UC Irvine

Globally, India and the United States (US) represent the first and third most populous nations, respectively. India is the most populous South Asian country. In the US, Asian Indians constitute the largest South Asian group and are the second largest “Asian” group overall. These proportions indicate how important the sheer size of their population is—globally and domestically. Furthermore, Asian Indians’ status as a “model minority” in the US and their numerical majority in India contribute to the assumption that Asian Indians are impervious to discrimination. Consequently, psychological research on how Asian Indians experience, embody, and cope with discrimination is nearly non-existent. Specifically, three critical empirical gaps remain. First, no study has examined the form and patterning of everyday discrimination (i.e., routine unfair treatment) among Asian Indians across different cultural contexts in which they are the numerical majority (i.e., India) vs. minority (i.e., US). Second, the harmful health effects of everyday discrimination are well-documented in various racial/ethnic groups. However, only a few studies have examined its effects on psychological flourishing, which is a correlate ofmorbidity and early mortality. Last, few studies have identified culturally relevant putative protective factors to mitigate the adverse mental health effects of discrimination among Asian Indians.

Against this backdrop, my dissertation, grounded in socioecological and intersectional frameworks, pushes research on discrimination forward in three critical ways across two sets of interrelated studies employing data from two population-based surveys—the Mediators of Atherosclerosis in South Asians Living in America (MASALA) and Longitudinal Aging Study in India (LASI). Studies 1A and 1B aimed to establish the dimensionality of the Everyday Discrimination Scale and identify its correlates among Asian Indian adults in the US (MASALA) and in India (LASI), respectively. Findings revealed that a five-item, unidimensional version of the EDS is appropriate for capturing routine experiences of discrimination among Asian Indians in both the US and India. Findings also showed that everyday discrimination is socially patterned across individual-, health-, community-, and cultural characteristics as well as similarities and differences across cultural contexts. Studies 2A and 2B examined the association between everyday discrimination and mental health (MASALA; Study 2A) and subjective well-being (LASI; Study 2B) and tested whether religious engagement and spirituality offer protection against experiences of discrimination. Findings revealed that everyday discrimination was associated with worse subjective well-being. Religious engagement and spirituality differentially moderated the said associations in each context. Specifically, higher levels of religious engagement were associated with poorer mental health for those not reporting discrimination in the US. Higher levels of spirituality were associated with better subjective well-being among those who did and did not report discrimination in India. Collectively, these studies help to identify Asian Indians at the most significant risk for experiencing discrimination, its association with psychological outcomes, and culturally relevant sources of strength that may protect targets of discrimination against its harmful effects across cultural contexts where Asian Indians are the numerical majority (India) and minority (US).