Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 283

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 62 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Intersectional Discrimination Index: Development and validation of measures of self-reported enacted and anticipated discrimination for intercategorical analysis

Open access
Scheim, Ayden I., Bauer, Greta R.·2019·Social Science & Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Although intersectional approaches have gained traction in population health research, quantitative discrimination and health studies have tended to focus on a single axis of discrimination (e.g., racism, homophobia). As few discrimination measures function across multiple social identities or positions, we developed the Intersectional Discrimination Index (InDI) for intercategorical intersectionality research, including measures of Anticipated (InDI-A), Day-to-Day (InDI-D), and Major (InDI-M) discrimination that do not require attribution to particular grounds. METHODS: We conducted a validity and reliability study with 2016 online survey panel data from Canada and the United States (n = 2583). Internal consistency and dimensionality of the InDI-A were evaluated with exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Construct validation included known-groups comparisons, associations with psychological distress, and convergence with existing discrimination measures. Test-retest reliability was examined in a subgroup (n = 150). RESULTS: We found support for use of the InDI-A as a unidimensional scale. As hypothesized, racial and sexual/gender minorities reported higher frequencies of all discrimination types (all p < 0.001), and discrimination varied across intersectional categories. Each InDI component was significantly positively associated with psychological distress after controlling for potential confounders. Frequency scores were strongly positively correlated with existing scales. Intraclass correlation coefficients for test-retest reliability of anticipated, lifetime day-to-day, and lifetime major discrimination ranged from 0.70 to 0.72. CONCLUSIONS: Final InDI measures include the 9-item InDI-A, 9-item InDI-D, and 13-item InDI-M, for which we have found initial evidence of construct validity and reliability. In combination with sociodemographic information, the InDI measures can be used to evaluate the role of discrimination as a mediator of intersectional health inequalities, and to monitor the prevalence and impacts of discrimination in heterogeneous populations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.12.016

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 62 references

Cited by

See all 283

Metadata

Authors
Scheim, A. I., & Bauer, G. R.
Venue
Social Science & Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-04
Volume
226
Pages
225-235
ISSN
0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2913405645
Cited by
283
References
62
FWCI
26.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Intersectional Discrimination Index: Development and validation of measures of self-reported enacted and anticipated discrimination for intercategorical analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.12.016
The paper
Scheim, A. I., & Bauer, G. R. (2019). The Intersectional Discrimination Index: Development and validation of measures of self-reported enacted and anticipated discrimination for intercategorical analysis. Social Science & Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.12.016

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.