, languages, and religious denominations; evidences cross- observer convergence; incrementally predicts, over the ffm, a wide range of salient psychosocial outcomes; and has been shown to have a causal influence on one’s psychological system (piedmont et al., 2009). the empirical robustness of the aspires scales is one reason for its tremendous success in both research and clinical contexts. it is the only scale with a validated observer rater form, and both long and short versions. one of the important contributions of the aspires is its representation of spirituality as a sixth dimension of personality. by being a well- defined empirical construct, the dimensions of the aspires clearly outlined what qualities can be considered “spiritual” and which qualities should not be considered “spiritual” in nature. such empirical parsing provides greater clarity and interpretative depth to the domain of numinous motivations. a focused, clearly defined understanding of what the numinous is allows for greater predictive precision and enhanced clinical insight. research using the aspires has demonstrated its value in accomplishing these tasks, which in turn has moved the field forward (e.g., griffiths et al., 2006; piedmont, 2004). the nmi stands on the shoulders of the empirical accomplishments of the aspires and aims to enhance the field’s ability to accurately assess the essential numinous motivations of the individual. the nmi takes a more proactive approach to identifying and measuring important numinous dimensions. the instrument developed out of a psychological ontology of spirituality that i developed (piedmont, 2015; piedmont & wilkins, 2020). the aspires project was inherently exploratory, attempting to identify and empirically bootstrap a numinous dimension that would generalize across denominations. based on what was learned, the nmi project was more confirmatory in nature; it sought to confirm the value of predefined numinous constructs, identified by the results from the aspires and enhanced by theoretical considerations from philosophers and theologians. the goal was to identify a set of higher- order numinous constructs that would evidence better predictive validity over the aspires scales. ultimately, the results from the nmi will be used to upgrade and improve the aspires scales.  c11p11  c11p12  c11s2  background of nmi project  c11p13  the development of the aspires represented an effort to determine if spiritual and religious constructs could be developed from a trait perspective. the big question to be answered at that time was, “what spiritual and religious constructs should be assessed?” given the assumptions guiding the development of the aspires (as indicated above), it  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 265  265  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p14  c11p15  was important that all constructs would need to be independent of any specific theological or denominational perspective and also provide predictive value over and above the personality factors in the ffm. with little consensus at the time regarding how to define spirituality, care needed to be exercised in selecting potential dimensions. also, it was clear that theological and metaphysical concepts permeated many discussions, even scientific ones, about the nature and role of spirituality. this was evidenced by critiques of assessment scales of the time: many reflected a main- line protestant orientation in their items (gorsuch, 1984). while such a bias created many significant limitations in the applicability of such scales to various populations, it could not be denied that religious perspectives were important and should be considered if one was interested in identifying an ecologically valid spiritual perspective. religion and the many wisdom traditions provide very rich and engaging expressions of transcendence and humanity’s ultimate nature. these insights and perspectives contrasted starkly with the drive- reduction, mechanistic models that dominate the social sciences. the original research with the aspires needed to walk a fine line. on the one hand, it wished to engage the wisdom traditions and explore the insights and understandings that they have acquired. but, the final goal was to harvest these ideas in a manner that stripped them of their metaphysical qualities and stressed their empirical properties. the major concern was whether such a transformation would render the resulting constructs useless and of little value. when removing the role of “grace,” “spirit,” “god,” and “soul,” among other concepts, from an understanding of what spirituality represents, would what was left be devoid of any useful psychological value? while it was clear that such a processed spiritual construct may have little relevance for theologians, it was hoped that there would still be something of psychological value. given the focus on empirical methods, such a determination would be easily accomplished. as a result, our fundamental question has always been, “what are those internal psychological qualities that make religion and spirituality so important to us?” a second issue related to the selection of the relevant spiritual constructs. which ones should be employed? how should they be identified? what criteria should be used? given the heavy christian bias and the need to generate universal constructs, it was clear that a direct appeal to any one theological or denominational tradition would be insufficient. in order to overcome this problem, the decision was made to create a multifaith group of theological experts from a variety of religious traditions (piedmont & wilkins, 2020, provides a more detailed exposition of this process). a group of 10 individuals representing a variety of christian backgrounds (e.g., catholic, lutheran, baptist, and quaker), judaism, and hinduism, both clergy and lay, were gathered to discuss spirituality. the aim of the focus group was to have the participants identify those spiritual qualities that are held in common across their various religious and theological traditions. once the group began to identify these seemingly “universal” qualities, they were asked to write statements that could be used to assess these qualities in others. at the end of the session,  266  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 266  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p16  c11p17  c11p18  several dimensions were identified, and items acquired to assess them. these items, along with others i developed, were then given to a large sample along with measures of the ffm (piedmont, 1999). each of these items was examined using a predetermined empirical procedure that accepted items only if they were found to be independent of the ffm domains. these items were then factor- analyzed and three correlated dimensions emerged: prayer fulfillment represented the ability of an individual to create an internal, personal space that allowed them to connect with some larger, transcendent reality; universality reflected an understanding that life was unfolding in a meaningful, logical way and that all of life is bound together in this process; and connectedness assessed the extent to which an individual created and maintained relationships with others (living and dead) across communities both close (e.g., family) and far (e.g., humanity). these three factors could be contained by a single, larger dimension that was labeled spiritual transcendence (see piedmont, 2010, 2012). as the research literature on the aspires shows, this was a successful methodology for identifying a universal trait dimension. but, ultimately, this project was only exploratory in nature. it sought out a theologically diverse pool of individuals to provide guidance and direction to the ultimate selection of qualities to be assessed. there were no a priori assumptions or expectations to include any type of content. what emerged was simply a consequence of statistical analyses. spiritual transcendence (st) proved to be a useful construct and helped bring order to a broad, not- well- organized field. the essential take- away result of research with the aspires was that spirituality can be conceptualized as a psychological construct independent of existing personality dimensions and does have significant predictive value for the social sciences. while the three facets of st should not be considered exhaustive of all spiritual constructs, the aspires was useful in identifying constructs that are and are not spiritual (e.g., piedmont et al., 2006). this is, perhaps, the most important outcome of work with the aspires: it provided a focus and direction for working with numinous constructs. it, in a way, mapped out the personological boundaries that define what is spiritual. such a framing provided a useful rubric for linking together a wide range of theory and data across diverse areas. it quickly became clear that aspects of terror management theory and fear of death, meaning- making and resilience, and existential crisis all shared features in common: they all addressed issues that defined a personological area that was linked to st. the aspires was a lens that focused and clarified our view of the numinous. would the clarity provided by this measure enable us to delve deeper into this content area? the answer is “yes” and the nmi is the result of our efforts to do exactly this. note on terminology: our efforts in this entire research process was to create a psychological measure of spirituality. the goal of this research was not to prove any theological or denominational perspective. rather, the intent was to identify a new dimension of personality functioning that would expand the social sciences’ view and understanding of  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 267  267  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p19  our mental lives. this endeavor has been, and is, all