Cited by 756Health disparities and outcomesRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchGender, Health, and Social Inequality

RACIAL DISPARITIES IN HEALTH: How Much Does Stress Really Matter?

Open access
Sternthal, Michelle J., Slopen, Natalie, Williams, David R.·2011·Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race

Abstract

Despite the widespread assumption that racial differences in stress exist and that stress is a key mediator linking racial status to poor health, relatively few studies have explicitly examined this premise. We examine the distribution of stress across racial groups and the role of stress vulnerability and exposure in explaining racial differences in health in a community sample of Black, Hispanic, and White adults, employing a modeling strategy that accounts for the correlation between types of stressors and the accumulation of stressors in the prediction of health outcomes. We find significant racial differences in overall and cumulative exposure to eight stress domains. Blacks exhibit a higher prevalence and greater clustering of high stress scores than Whites. American-born Hispanics show prevalence rates and patterns of accumulation of stressors comparable to Blacks, while foreign-born Hispanics have stress profiles similar to Whites. Multiple stressors correlate with poor physical and mental health, with financial and relationship stressors exhibiting the largest and most consistent effects. Though we find no support for the stress-vulnerability hypothesis, the stress-exposure hypothesis does account for some racial health disparities. We discuss implications for future research and policy.

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 · 10.1017/s1742058x11000087

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sternthal, M. J., Slopen, N., & Williams, D. R.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Sternthal, Michelle J.
Venue
Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race
Published
2011
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
95-113
ISSN
  • 1742-058X (ISSN-L)
  • 1742-0598
OpenAlex
W2024277158
Cited by
755
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 50 · 2025: 104 · 2024: 76 · 2023: 83 · 2022: 89 · 2021: 73 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 13
FWCI
22.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Du Bois Review Social Science Research on Race (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (T32ES007069)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD050467, P50HD038986)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Gender, Health, and Social Inequality
Keywords
racial disparities in health, stress accumulation, cumulative stressors, financial stress, relationship stress, Black people, Hispanic adults, foreign-born Hispanics, physical health, mental health, community sample

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