There is limited research on ethnic-racial socialization outside the family context (e.g., in peer groups). Using two-week, daily data from 177 U.S. ethnic-racial minority 9th graders in 2017–2020 (M_age = 14.48 years old; 51% females; 52% Black, 20% Latinx, 10% Asian American, 6% Native American, and 12% Other), this study tested a transactional model of family and peer ethnic-racial socialization, identity, and discrimination. Bidirectional associations were observed between family and peer cultural socialization across days (βs = .09–.10). Peer but not family cultural socialization promoted adolescents' ethnic-racial identity on the next day (βs = .07–.10). Ethnic-racial discrimination predicted greater next-day family ethnic-racial socialization (cultural socialization, preparation for bias; βs = .08–.11), whereas family and peer ethnic-racial socialization predicted next-day discrimination (βs = .11–.18). The differential roles of family and peer ethnic-racial socialization are discussed.

Abbreviations

DSEM: dynamic structural equation modeling
ERS: ethnic-racial socialization
ICC: intraclass correlation
MCMC: Markov Chain Monte Carlo
SES: socioeconomic status

In ethnically and racially diverse societies like the United States, ethnic-racial socialization is a salient socialization process that families use to cultivate a sense of pride in their ethnic-racial heritage and help their children navigate challenges related to ethnicity and race (Hughes et al., 2006). Recent meta-analytic work has documented a positive association between family ethnic-racial socialization and children's ethnic-racial identity (Huguley et al., 2019), as well as psychosocial and behavioral well-being (e.g., Wang et al., 2020), in ethnically and racially diverse groups. Despite this extensive literature on family ethnic-racial socialization, there is a dearth of research on ethnic-racial socialization in other developmental settings, such as peer groups (Ruck et al., 2021). This lack of attention is particularly concerning in research focused on adolescence, as peers may have more influence than family members on young people's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors during this time (Brown & Larson, 2009). Recent theoretical and review work has highlighted the need to examine ethnic-racial socialization in peer groups to better understand adolescent development in ethnically and racially diverse groups (Hughes et al., 2016; Huguley et al., 2019; Ruck et al., 2021).

A nascent body of work has begun to examine peer ethnic-racial socialization, identifying its close associations with family ethnic-racial socialization and adolescent outcomes (Wang & Benner, 2016), including ethnic-racial identity (Nelson et al., 2018). However, this initial evidence uses cross-sectional data, limiting our knowledge regarding how family and peer ethnic-racial socialization influence each other, and how ethnic-racial socialization (particularly that by peethnic-racial socialization) and adolescent outcomes influence each other. Such knowledge is critical for identifying effective levers of change to promote positive development within the context of ethnicity and race. Informed by a recent theoretical framework highlighting the transactional nature of ethnic-racial socialization, identity, and discrimination across various settings (Hughes et al., 2016), the current study investigates potential bidirectional associations between (1) family and peer ethnic-racial socialization, (2) ethnic-racial socialization across contexts and adolescent outcomes (i.e., ethnic-racial identity centrality, private regard, and public regard), and (3) ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination. We focus on discrimination in peer groups, the most frequent source of ethnic-racial discrimination for U.S. adolescents based on national data (Nagata et al., 2021).

Another critical limitation of the existing literature is the reliance on one-time surveys (see Cheeks et al., 2020; Smith-Bynum et al., 2016 for exceptions), precluding the investigation of how ethnic-racial socialization is a fluid process that may fluctuate in adolescents' everyday life, or how ethnic-racial experiences influence one another on a daily basis (Cheeks et al., 2020). To address this theoretical and empirical gap, the current study used a daily diary design to examine cross-day, bidirectional links among family and peer ethnic-racial socialization, identity, and discrimination. These within-person associations captured how deviation from one's typical levels of ethnic-racial experiences may be associated with one another, teasing out trait-like individual characteristics (e.g., personality) that may drive the between-person associations (Zeiders et al., 2018). As such, results from these within-person associations are better positioned to uncover the actual dynamics occurring within individuals (Hamaker & Wichers, 2017), providing stronger evidence to inform practice (Snippe et al., 2016). The study focuses on a sample of ethnic-racial minority 9th graders, as adolescents' social experiences and ethnic-racial identity may undergo significant changes as they transition into high school (Benner & Graham, 2009; Wang & Yip, 2020).

