Blog
About

15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    5
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Social support as a buffer for perceived unfair treatment among Filipino Americans: differences between San Francisco and Honolulu.

      American Journal of Public Health

      Adult, Asian Americans, psychology, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Hawaii, Health Status, Humans, Male, Philippines, ethnology, Prejudice, San Francisco, Social Support, Socioeconomic Factors

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We examined whether perceived unfair treatment is associated with health conditions, whether social support moderates this association, and whether such relationships differ by location. Data were derived from the 1998-1999 Filipino American Community Epidemiological Study, a cross-sectional investigation of 2241 Filipino Americans living in San Francisco and Honolulu. Negative binomial regression was used to examine potential 2-way and 3-way interactions between support, unfair treatment, and city (San Francisco vs Honolulu). Reports of unfair treatment were associated with increased illness after control for education, employment, acculturation, ethnic identity, negative life events, gender, and age. Furthermore, 2-way interactions were found between instrumental support and city, emotional support and city, and unfair treatment and city, and a 3-way interaction was shown between instrumental support, unfair treatment, and city. Local contexts may influence the types of treatment encountered by members of ethnic minority groups, as well as their resources. These factors in turn may have implications for health disparities and well-being.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          16507727
          10.2105/AJPH.2004.060442
          1470535

          Comments

          Comment on this article