about psychology. as noted above, spirituality and theology are strongly intertwined concepts. it is difficult to separate the two because so much of how spirituality is understood has been shaped and defined by theology. this helps explain why so many scales are contaminated by specific theological perspectives. in fact, some (e.g., moberg, 2002) have argued that the only effective means of understanding spirituality is to do so from the perspective of each religious denomination. there is no one single spiritual motivation; rather a plethora of spiritualities exist, each with its own nuances and dynamics. clearly, this is not my approach. i believe that in order to help distinguish between psychology and theology, new terms need to be used that are meaningful for the social sciences and do not lend themselves to theological parochialism. when discussing the psychological aspects of spirituality, i prefer to use the term “the numinous.” it is a useful term that has many advantages over current usage. first, the term has clear religious value. it was originally used by otto (1958) to reflect aspects of the mystical experience: the awe, wonder, emotional integration, and essential ineffability of encountering a divine reality. second, it is a term that has been used psychologically by erik erikson. the numinous represents one of the positive outcomes experienced at the first stage of psychosocial development: trust vs mistrust. for erikson, a child develops feelings of the numinous (awesome, hallowed) as a result of a mother’s care and reliable concern for the needs of her child. she promotes and supports her child’s beginning sense of self- identity while also supporting the child’s ability to transcend their fears of aloneness and separateness (erikson, 1977). this usage of the term reveals that our spirituality has its roots in the very beginning of our psychological lives and its presence influences all future development. finally, the term includes many different elements to it and underscores the reality that there are many different parts to our “spirituality.” therefore, the numinous represents a useful descriptive term for the domain of spiritual functioning: there are elements of transcendence, spirituality, religiousness (e.g., the prayers we say and the rituals we perform), and mysticism, among others, and the nmi will add another three qualities to this domain. the psychological pedigree of the term makes it more amenable to social scientists and does not, in such an obvious manner, involve any specific theological or metaphysical concepts. relying only on the terms “religiousness” and “spirituality” is too limiting and restrictive and does not do justice to the large literature that has identified so many numinous constructs (e.g., harris et al., 2018). as such, this term will be used to refer to all things spiritual.  c11s3  developing the ontological model underlying the nmi  c11p20  one of the most daunting challenges for the field has been to identify a consensual definition of what the numinous represents. this process has not produced any such concordance in the field (e.g., harris et al., 2018), and some even argue that this is an unattainable, and unnecessary, goal (e.g., barrett, 2017; oman, 2013; paloutzian & park, 2021). i have  268  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 268  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p21  c11p22  argued that this is a truly tragic reality for the field (piedmont, 2014). for if we cannot agree on what the object of our efforts is, how can we create a unified, cumulative database for the field (see hill et al., 2000)? one reason for the elusiveness of this goal is that the field has not developed a useful psychological ontology for spiritual dynamics. an ontology is a conceptual framework that outlines the origins, processes, and dynamics that surround the development and expression of numinous motivations. although spirituality is most commonly associated with religious traditions and theological models, very little has been done to discuss and outline the psychological underpinnings of these dynamics. where does the numinous find its origins within our mental system? is it an intrinsic quality that motivates us to seek broad, transcendent goals? is it an acquired sentiment, learned from our cultural heritage and upbringing? is the numinous a cultural script or does it represent a core sense of self that drives us through life? these are important questions for understanding the numinous. having such a model(s) helps to direct the scientific enterprise in this area. by having an ontological model, the field can have a direction for addressing key questions, such as why do we wish to study the numinous in the first place? what is its unique role in the psychic system? how does the numinous intersect with other aspects of our psychological world? answers to these questions provide the foundation for creating measures to capture these qualities. after all, without knowing why the numinous is important and what role it plays in our lives, then efforts at developing measures to assess these qualities becomes, at best, a hit- or- miss undertaking. the aspires was very useful in showing that the numinous could be understood as an organismic, motivational construct that drives, directs, and selects behavior. work with the aspires demonstrated that the numinous can be considered an independent dimension of personality, with useful incremental predictive validity. further, the numinous was shown to be strictly psychological in nature because scores on the aspires were found to be reliable and valid across, religious denominations (e.g., piedmont & leach, 2002; joshanloo, 2012), cultures (e.g., rican & janosova, 2010), and languages (e.g., piotrowski et al., 2021). clearly, the numinous is a universal motivation. with these data in hand, there was a need was for an ontological model that reflected these findings and also developed theoretical perspectives on the role and value of the numinous psychologically. as a result, i developed an ontological model that attempts to flesh out the value of the numinous for psychological work (piedmont, 2015; piedmont & wilkins, 2020). at the heart of my efforts was the work of paul tillich (1952), a theologian who takes a very psychological perspective to his work. in describing the ability of human beings to assert themselves and find personal resilience in a life that is known from the start to be finite and fleeting, tillich identified three important, inherent qualities that define our being: infinitude, worthiness, and meaning. to become fully human, we need to address these issues and concerns and find some type of accommodation with them. humans are the only species that knows from the beginning of our lives that we will someday die. knowing this, our spirituality can be found in our efforts to create meaning, coherence, and depth to the life we are leading. these three qualities are the issues we all  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 269  269  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p23  c11p24  need to address in order to find that sense of wholeness and value. our efforts in these areas can lead to successful outcomes which provide us with a sense of resilience, emotional integration, and personal well- being. less successful outcomes can serve to impair significantly our ability to relate to others, our communities, and ourselves. from the perspective of the nmi, the qualities of infinitude, meaning, and worthiness were viewed as essential motivational elements of our psychological world. it was hypothesized that these qualities were uniquely human motivations that define us as a species (piedmont, 2015; piedmont & wilkins, 2020). we are all concerned with the need to find personal durability for our own efforts (infinitude). we need to find ways to extend our lives beyond our lifetimes. whether this is through having children, being productive in our work (e.g., writing, creating, and inventing), or making other contributions (e.g., philanthropy and creating personal/ financial legacies), the goal is to create a lasting presence for ourselves in this world. meaning is another obvious aspect of who we are. we are a species that looks for and responds to patterns in nature. but more than this, we seek to create for ourselves a larger understanding of the universe and our place in it. we need to feel useful and productive, and we accomplish this by identifying a purpose, role, or value to our actions. finally, because of our need to create ultimate meaning, do we feel affirmation and support for the work we do, the lives we lead, from the universe as we understand it (worthiness)? despite our limitations, are we deemed acceptable and worthy? negotiating these motivations is at the heart of our humanity for tillich, and as such form the basis of our numinous lives. these three qualities are at the heart of the nmi. i saw these as essential motivations that drive our spiritual and religious actions. they also were portrayed as having the essential characteristics of a numinous variables: (a) they were universal to all people; (b) they defined our ultimate, human nature; (c) they represented the highest level of human motivation, unattached to the other dimensions of personality (e.g., ffm). given what was learned from the aspires, i developed definitions of these concepts that were closely related to the numinous as understood psychologically. these three qualities were defined as follows:  c11p25  infinitude vs. nonbeing the awareness of our mortality creates within us a drive to give substance and continuity to our lives. we seek to create some type of durability to our efforts; a legacy that will continue to reverberate into the future. we look to immortalize our identity. one way is through immortality, another is through creating security for ourselves— protection from threats to our being. the need to control, direct, and master events, processes, people, and so on gives rise to a sense of durability.  