Social science & medicine
-
Social science & medicine · Apr 2019
Quantifying intersectionality: An important advancement for health inequality research.
Intersectionality is a powerful theoretical framework that is useful in describing the lived experiences of people with multiple marginalized statuses. By focusing on power and domination (e.g., racism, sexism), and the ways in which they are inextricably linked and mutually constructing, researchers can better understand experiences of all people, not just those with one or more master statuses. This framework is valuable in understanding how discrimination relates to health and in attempts to reduce health disparities. ⋯ The pair of articles in this issue by Scheim and Bauer (2019), and Bauer and Scheim (2019), offer important new data collection instruments and data analytic strategies to advance our ability to measure discrimination intersectionally. When using these new tools, it is important to not lose track of the origins and historical underpinnings of intersectionality and to focus on the transformative goal of intersectionality to eradicate inequality.
-
Social science & medicine · Apr 2019
Methods for analytic intercategorical intersectionality in quantitative research: Discrimination as a mediator of health inequalities.
Intersectionality as a theoretical framework has gained prominence in qualitative research on social inequity. Intercategorical quantitative applications have focused primarily on describing health or social inequalities across intersectional groups, coded using cross-classified categories or interaction terms. This descriptive intersectionality omits consideration of the mediating processes (e.g., discrimination) through which intersectional positions impact outcome inequalities, which offer opportunities for intervention. ⋯ We describe actual and adjusted intersectional inequalities in psychological distress and decompose them to identify three component effects for each of 11 intersectional comparison groups (e.g., Indigenous SGM), versus the reference intersectional group that experienced the lowest levels of discrimination (white non-SGM). These reflect the expected inequality in outcome: 1) due to membership in the more discriminated-against group, if its members had experienced the same lower levels of discrimination as the reference intersection; 2) due to unequal levels of discrimination; and 3), due to unequal effects of discrimination. We present considerations for use and interpretation of these methods.