Different sides of the same conversation: Black and White partners differ in perceptions of interaction content

A positive interracial interaction can create a foundation for friendships, improved intergroup attitudes and reduced prejudice. Recent research has demonstrated that what people talk about in important. Here, two studies expand the interaction content model of interracial interactions to reveal that Black and White Americans perceive interaction content in similar and different ways. As expected, Black and White participants evaluated conversation topics along the same three dimensions, but differed in their perceptions of specific conversation topics. These convergences and differences emerged for pre‐generated (Study 1) and self‐generated (Study 2) topics. Factor analyses revealed that conversation attributes similarly distilled to the predicted underlying content dimensions of intimacy, valence, and controversy for Black and White Americans. However, Black individuals found interaction content, in general, to be more controversial, race‐related, enjoyable, and predictable than White individuals. Although both groups found race‐related content more controversial, Black individuals were less bothered by discussing race and found race‐related topics to be more predictable and enjoyable to discuss. These findings supported the interaction content model which may provide a framework for future research on interracial interactions. We conclude with the importance of considering differences in perceptions of interaction content, as well as suggestions for how intergroup interaction research could benefit from systematically incorporating such content.     

“This is My Community”: Reproducing and Resisting Boundaries of Exclusion in Contested Public Spaces

The way that public space is structured has significant implications for identity, social interaction, and participation in society. For those experiencing homelessness, with no or limited private space, survival hinges on the accessibility and livability of public space. However, the increasing privatization of public space in the United States has contributed to the implementation of anti‐homeless ordinances in cities, restricting sitting, standing, panhandling, and sleeping in public. This study analyzes data from interviews with housed and unhoused community members, text from a local policy document, and ethnographic observations to explore how boundaries between “insiders” and “outsiders” are drawn in public space and mediated through individual discourse. Our findings suggest that boundaries of exclusion are constructed through dominant narratives that portray the unhoused as a threat to safety and economic vitality, thus justifying the need for regulation and punishment through the criminalization of homelessness. Yet, informants also demonstrate resistance to this narrative by discussing how criminalization of homelessness perpetuates dehumanization, violence, and economic inequality. Policy implications for the regulation of public space are discussed.     

Context Matters for Social-Emotional Learning: Examining Variation in Program Impact by Dimensions of School Climate

This paper examines whether three dimensions of school climate—leadership, accountability, and safety/respect—moderated the impacts of the INSIGHTS program on students’ social‐emotional, behavioral, and academic outcomes. Twenty‐two urban schools and N = 435 low‐income racial/ethnic minority students were enrolled in the study and received intervention services across the course of 2 years, in both kindergarten and first grade. Intervention effects on math and reading achievement were larger for students enrolled in schools with lower overall levels of leadership, accountability, and safety/respect at baseline. Program impacts on disruptive behaviors were greater in schools with lower levels of accountability at baseline; impacts on sustained attention were greater in schools with lower levels of safety/respect at baseline. Implications for Social‐Emotional Learning program implementation, replication, and scale‐up are discussed.     

Keeping It Going: Evidence of Long-Term Improvements After Implementation of the 1-2-3 Magic Parenting Program

This study builds upon a pilot evaluation of the 1-2-3 Magic Program (Bailey, van der Zwan, Phelan, &; Brooks, 2012 Bailey, E. L., van der Zwan, R., Phelan, T. W., &; Brooks, A. (2012). The 1–2-3 Magic Program: Implementation outcomes of an Australian pilot evaluation with school-aged children. Child &; Family Behavior Therapy, 34(1), 53–69. doi:10.1080/07317107.2012.654455[Taylor &; Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]), by investigating its long-term efficacy as a brief parenting intervention for families with a school-aged child. Twelve Australian families participated in a randomized controlled trial, assigned either to a wait-listed control group or to one that received immediate training. Consistent with the pilot evaluation, only families who had received training reported significant improvement in child and parenting behavior at an 8-week follow-up assessment. These improvements were maintained for 12-month posttraining, supporting the long-term efficacy of the 1-2-3 Magic Program for Australian families.     

Ethical Ambiguities in Participatory Action Research With Unauthorized Migrants

There is increased recognition of the importance of well-designed scholarship on how immigration status and policies impact migrants in the United States, including those who are unauthorized. Some researchers have looked to community-based and participatory methods to develop trust, place migrants’ voices at the forefront, and engage collaboratively in using research as a tool for social change. This article reviews three ethical ambiguities that emerged in the process of a series of participatory action research (PAR) projects with migrants in the United States, many of whom were unauthorized. Specifically, three themes are discussed: (a) the tension between the human desire to respond to injustices, and the challenges of doing so in ways that recognize one’s privilege and power as an outsider and supports the migrants’ agency and autonomy; (b) the complex definition, explanation, and dimensions of “risk”; and (c) the complexity of using a methodology (PAR) that prioritizes participants’ collective identity and community in the context of regulations that are designed primarily to protect individuals.