c11p27  meaning vs. chaos predictability is important to us. there needs to be patterns that we can rely on, interpret, and exploit to our benefit. we actively seek to create patterns on top of those that already exist. these patterns can be explicit, such as our own personal knowledge and wisdom  270  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 270  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  of life. they can also be implicit in that when we cannot explain, we hope that there are larger patterns operating that provide a meaning we cannot see. there needs to be purpose and direction to all things. although doubt is an important mechanism by which we are told to improve our meaning- making abilities, too much doubt can crumble our meaning structures. a life without meaning is a life not worth living.  c11p30  c11p31  c11p33  c11p34 c11p35  worthiness vs. condemnation although we recognize our own imperfections and failings, ultimately each of us assesses our worth and value within the entire universe as we conceive and understand it. this creation of ours exists as its own reality that calls on us to make a statement of our own worth and value. in return, we seek acceptance as being worthy. we seek acceptance from the totality of our entire sense of meaning, despite our own perceived unacceptability. there is security in feeling worthy; there is emptiness in feeling condemned. there are two very important implications for these motivations. first, these motivations arise from the core of our physical being: our neocortex. human beings have the most powerful brains on the planet, allowing us to dream and imagine. we are able to learn and create, shaping the planet to our desires and aspirations. humans are the only animals that are untethered from instinctual scripts. we are able to operate in almost unlimited ways, to move unfettered across environments, act in ways that seem to contradict the animal kingdom’s focus on survival. it is this brain power that creates a psychological space within us that is the home of our numinous motivations. thus, the numinous represents psychological qualities that uniquely define the human condition. these qualities, while working with our other “animal” instincts, are independent from them. the second implication of this ontology is that these qualities are inherent to our existence and orient us to the world we inhabit. as such, this internal space creates a readiness to experience and a willing to seek out transcendent- oriented events. this assumption frames the essential question the social sciences need to ask in studying the numinous, “what are those psychological qualities that make spirituality and religion so important to us?” empirical criteria for a spirituality measure with these definitions in hand, i assembled a group of graduate students who formed what came to be known as the numinous assessment group (nag). working from the above definitions and a basic set of items i wrote; the team began to create additional items to reflect each of these qualities. together, we strove to write both positively and negatively reflected items for each dimension. these items were iteratively tested in sequential subject groups. the following empirical criteria for keeping an item were applied: 1. items had to have low to zero correlation with markers of the ffm. 2. items had to have moderate correlations with the st scales from the aspires.  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 271  271  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  3. items that survived the first two criteria were then entered into a joint factor analysis with the st scale and markers of the ffm. items had to load either on the dimension containing the st scales, or on a factor that was independent of both the st scales and the ffm marker scales. 4. items remaining were then vetted to ensure that they did not contain any explicit reference to a theological or denominational position or contain language that reflected a more general western view of the transcendent (e.g., reference to a “god” or specific supreme being). 5. scales were balanced for acquiescent responding.  c11p36  c11p37  c11p38 c11p39  c11p40  overall, this process took four iterations where new items were written to replace those not meeting the above criteria and/ or impeding the recovery of a clear factor structure. a final set of 22 items was obtained that met all the above criteria. these items were then given to a large, nationally representative sample of adults to complete. also developed was a rater version of these scales. this version used the same items as the self- report with the substitution of the term “he/ she” for the term “i.” individuals in the final validation sample were asked to rate someone they knew on this version of the scale. the intention behind the development of this scale was to identify numinous variables with greater conceptual precision and empirical predictiveness than those dimensions already contained in the aspires. one characteristic of our research has been always to demonstrate the incremental predictive validity of our numinous constructs over the ffm dimensions. it is important that one can have confidence that the numinous variables are not merely stand- ins for other, already existing psychological constructs. for the nmi, we added another bar to cross: to demonstrate that the nmi dimensions evidence incremental predictive validity over both the ffm domains and the st facet scales. finding such evidence supports the claim that the nmi is a second- generation measure of the numinous. it benefits from the earlier empirical work which led to a better- informed theoretical orientation that culminated in an improved ability to identify, define, and measure the numinous. because the nmi only measures aspects of spirituality, combining the nmi with the aspires provides a comprehensive assessment of both the spiritual and religious aspects of the numinous.  c11s4  psychometric properties of the nmi  c11p41  the information presented in this section was obtained from a sample of 1,626 individuals. participants were mturk workers (an online, constructed community of individuals who will work on projects for a fee) who volunteered to complete this task and were compensated 1 for their efforts. these individuals were from all 50 states and ranged in age from 18 to 81 years. these individuals completed several scales as well as the self- and observer rating forms of the nmi. table 11.1 presents a description of the normative sample. more detailed information can be found in the technical manual (piedmont, 2017).  272  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 272  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11t1  table 11.1 sample characteristics for both the self- report and observer samples overall sample:  n 1626 ages: 18– 81  men 659 mean 37.08  women 959 mean 34.00  missing: 8  gender by age:  age category 18– 25 26– 45 46 mean age:  men 99 426 134 36.12  women 145 579 235 37.85  missing 7 1 0 23.00  ethnicity:  african american: american: arab: asian: caucasian: hispanic: hawaiian/ pacific islander: multiethnic: other:  117 12 2 113 1215 98  agnostic: atheist: baptist: buddhist: catholic: earth- based: episcopal: evangelical: hindu indigenous jewish  310 (19.1%) 181 (11.1%) 154 (9.5%) 28 (1.7%) 242 (14.9%) 8 (.5%) 14 (.9%) 50 (3.1%) 22 (1.4%) 2 (.1%) 22 (1.4%)  latter day saints: lutheran: methodist: muslim: pagan: pentecostal: presbyterian: spirit not religious: other christian: other faith tradition:  27 (1.7%) 33 (2.0%) 54 (3.3%) 18 (1.1%) 28 (1.7%) 34 (2.1%) 28 (1.7%)  rater gender: rater age:  men 863 range 15- 90  women 756 mean 37.85  missing 7 median 34  rater gender by age:  age category 18– 25 26– 45 46 mean age:  men 139 534 187 36.00  women 127 410 212 38.33  time known subject (months):  range 2 - 6000  mean 152.12 (12.68 years)  how well known:  1 “not at all”; 7 “very well’  mean 6.17  religious affiliation:  1 59 9  163 (10.0%) 188 (11.6%) 20 (1.2%)  missing 3 4 0 33.86  note. this table is reproduced with permission from piedmont (2017). no further reproductions may be made without the express consent of the author.  c11p42  as can be seen, the average age was approximately 37 years and subjects were predominantly caucasian. there were a variety of faith traditions, with most participants being christian. interestingly, the most numerous categories were for the atheist and agnostic groups, comprising close to 30% of the sample. participants were drawn from all  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 273  273  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  50 states. concerning their ratings, most knew their targets well (mean familiarity rating of 6.17 on a 7- point scale) and for a long period of time (m 12.68 years). c11s5 c11p43  c11p44  c11p45  c11p46  c11p47  normative data the nmi measures three correlated facets: infinitude, meaning, and worthiness. there are eight items on the infinitude scale (e.g., when i die, everything that i am will cease to exist (r), i believe this life is only one stage in a larger, eternal process), nine items on the worthiness scale (e.g., i value myself, i am unlovable (r)), and five items on the meaning scale (e.g., i am guided by my personal philosophy and/ or faith, as a human being i am the pinnacle of creation). detailed information concerning item content, normative values, and psychometric information can be obtained from the technical and interpretative manual (piedmont, 2017). items are rated from 1 “strongly disagree” to 5 “strongly agree.” items are counterbalanced to control for the effects of acquiescence. a 2(gender) by 3(age group: 18– 25, 26– 45, 46 ) multivariate analysis of variance (manova) was conducted using the three facet scales of the nmi as the dependent variables. a significant age effect (wilks lambda 0.952, multivariate f(6, 3220) 13.40, p 0.001) was found. univariate analyses indicated significant effects for all three of the nmi scales. post hoc (lsd) tests noted that scores significantly increased with age: each of the three age groups were significantly different from each other. an inspection of the group means also indicated rising mean scores from the younger to older group. a significant gender effect was also observed (wilks lambda 0.977, multivariate f(3,1610) 12.88, p 0.001). univariate analyses indicated significant effects for the infinitude and worthiness scales. an inspection of the group means indicated that women scored significantly higher than men in each instance. although not statistically significant, a similar mean- level pattern was found for meaning. no significant age by gender effects were noted. similar findings were obtained when the nmi total score was examined. significant age and gender effects emerged with scores significantly increasing with age and women scoring significantly higher than men. the presence of these significant age and gender effects demands that when scoring the nmi scales, it is necessary to compare scores by gender and age. it is recommended that the normative data provided in the manual be used to calculate t- scores. such a transformation can help one to determine how similar obtained scores are to those in this normative data set. it should be noted that the nmi also has an observer rating form. the need for such a version was supported by research using the aspires and based on the working assumption that numinous constructs represent broad- based aspects of personality that find clear expression in daily behavior. these constructs are sufficiently distinct and salient that observers can readily identify them. research has strongly supported this contention by demonstrating significant correlations between self- rated aspires scores and scores obtained from observers (piedmont, 1999; 2010). the magnitude of such convergence is like that found with the major personality dimensions of the ffm.  274  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 274  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p48  c11p49  c11p50  c11s6 c11p51  c11p52  as such, observer ratings can provide useful information about the numinous aspects of individuals. observer ratings can be utilized when working with couples, either for premarital evaluations or for marital therapy (see piedmont & rodgerson, 2017, for techniques for comparing self- and observer- ratings with couples). ratings would also be useful in medical contexts where individuals may not be able to provide their own assessment either due to age or physical debilitation. the manual provides normative information based on responses obtained from the rater data (piedmont, 2017). as with the self- report data, scores obtained from the rater version should be compared to normative values, with respect to age and gender of the person being rated. analyses of rating scores by age and gender revealed the same pattern of effects as observed with the self- report scores. thus, it is important that these scores be standardized as well. note that the normative values for the observer ratings are different from those obtained with self- reports. different types of raters will generate different types of score distributions. one should not use self- rated normative data for evaluating observer ratings. there are two important reasons that support the use of normed t- scores with nmi scales. first, examining overall mean level scores in a sample can indicate the extent to which that sample is consistent with the normative group’s standing on these same dimensions. this can give the user a sense of the representativeness of his/ her own sample. second, the use of t- scores enables direct comparisons across self and observer data. because scores are based on their own normative values, t- scores can be directly compared to one another. thus, it can be determined whether raters observe the same mean level of numinous drive in targets as the targets themselves. the absolute value of the difference between the scores can be an index of interobserver agreement, with smaller differences indicating more convergence. t- score differences of 15 or more points will indicate a significant difference in ratings. the level of agreement does have interpretative significance. factor structure self- reported scores from the 22 items of the nmi were subjected to a principal components analysis. three factors were expected to emerge from the data and the scree plot indicated that three factors were appropriate. three factors were extracted and obliquely rotated. table 11.2 presents the results. as can be seen, all items loaded on their intended dimensions, with no significant secondary loadings. an examination of the factor correlation matrix indicated that only factors 1 (infinitude) and 3 (meaning) were significantly correlated (r 0.52). thus, the nmi items evidenced the expected putative structure. a similar analysis was also performed using the observer scores from the nmi. in this analysis, the 22 items were subjected to a principal components analysis and three factors were extracted and obliquely rotated. in order to determine whether the above normative structure could be recovered, these results were then rotated using an orthogonal procrustean rotation. the above factor loadings were used as the target structure. then, congruence coefficients were obtained to determine the extent to which the observer  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 275  275  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  table 11.2 principal components analysis using an oblique rotation of the nmi self- report items  c11t2  nmi  i  w  m  i1  0.89  0.04  – 0.16  i2  0.91  0.04  – 0.01  i3  0.84  0.17  – 0.04  i4  0.92  0.04  – 0.06  i5  0.80  – 0.05  0.18  i6  0.75  – 0.08  0.16  i7  0.71  – 0.05  0.23  i8  0.59  – 0.07  0.31  w1  0.13  0.78  – 0.11  w2  0.01  0.81  0.01  w3  0.08  0.81  – 0.03  w4  – 0.04  0.83  – 0.01  w5  0.04  0.77  – 0.06  w6  0.01  0.82  – 0.00  w7  – 0.04  0.78  0.06  w8  0.04  0.80  0.03  w9  – 0.13  0.77  0.20  m1  – 0.03  0.08  0.81  m2  0.03  0.02  0.86  m3  0.05  – 0.13  0.81  m4  0.07  0.06  0.75  m5  0.08  0.07  0.54  note. n 1626. i infinitude; w worthiness; m meaning. loadings above 0.40 are in boldface. this table is reproduced with permission from piedmont (2017). no further reproductions may be made without the express consent of the author.  structure mirrored the above normative structure. the factor structure of the observer rating version converged significantly with that found with self- reports; congruence coefficients were very high (0.96, 1.00, 0.93, and 0.97, for infinitude, worthiness, meaning, and overall fit, respectively). c11s7 c11p53  internal consistency alpha reliability coefficients were calculated for scores obtained for each nmi scale in both the self- and observer- ratings. table 11.3 presents these values. as can be seen, all scales evidence high levels of internal consistency. these values indicate that items are capturing related concepts and with high- level precision.  276  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 276  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11t3  table 11.3 alpha reliabilities for the self- and observer versions of the nmi scale  self- report α  observer report α  infinitude worthiness meaning total score  0.94 0.93 0.85 0.92  0.91 0.88 0.81 0.90  n 1626. this table is reproduced with permission from piedmont (2017). no further reproductions may be made without the express consent of the author.  c11s8 c11p54  c11s9 c11p55  c11p56  validity information there are two important validity issues that need to be considered in evaluating the nmi. the first is to demonstrate that while the constructs captured by the nmi scales represent numinous/ existential issues (convergent validity), that these dimensions are not redundant with qualities already identified within the ffm personality domains (discriminant validity). the second issue is of greater value: to demonstrate that scores from the nmi predict important psychosocial outcomes over and above any associations with the five major personality dimensions (incremental validity). to be useful, it needs to be shown that information from the nmi will increase our predictive abilities over existing constructs. construct validity one manner of documenting the validity of a scale is to demonstrate that scores correlate with scores from other measures that assess similar constructs. as noted earlier, the numinous represents a broad content domain containing a variety of constructs. as such, nmi self- report scores should converge with scores obtained from other related measures. in this sample, participants completed several measures of spirituality and religiousness: the aspires, the mysticism scale, and the brief religious coping scale. nmi self- report scores were also correlated with measures of the ffm domains in an effort to examine discriminant validity. as noted earlier, numinous constructs represent personality dimensions that are independent of the ffm domains. table 11.4 presents patterns of association. as can be seen, the nmi scales of infinitude and meaning correlate strongly with the mysticism, aspires, and brief religious cope scales, with values ranging from r 0.20 to r 0.74. exceptions to this pattern are found with the negative coping scale and the religious crisis scale. values here are much lower. the worthiness scale has lower correlations with these outcome measures. however, worthiness has its largest associations with the negative religious coping and religious crisis scales. clearly, these measures are reflecting aspects of spiritual/ religious distress. these associations do provide evidence of convergent validity.  