| Title |
Differences Between African Americans and Non-Hispanic Whites Utilization of Clergy for Counseling with Serious Personal Problems
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Race and Social Problems, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12552-017-9207-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda M. Chatters, Robert Joseph Taylor, Amanda Toler Woodward, Amy S. B. Bohnert, Tina L. Peterson, Brian E. Perron |
| Abstract |
There is a paradox in research on African Americans and non-Hispanic whites in the utilization of clergy. Research finds that African Americans have higher levels of religious service attendance and higher levels of contact with clergy. Research also finds that despite this, African Americans are less likely than non-Hispanic whites to seek out assistance from clergy for psychiatric disorders including depression and anxiety. The goal of this paper was to investigate race differences in the use of clergy for counseling for serious personal problems. It uses the National Survey of American Life. We find that non-Hispanic whites were more likely than African Americans to use clergy for a serious personal problem. The significant difference between African Americans and non-Hispanic whites appeared to be mediated by the fact that African Americans were more likely to have seen clergy in a religious setting and non-Hispanic whites were more likely to have seen clergy in other settings including hospitals. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 11 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 4 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 14 | 52% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 May 2017.
All research outputs
#3,834,977
of 23,298,349 outputs
Outputs from Race and Social Problems
#108
of 251 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,320
of 310,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Race and Social Problems
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,298,349 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 251 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,309 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.