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 277  277  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  table 11.4 zero- order correlations between the nmi self- report scales and the aspires, mysticism, brief religious coping scale, and markers of the ffm personality domains  c11t4  outcome measure mysticism brief rcope- positive brief rcope- negative aspires prayer fulfillment universality connectedness total sts religious involvement religious crisis ffm personality emotional stability extraversion openness agreeableness conscientiousness  nmi scale infinitude  worthiness  meaning  0.46*** 0.59*** 0.09***  0.12*** 0.10*** – 0.31***  0.33*** 0.67*** 0.13***  0.74*** 0.60*** 0.29*** 0.74*** 0.63*** – 0.15***  0.21*** 0.31*** 0.16*** 0.28*** 0.17*** – 0.43***  0.71*** 0.40*** 0.20*** 0.63*** 0.72*** – 0.19***  0.10*** 0.10*** 0.12*** 0.26*** 0.10***  0.55*** 0.32*** 0.30*** 0.43*** 0.38***  0.12*** 0.11*** – 0.01 0.18*** 0.13***  n 1618. *** p 0.001. this table is reproduced with permission from piedmont (2017). no further reproductions may be made without the express consent of the author.  c11p57  correlations with the ffm marker scales provide evidence of discriminant validity. correlations between the infinitude and meaning scales all have associations less than r 0.30, indicating that these aspects of numinous functioning can be considered independent of the ffm personality domains (see piedmont, 1999). the worthiness scale evidences stronger associations with the ffm scales, especially the emotional stability (r 0.55) and agreeable (r 0.43) domains. the magnitude of these associations indicates the possibility of some substantive overlap between the two sets of constructs. worthiness does attempt to capture higher- level, existential distress in a manner that is not associated with personal feelings of negative affect. the current set of items does not crisply capture this distinction. it is therefore necessary to examine the incremental validity of this scale in predicting outcomes over and above these ffm personality dimensions. failure to demonstrate incremental predictiveness would render the scale useless for current purposes. however, if the worthiness scale can demonstrate significant predictive power over both the ffm and aspires st scales, then it would indicate that despite a lack of clear distinctiveness with negative affect, the scale does contain content that addresses aspects of existential dread that exist above and beyond an individual’s personal feelings of inadequacy and emotional vulnerability.  278  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 278  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11s10 c11p58  c11p59  c11t5  incremental validity participants in the normative sample completed a number of relevant psychosocial measures: a work satisfaction rating (based on a single likert- type rating); resilience (the brief resilience scale, developed by smith et al. [2008]); self- compassion (developed by neff [2003]); symptom experience (the depression anxiety stress scale 21, developed by lovibond and lovibond [1995]); the affect balance scale (abs; bradburn, 1969); and the single item rating of the delighted- terrible scale (andrews & withey, 1976). finally, the religious crisis scale from the aspires was used which captures aspects of existential dread and a the belief by individuals that god has rejected them as worthy people. this scale has been shown to represent an independent predictor of psychopathology (fox & piedmont, 2020; piedmont et al., 2007). each of the above scales served as the outcome variable in a series of hierarchical multiple regression analyses. at step 1 of each analysis, gender and age were entered. this was done because raw scores for the nmi scales were included and, as discussed earlier, these variables need to be controlled for when examining the effects of the nmi scales. at step 2 the ffm personality dimensions were entered as a block. at step 3 the st facet scales were entered simultaneously. finally, at step 4 the nmi scales were entered using a forward entry method. partial f- tests were conducted to determine whether a given block added a significant amount of additional explanatory variance in the outcomes measured. table 11.5 presents the results of these analyses.  table 11.5 incremental validity of the self- report nmi scales over demographic variables and the ffm model domains in predicting psychosocial outcomes outcome dass depression anxiety stress abs negative affect positive affect resilience self- compassion delighted- terrible work satisfaction religious crisis  demographic r2  ffm δr2  aspires δδr2  nmi δδδr2  nmi predictors  0.04** 0.05** 0.05**  0.43** 0.29** 0.47**  0.04** 0.01** 0.01** 0.03** 0.00 0.01** 0.00  0.31** 0.16** 0.32** 0.49** 0.33** 0.13** 0.14**  0.01** 0.01** 0.01** 0.01**  0.11** 0.04** 0.03** 0.01**  w w w w/ i  0.02** 0.00 0.01** 0.02** 0.01** 0.02**  0.04** 0.01** 0.02** 0.08** 0.02** 0.07**  w w w/ i w w/ m w/ m/ i  note. dass: depression/ anxiety/ stress scale; abs: affect balance scale. w worthiness, i infinitude, m meaning. ** p 0.01. this table is reproduced with permission from piedmont (2017). no further reproductions may be made without the express consent of the author.  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 279  279  03-jun-23 04:28:26  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p60  c11p61  c11p62  c11s11 c11p63  several points of interest emerge from table 11.5. first, the ffm dimensions were the single strongest predictors of each outcome. nevertheless, the numinous constructs provided significant incremental predictive power in every instance. second, the nmi scales were significant, unique predictors of every outcome variable. like the aspires, numinous aspects of personality captured by the nmi have a broad range of predictive appeal. as a single domain, it is exciting to see that this construct relates to both negative aspects of functioning (e.g., stress and anxiety) and positive elements (e.g., resilience and compassion). these findings demonstrate that the numinous cannot be considered as simply the religification of existing psychological constructs (e.g., buss, 2002; van wicklin, 1990). third, in this set of outcome variables, worthiness emerged as the most robust predictor, being relevant to all of these outcomes. despite the rather strong levels of overlap noted with the ffm scales in table 11.4, the scale continues to predict these outcomes even after its associations with the ffm domains is removed. fourth, elements of meaning and infinitude had a more selective association with these outcomes. this may be a function of the outcome measures selected for this study. future research will need to examine their utility with other outcomes. nonetheless, the involvement of these other nmi scales does make conceptual sense. meaning emerged with the work satisfaction variable, indicating that feeling satisfied with one’s vocational involvements is related to a sense of our own existential worthiness but also a function of our ability to create a larger sense of personal meaning. infinitude’s involvement is very interesting. for negative affect and religious crisis, infinitude has a positive predictive relationship, while for self- compassion it is negatively related. this suggests that taking an eternal perspective on our lives and work may place additional stress on our personal sense of self. only when we back away from such a perspective are we able to be self- nurturing and accepting. clearly, future research will need to focus on unpacking the meanings behind this pattern of associations. aspects of our numinous functioning seem to carry both positive and negative implications for our overall sense of well- being. finally, it is important to note that not only were the nmi scales incrementally significant over the aspires st scales, but the magnitude of contribution for the nmi scales was larger than the aspires’s contribution in every instance. these findings support the contention that the nmi is a second- generation measure of the numinous. building on the research findings from the aspires, we have been successful in developing a measure that more clearly assesses numinous functioning, resulting in a measure that more strongly predicts important psychosocial outcomes. it is hoped that the nmi will provide a more persuasive empirical demonstration of the value and importance of numinous constructs for understanding psychological functioning. causal role in psychological functioning the most important question to consider regarding the numinous is the role it plays in directing psychological functioning (piedmont, 2014; piedmont & wilkins, 2020).  280  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 280  03-jun-23 04:28:27  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p64  c11p65  there are two possible roles. the first, which is the least interesting, is that the numinous is an outcome from other psychological processes. for example, an individual may have a negative view of god, believing that god is punishing him or her, or that god is just not interested in the person. such a negative view may be a consequence of the person being depressed. a depressed person has a rather dark view of the world, the glass is just “half empty,” and the person feels worthless and of little value. the negative image of god fits cleanly into this larger dysphoric pattern. after receiving treatment for the depression, the person feels better emotionally, has a more upbeat attitude toward life, and also now sees god in a more positive manner. obviously, how the person perceived god was a consequence of their internal emotional state. as an outcome, numinous variables hold little value or interest for psychology. after all, the field is ultimately interested in identifying the antecedents of behavior. outcomes may be catalogued but only for their potential diagnostic value. the second answer to this question is of greater importance: numinous variables serve as inputs into our psychological system. in this model, the numinous represents a core set of motivations that directly impact our engagement with the world. the quality of our relationship to a transcendent reality has direct consequences for our psychological status. in a longitudinal study examining psychotherapeutic outcome among outpatient clients, cheston et al. (2003) demonstrated that changes in clients’ images of god were associated with counselor ratings of symptom experience. piedmont et al. (2007) demonstrated that the aspires scale of religious crisis (rc; a measure of worthiness) was a unique predictor of characterological impairment and that its impact on symptom experience was causally based. fox and piedmont (2020) demonstrated that rc represented a unique, causal predictor of emotional dysphoria independent of the predictive effects of neuroticism. while very few studies attempt to address this most important of questions, extant data do support the assumption that the quality of one’s relationship to a higher reality has important implications for symptom experience. as such, an evaluation of how the nmi’s scales relate to various psychosocial and symptom experience measures seems warranted. does the nmi evidence causal precedence on directing psychological functioning? structural equation modeling (sem) provides a useful analytical approach to answering this question. there are two values to this approach. first, sem allows for the a priori specification of a variety of complex models that postulate the contribution of multiple variables on selected outcomes. these proposed models present the causal role of the numinous from difference perspectives (e.g., as an input into functioning or as a consequence of other processes). the value of each model can be evaluated. the second approach, and perhaps most valuable role of sem, is the ability to compare the merits of these different models to each other. so, it is possible to determine whether the model postulating the numinous as a causal input better fits the data than models that specify it as a consequence of other variables. showing that models that specify the numinous as causal predictors are superior to models that describe  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 281  281  03-jun-23 04:28:27  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  es  e  o  numinous motivation inventory  47  c  nmi  a  out come model 1: nmi as unique predictor of dass  es  e  o  a  c  out come  nmi  model 2: nmi and dass as outputs of personality es  e  o  a  c  out come  nmi  model 3: nmi as an output of personality and dass  c11f4  c11p66  figure 11.1 proposed structural models linking the four nmi scales, personality, and psychological  outcomes note. es – emotional stability; e – extraversion; o – openness; a – agreeableness; c – conscientiousness; nmi – numinous motivation inventory. see text for names of the outcome variables.  the numinous as outcomes provides support for the significance of the numinous for psychological functioning. figure 11.1 outlines three causal models containing differing perspectives on the causal nature of the numinous. model 1 presents the numinous as a causal predictor of psychosocial outcomes independent of any contribution of the ffm personality domains. this is the preferred model because it shows the numinous as directly impacting functioning. model 2 specifies the numinous as an outcome of the ffm personality domains, being influenced in a manner similar to that found for the ffm’s impact on the other  282  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 282  03-jun-23 04:28:27  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p67  c11p68  c11t6  outcome variables. in this model, the correlation of the numinous with these other psychosocial outcomes is due to the fact that both constructs are consequences of the ffm personality domains. finally, model 3 sees the numinous as a consequence of both the ffm personality domains and the other psychosocial variables (labeled “outcome”). here the numinous is merely the outcome of other psychological processes. the numinous correlates with the outcomes because it is a consequent of their actions. four sem analyses were examined, using a set of four outcomes capturing diverse psychosocial constructs: work satisfaction, resilience; self- compassion; and symptom experience (the dass). for each of these outcomes, sem analyses were conducted testing the three models presented in figure 11.1. table 11.6 presents the results. table 11.6 presents two important pieces of information. first, model 3, which postulates the numinous as an outcome from all other variables provides the least fitting model across all the outcome variables. clearly, the numinous cannot be seen as merely an outcome from other psychological systems. second, although the remaining two models evidence some level of fit to the data, model 1, which hypothesizes the numinous as an independent causal force, evidences the best fit across all outcome variables. the superiority of this model is found across all the fit indices. it is clear that our numinous motivations impact our enjoyment and satisfaction with work involvements, a personal sense of resilience to stressful events, and an ability to be compassionate with ourselves and others.  table 11.6 results of the sem analyses examining the three putative causal models for each of the four outcome variables model  x2  df  x2/ n  rmsea  srmr  ifi  cfi  aic  work 1. 2. 3.  134.81 161.22 770.17  10 11 15  13.48 14.65 51.34  0.082 0.085 0.160  0.036 0.041 0.130  0.98 0.97 0.85  0.98 0.97 0.85  204.81 229.22 830.17  resilience 1. 2. 3.  124.56 141.51 675.96  10 11 15  12.46 12.86 45.06  0.078 0.080 0.150  0.034 0.035 0.120  0.98 0.98 0.89  0.98 0.98 0.89  194.56 209.51 735.96  compassion 1. 2. 3.  123.88 213.11 488.95  10 11 15  12.39 19.37 32.60  0.079 0.100 0.130  0.034 0.038 0.087  0.98 0.97 0.93  0.98 0.97 0.93  193.88 281.11 548.95  symptoms 1. 2. 3.  423.98 654.38 675.41  25 30 26  16.96 21.81 25.98  0.092 0.100 0.110  0.040 0.060 0.054  0.97 0.95 0.95  0.97 0.95 0.95  505.98 726.38 755.41  note. rmsea – root mean square error of approximation; srmr – standardized root mean square residual; ifi – incremental fit index; cfi – comparative fit index; aic – akaike information criterion.  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 283  283  03-jun-23 04:28:27  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p69  c11p70  of particular interest are the findings with symptom experience. in this model, unlike the others, only the nmi worthiness scale was used (because only this scale emerged as a significant, incremental predictor over personality and the aspires). what is significant about this finding is that it demonstrates that there may be a second psychological pathway that leads to emotional distress (see also piedmont et al., 2020 for another replication of this finding). it has already been shown in the research literature that the personality dimension of neuroticism (n) underlies the experience of most of the categories of distress that are represented in the current diagnostic manuals. syndromes related to trauma and stress, phobias, impulse disorders, and the personality disorders, among others, have been shown to be linked to high levels of this domain (miller et al., 2001; zonderman et al., 1993). it is easy to see the connection between affective lability and impaired psychological functioning. however, worthiness is independent of n yet is also significantly related to psychological impairment. future work needs to identify the underlying pathways by which this quality either creates fundamental vulnerabilities to experience impairment or serves as a direct predictor of pathology. how does worthiness operate in tandem with n in the expression of current psychological disorders? does the numinous underlie its own, unique domain of mental impairment that is currently uncharted? the numinous represents an aspect of psychological functioning not well studied by the social sciences. these qualities, as assessed by the nmi, represent qualities that are independent of the already existing personality dimensions of the ffm. thus, the possibility exists for an expansion of our understandings of human functioning. relatedly, now that this numinous quality can be assessed, there is the need to examine how this dimension may be contributing to emotional distress in some already existing disorders. for example, a large majority of military personnel have seen combat and are experiencing negative emotional consequences. while posttraumatic stress disorder (ptsd) is a common diagnosis for many military personnel, not all seem to respond to established treatments for the disorder. efforts at identifying potential mediating variables have identified some veterans as experiencing moral injury, a condition that phenotypically resembles ptsd symptomologically but with different underlying dynamics (see hodgson & carey, 2017). feeling that one has compromised ultimate ethical and moral values as a consequence of his/ her military involvements creates a larger existential dread within these sufferers as opposed to those with ptsd. perhaps a consideration of numinous dimensions may open up another modality for viewing and understanding individuals with moral injury. perhaps the high level of existential conflict and dread stems from a battle between one’s actions in the line of duty with one’s higher- order, transcendent- oriented motivations that drive us to find connection, nurturance, and constructive engagement with others. identifying the role of worthiness  284  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 284  03-jun-23 04:28:27  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p71  may open the door to identifying new dynamics that may help to define better the nosological issues involved in this disorder. aside from new areas of potential vulnerability, there is also the potential for the development of new intervention strategies that capture these qualities that may serve as useful approaches for therapy. piedmont and wilkins (2020) outline in more detail the numinous processes underlying infinitude, worthiness, and meaning and their role in the larger mental system. like any other personality dimension, these qualities have their positive and negative sides. when numinous motivations are not appropriately gratified, the results can be deep, existential crises that affect individuals at the core of their selfhood. as in the case of moral injury, effective treatment will need to address these motivations and attempt to create more positive outcomes for them. the development of techniques that can accomplish this will provide the field with a new set of tools for use in treating mental issues that seem to be unresponsive to current methods.  c11s12  final comments  c11p72  over the past 25 years, i have been involved in a program of research that focused on the development of an empirically sustainable definition of the numinous. at the heart of this approach was the ffm of personality, which provided the scaffolding necessary for identifying those personological qualities that were independent from already established constructs. this approach was selected for several reasons, including the fact that by embedding scale development within established psychological models we would avoid unnecessary content from theological and denomination- specific models to contaminate the process. it would also help to set appropriate boundaries around the new construct, determining what is and is not a numinous quality. the initial result from this process was the aspires (piedmont, 2010, 2012). this scale successfully operationalized a dimension that was universal and empirically relevant. the aspires provides a useful conceptualization of the numinous and its operating properties. further, the methods used to develop the scale can be very useful for the development of new numinous variables/ scales (e.g., macdonald, 2000). while an important advancement for the field, there was still more work to be done. given the success of the aspires, the need existed for developing a more elaborate model for understanding how this motivational source arose in the mental life of people and for outlining in more detail how it effects psychosocial functioning. such an ontological model helps to conceptually define the numinous and its inherent properties. this is important information for use in interpreting scores for numinous measures. the developed ontology briefly presented here (see piedmont & wilkins, 2020, for a more detailed overview) provides a statement of the underlying structure of these motivations and the source of their origins. the ontological model tells us why  c11p73  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 285  285  03-jun-23 04:28:27  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p74  c11p75  c11p76  the study of the numinous is important and the value it provides for expanding our psychological models of the mind. this ontology has two very important insights for professionals in this area. first, it is clear that religiousness and spirituality are qualities that are universal and unique to the human species. the numinous arises out of those neurological processes that bring us self- awareness and fuels our abilities to think in such broadly abstract and creative ways. this model argues that, unlike most other human characteristics studied by psychology, the numinous represents those psychological qualities that are defining of the human species (albright & ashbrook, 2001). the great significance of the numinous is that it represents the essential qualities of our humanity. as such, these dimensions play a foundational, core role in human development. as we noted at the beginning of this chapter, the numinous is with us from birth and operates even in the first months of life. its impact grows and becomes more salient as we age. the numinous holds our entire sense of selfhood and its place in the universe, as we construe it to be. as such, difficulties within the numinous motivations can create psychological problems that impair individuals at the very core of their sense of personhood. second, although the ontological model for the numinous provides great interpretive depth to our understanding of numinous constructs, it also provides the lens through which the field can focus its efforts for moving forward. the ontological model makes clear the basic question the social sciences needs to ask, “what are those psychological qualities that make religion and spirituality important to us?” although there is value in cataloguing the values and liabilities that membership in various religions or adherence to theological models may hold for people, ultimately, the interest should be directed toward understanding these basic, uniquely human qualities and how they are expressed in all areas of functioning. the model also outlines the underlying qualities associated with the various numinous motivations, making it easier to determine what is and what is not numinous in nature. this enables the creation of very specific boundaries for these constructs, ultimately promoting the development of more sophisticated and useful measures. the nmi benefits from the ontological model presented here. it was these definitions that served as the conceptual ground for the development of the scale itself. item development was focused and efficient. unlike the development of the aspires, which was more of an exploratory process aimed at determining whether an independent numinous construct could be developed, the nmi represents a more confirmatory approach. knowing what the numinous represents, it is easier to identify items that seem to capture specifically those qualities. complementing this conceptual foundation is the formalization of an epistemological process for empirically developing, testing, and applying numinous variables. the criteria listed above provide the goals that need to be attained empirically in order to justify the value of any putatively numinous construct. piedmont and wilkins (2020) provide step- by- step instructions for developing  286  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 286  03-jun-23 04:28:27  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p77  c11p78  c11p79  scales and give examples of the empirical criteria to be met. the nmi benefited from the development of these ideas. what the nmi shows is that the scale construction process can take on more focus and clarity in its efforts. gorsuch (1984, 1990) noted that although there are many different measures of spirituality and religiousness, they lack any useful organization; there was little sense of how these different measures all related to one another as well as to other psychological models. the nmi stands in stark contrast to most other measures in the field given both its conceptual and empirical pedigrees. while a relatively new instrument, it holds great promise for moving the field forward. this measure can be used as a reference point in the development of new scales; any measure that correlates with it and is independent of the domains of the ffm can be seen as a potentially useful measure. scales that do not meet this simple threshold should be avoided. the nmi can serve as a useful organizing praxis for scale development and evaluation. showing that scores on the nmi are universally relevant underscores the value of the numinous as an important psychological construct that addresses core psychological states. such a construct must be studied by psychology because its presence will ensure that a comprehensive assessment of functioning is attained. omitting the numinous leaves blank a very key element of our nature. the causal linkage of numinous constructs to important psychosocial outcomes demonstrates the value of this domain for understanding well- being and distress. it also outlines potentially new intervention strategies that may help improve therapeutic outcomes. the information presented here on the nmi should be interpreted as a first step in the process of creating cumulativeness in our field. the ontological model provides a foundation for understanding the numinous and for focusing our endeavors. it is a point of departure for future dialogues that seek to further develop and catalogue numinous motivations. the empirical criteria outlined in this chapter can provide the necessary scientific structure to research that will easily integrate findings within larger psychological models. this empirical foundation should give professionals confidence in the robustness of our constructs, showing them to be truly scientific and devoid of the types of metaphysical concepts and ideas that undermine our ability to widely permeate the field. having a second- generation measure of the numinous brings much value to the field as well as an anticipatory excitement about what the third generation will hold.  c11s13  acknowledgments  c11p80  i would like to thank dr. joanna hayward and rose piedmont for their comments on an earlier draft of this chapter. information about this study can be obtained from dr. ralph l. piedmont at the center for professional studies, 9603 deereco road, #5334, timonium, md 21094, usa or via e- mail: drralph@thecfps.com. further information  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 287  287  03-jun-23 04:28:27  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  about the nmi can be found at www.cente rfor prof essi onal stud ies.com. i wish to thank the members of the nag group for volunteering their time and talents to this project. the members of this team were alina lightchaser, angela liddie, anil gonsalves, barbara laymon, carol stewart, charles hinz, chun- shin taylor, cynthia canner, diane walsh, jessica haas, mario conliffe, marion toscano, martin burnham, nicole robertson, tak cho, tiffany anderson, william flythe, and yen le. as the old adage goes, “many hands make light work”; the concerted efforts of this group were able to accomplish much in a relatively short period of time. c11s14 c11p81 c11p82 c11p83 c11p84 c11p85 c11p86 c11p87 c11p88 c11p89 c11p90 c11p91 c11p92 c11p93 c11p94 c11p95 c11p96 c11p97 c11p98 c11p99 c11p100  references albright, c. r., & ashbrook, j. b. (2001). where god lives in the human brain. naperville, il: sourcebooks. andres, f. m., & withey, s. b. (1976). social indicators of well- being; american’s perceptions of life quality. plenum. barrett, j. l. (2017). could we advance the science of religion (better) without the concept “religion”? religion, brain, and behavior, 7, 282– 284. https:// doi.org/ 10.1080/ 21535 99x.2016.1249 926 bradburn, n. m. (1969). the structure of psychological well- being. aldine. buss, d. m. (2002). sex, marriage, and religion: what adaptive problems do religious phenomena solve? psychological inquiry, 13, 201– 203. cheston, s. e., piedmont, r. l., eanes, b., & lavin, l. p. (2003). changes in clients’ images of god over the course of outpatient therapy. counseling and values, 47, 96– 108. digman, j. m. (1990). personality structure: emergence of the five- factor model. annual review of psychology, 41, 417– 440. erikson, e. h. (1977). toys and reasons. w. w. norton. fox, j., & piedmont, r. l. (2020). religious crisis as an independent causal predictor of psychological distress: understanding the unique role of the numinous for intrapsychic functioning. religions, 11. doi:10.3390/ rel11070329. gorsuch, r. l. (1984). measurement: the boon and bane of investigating religion. american psychologist, 39, 228– 236. gorsuch, r. l. (1990). measurement in psychology of religion revisited. journal of psychology and christianity, 9, 82– 92. griffiths, r. r., richards, w. a., mccann, u., & jesse, r. (2006). psilocybin can occasion mystical- type experiences having substantial and sustained personal meaning and spiritual significance. psychopharmacology, 187, 268– 283. harris, k. a., howell, d. s., & spurgeon, d. w. (2018). faith concepts in psychology: three 30- year definitional content analyses. psychology of religion and spirituality, 10, 1– 29. hill, p. c., pargament, k. i., hood, r. w., jr., mccullough, m. e., swyers, j. p., larson, d. b., & zinnbauer, b. j. (2000). conceptualizing religion and spirituality: points of commonality, points of departure. journal for the theory of sociall behavior, 30, 51– 77. hodgson, t. j., & carey, l. b. (2017). moral injury and definitional clarity: betrayal, spirituality and the role of chaplains. journal of religion and health, 56, 1212– 1228. https:// doi.org/ 10.1007/ s10 943- 017- 0407- z joshanloo, m. (2012). investigation of the factor structure of spirituality and religiosity in iranian shiite university students. international journal of psychology, 47, 211– 221. kapuscinski, a. n., & masters, k. s. (2010). the current status of measures of spirituality: a critical review of scale development. psychology of religion and spirituality, 2, 191– 205. https:// doi.org/ 10.1037/ a0020 498 lovibond, s. h. & lovibond, p. f. (1995). manual for the depression anxiety stress scales (2nd ed.) psychology foundation. macdonald, t. a. (2000). spirituality: description, measurement, and relation to the five factor model of personality. journal of personality, 68, 153– 197. mccrae, r. r. (2010). the place of the ffm in personality research. psychological inquiry, 21, 57– 64.  288  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 288  03-jun-23 04:28:27  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p101 c11p102 c11p103 c11p104 c11p105 c11p106 c11p107 c11p108 c11p109 c11p110 c11p111 c11p112 c11p113 c11p114 c11p115 c11p116 c11p117 c11p118 c11p119 c11p120 c11p121 c11p122 c11p123  mccrae, r. r., & costa, p. t., jr. (1997). personality trait structure as a human universal. american psychologist, 52, 509– 516. https:// doi.org/ 10.1037/ 0003- 066x.52.5.509 mccrae, r. r., & john, o. p. (1992). an introduction to the five- factor model and its applications. journal of personality, 60, 175– 215. miller, j. d., lynam, d. r., widiger, t. a., & leukefeld, c. (2001). personality disorders as extreme variants of common personality dimensions: can the five- factor model adequately represent pathology? journal of personality, 69, 253– 276. moberg, d. o. (2002). assessing and measuring spiritualities: confronting dilemmas of universal and particular evaluative criteria. journal of adult development, 9, 47– 60. neff, k. (2003). the development and validation of a scale to measure self- compassion. self and identity, 2, 223– 250. https:// doi.org/ 10.1.80/ 152988 6039 0209 035 oman, d. (2013). defining religion and spirituality. in r. f. paloutzian & c. l. park (eds.), handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality (2nd ed., pp. 23– 47). guilford press. otto, r. (1958). the idea of the holy (j. w. harvey, trans.). oxford university press. piedmont, r. l. (1999). does spirituality represent the sixth factor of personality? spiritual transcendence and the five- factor model. journal of personality, 67, 985– 1013. piedmont, r. l. (2004). spiritual transcendence as a predictor of psychosocial outcome from an outpatient substance abuse program. psychology of addictive behaviors, 18, 213– 222. piedmont, r. l. (2010). assessment of spirituality and religious sentiments: technical manual (2nd ed.). author. piedmont, r. l. (2012). overview and development of a trait- based measure of numinous constructs: the assessment of spirituality and religious sentiments (aspires) scale. in l. miller (ed.), the oxford handbook of psychology of spirituality and consciousness (pp. 104– 122). oxford university press. piedmont, r. l. (2014). looking back and finding our way forward: an editorial call to action. psychology of religion and spirituality, 4, 265– 267. piedmont, r. l. (september, 2015). a psychological ontology for understanding spirituality [invited presentation]. conference on values and the meaning of life, poznan, poland. piedmont, r. l. (2017). numinous motivation inventory: preliminary technical manual. author. piedmont, r. l., ciarrocchi, j. w., dy- liacco, g. s., & williams, j. e. g. (2009). the empirical and conceptual value of the spiritual transcendence and religious involvement scales for personality research. psychology of religion and spirituality, 1, 162– 179. piedmont, r. l., fox, j., & toscano, m. e. (2020). spiritual crisis as a unique predictor of emotional and characterological impairment in atheists and agnostics: numinous motivations as universal psychological qualities. religions. https:// www.mdpi.com/ 2077- 1444/ 11/ 11/ 551/ pdf piedmont, r. l., hassinger, c. j., rhorer, j., sherman, m. f., sherman, n. c., & williams, j. e. g. (2007). the relations among spirituality and religiosity and axis ii functioning in two college samples. research in the social scientific study of religion, 18, 53– 73. piedmont, r. l., & leach, m. m. (2002). cross- cultural generalizability of the spiritual transcendence scale in india: spirituality as a universal aspect of human experience. american behavioral scientist, 45, 1886– 1899. piedmont, r. l., mapa, a. t., & williams, j. e. g. (2006). a factor analysis of the fetzer/ nia brief multidimensional measure of religiousness/ spirituality (mmrs). research in the social scientific study of religion, 17, 177– 196. piedmont, r. l., & rodgerson, t. e. (2017). cross- over analysis: using the ffm and the neo pi- 3 for assessing compatibility and conflict in couples. in t. widiger (ed.), oxford handbook of the five- factor model (pp. 423– 448). oxford university press. piedmont, r. l., & wilkins, t. a. (2020). understanding the psychological soul of spirituality: a guidebook to research and practice. new york, ny: routledge. piotrowski, j. p., zemojtel- piotrowska, m., piedmont, r. l., & baran, t. (2021). the assessment of spirituality and religious sentiments (aspires) scale: examining a spiritual transcendence nomological net in polish context. psychology of religion and spirituality, 13, 36– 45. http:// dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/ rel 0000 273 rican, p., & janosovo, p. (2010). spirituality as a basic aspect of personality: a cross- cultural verification of piedmont’s model. international journal of the psychology of religion, 20, 2– 13. https:// doi.org/ 10.1080/ 105086 1090 3418 053  the numinous motivation inve ntory  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 289  289  03-jun-23 04:28:27  
  oup uncorrected proof – firstproofs, sat jun 03 2023, newgen  c11p124 c11p125 c11p126 c11p127  smith, b.w., dalen, j., wiggins, k., tooley, e., christopher, p., & bernard, j. (2008). the brief resilience scale: assessing the ability to bounce back. international journal of behavioral medicine, 15, 194– 200. https:// doi.org.10.1080/ 107055 0080 2222 972 tillich, p. (1952). the courage to be (2nd ed.). yale university press. van wicklin, j. f. (1990). conceiving and measuring ways of being religious. journal of psychology and christianity, 9, 27– 40. zonderman, a. b., herbst, j. h., schmidt, jr., c., costa, jr., p. t., & mccrae, r. r. (1993). depressive symptoms as a nonspecific, graded risk for psychiatric diagnoses. journal of abnormal psychology, 102, 544– 552.  290  ralph l. piedmont  oxfordhb-9780190905538_p1_ch11.indd 290 view publication stats  03-jun-23 04:28:27  
       