Family and peer ethnic-racial socialization in adolescents' everyday life

Ethnic-racial socialization is a multidimensional construct (Hughes et al., 2006), and the two most often studied dimensions include cultural socialization (i.e., practices that teach youth about their ethnic-racial heritage and promote ethnic-racial pride) and preparation for bias (i.e., practices that prepare youth for potential experiences of discrimination; Hughes et al., 2006). Ethnic-racial socialization has been primarily studied within the family context, with recent meta-analytic work identifying family cultural socialization as most consistently associated with positive outcomes in psychosocial and behavioral domains (Wang et al., 2020), as well as ethnic-racial identity (Huguley et al., 2019). Preparation for bias is also related to positive outcomes in areas such as interpersonal relationships, academics, and ethnic-racial identity, although the evidence here is less consistent compared to that of cultural socialization (Ibid).

A critical limitation of the existing literature on ethnic-racial socialization is the lack of attention to other influential developmental settings, such as peer groups (Ruck et al., 2021). During adolescence, peers become a particularly salient agent of socialization that is similarly, if not more, influential than one's family (Albert et al., 2013; Brown & Larson, 2009). A nascent body of work has documented peer ethnic-racial socialization similar to that practiced at home: peers engage in explicit cultural socialization practices by talking about ethnic-racial heritage and encouraging adolescents to respect their heritage culture; they also implicitly do this by participating in activities that represent their heritage (Wang et al., 2015); peers also prepare adolescents for potential experiences of discrimination due to their ethnicity and race (Nelson et al., 2018). These peer socialization practices are associated with adolescents' socioemotional and academic outcomes (Wang & Benner, 2016), as well as their ethnic-racial identity (Nelson et al., 2018), over and above the effects of family ethnic-racial socialization.

However, this initial evidence uses cross-sectional data, offering limited information on the nature of the interrelations between family and peer ethnic-racial socialization, as well as their developmental implications. It is an open question if family serves as a driving factor for the ethnic-racial messages adolescents receive from their peers, or if ethnic-racial messages conveyed by peers influence how families talk about ethnicity and race at home. Similarly, it is unclear if ethnic-racial socialization across contexts (particularly in peer groups) is influential of adolescent outcomes, or if adolescents who have more positive ethnic-racial identity seek out more ethnic-racial socialization by family and peers. These investigations will provide critical insights into how best to conceptualize and investigate ethnic-racial socialization—for example, whether future research should consider both contexts as important socialization settings related to issues of ethnicity and race, or focus on one context that is the driving force.

Moreover, research has almost exclusively investigated ethnic-racial socialization as a stable construct by asking adolescents or their parents to report various practices over a relatively long period (e.g., in the past year; Kulish et al., 2019) or more generally (e.g., Rivas-Drake et al., 2009). Yet, a recent daily diary study showed that adolescents reported family ethnic-racial socialization for 13% to 34% of the days over 21 consecutive days (Cheeks et al., 2020), indicating considerable variation in these practices in everyday life. Similarly, previous research has documented ethnic-racial discrimination as occurring for about 1–2 days per week (Huynh & Fuligni, 2010; Seaton & Iida, 2019), and has showed that ethnic-racial identity can vary from 1 day to another (Yip, 2014). The intermittent, changing nature of these ethnic-racial experiences on a daily basis suggests there may be important dynamics that occur on a more immediate time scale not yet captured by existing research. To fill in this gap, the current study uses a daily design to assess and disentangle the directionality of family and peer ethnic-racial socialization, seeking to understand how these processes unfold in adolescents' everyday life, along with other ethnic-racial experiences and outcomes.

A daily transactional model of ethnic-racial socialization, identity, and discrimination

The current study also tests a daily transactional model, exploring how ethnic-racial socialization across contexts is associated with adolescents' ethnicity and race-related outcomes (i.e., ethnic-racial identity) and other experiences (i.e., ethnic-racial discrimination). This investigation is informed by a recent theoretical framework highlighting the bidirectional, reciprocal associations among ethnic-racial socialization, identity, and discrimination (Hughes et al., 2016). This transactional, ecological model also suggests that the existing scholarship is limited to examining ethnic-racial socialization in family settings, and that much more attention on ethnic-racial dynamics across developmental settings is needed (Hughes et al., 2016). To fill in this gap, the current study focuses on the daily transactions between family and peer settings, seeking to identify the sources and consequences of family and peer ethnic-racial socialization practices as these relate to adolescents' ethnic-racial identity and discrimination in peer groups. Below we review existing research that is based on between-person associations, and pose hypotheses regarding how the constructs are associated with each other at the daily, within-person level.

Daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization and identity

Regarding ethnic-racial identity, the current study focuses on identity contents that are theoretically fluid and sensitive to one's environment, including private regard, public regard, and, to a lesser degree, centrality (Sellers et al., 1998). Centrality captures the importance of ethnicity and race to one's identity, whereas private and public regard refer to the extent to which one thinks positively of their own ethnic-racial group, from either their own perspective (private regard) or their perceptions of public viewpoints (public regard; Sellers et al., 1998). Empirical research has also documented considerable daily variation in adolescents' ethnic-racial identity centrality, private regard, and public regard (Seaton & Iida, 2019; Yip, 2014).

Bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization and identity are supported by theoretical and empirical work at the between-person level. On the one hand, cultural socialization can foster greater centrality and more positive private regard by stressing the importance of one's ethnic-racial heritage and promoting ethnic-racial pride (Huguley et al., 2019; Neblett et al., 2012). Indeed, empirical research shows that family cultural socialization is positively associated with centrality and private regard, but tends to have a null association with public regard (Butler-Barnes et al., 2019; French et al., 2013; Rivas-Drake et al., 2009; Witherspoon et al., 2021). In contrast, in preparing adolescents for potential experiences of discrimination (i.e., preparation for bias), families and other socialization agents likely discuss negative stereotypes that are related to one's ethnicity and race, thus lowering youth perceptions of public regard (Hughes et al., 2016). Empirical research has linked preparation for bias to lower levels of public regard, but not private regard (Butler-Barnes et al., 2019; French et al., 2013; Rivas-Drake et al., 2009; Witherspoon et al., 2021). This body of work also shows mixed patterns for centrality: while some research suggests that preparation for bias can accentuate the importance of ethnicity and race and increase centrality (Butler-Barnes et al., 2019; French et al., 2013), other studies show null findings between the two constructs (Rivas-Drake et al., 2009; Witherspoon et al., 2021). On the other hand, informed by theoretical views stressing the agency of the developing child (e.g., Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006), research has also identified the active role that adolescents with varying levels of ethnic-racial identity play in constructing and driving family discussions around issues of ethnicity and race (Umaña-Taylor et al., 2013).

Extending previous work, this study examines bidirectional links between ethnic-racial socialization and identity on a daily basis. It is possible that on days when adolescents receive more cultural socialization from their families and peers, they also perceive stronger centrality and more positive private regard towards their ethnicity and race subsequently (or lower public regard, if receiving more preparation for bias); on days when adolescents perceive stronger centrality and more positive regard, they could also engage in more ethnicity and race-related conversations with their important others. It is less clear, however, whether these processes are more salient in family settings or in peer groups. For example, because families are theorized to be the primary socialization setting for one's ethnic-racial heritage (Umaña-Taylor et al., 2009), family ethnic-racial socialization may be more influential for adolescents' ethnic-racial identity; at the same time, parents may also be more sensitive to adolescents' ethnic-racial feelings on a particular day and tailor their socialization practices accordingly. In contrast, given the salience of peer influences in adolescence (Brown & Larson, 2009), peer ethnic-racial socialization may be more influential but less affected by adolescents' identity contents on a particular day. These possibilities are explored by the current study.

Daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination

Ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination may also relate to each other bidirectionally. On the one hand, ethnic-racial socialization is considered a primary tool that helps adolescents navigate prejudice and racism; as such, parents may engage in more ethnic-racial socialization if they are concerned about their children's potential experiences of ethnic-racial discrimination (Hughes et al., 2016). However, empirical evidence is mixed: While studies typically fail to find significant findings between adolescents' experiences of discrimination and family ethnic-racial socialization indicated by cultural socialization and preparation for bias (Saleem et al., 2020; White-Johnson et al., 2010), other research suggests that adolescents reporting more discrimination may also report more preparation for bias from their families (Woo et al., 2020). On the other hand, emphasizing ethnicity and race and talking about potential experiences of discrimination could also increase adolescents' awareness of these experiences, leading to more reports of discrimination (Hughes et al., 2016). Although empirical work on this direction of the association is limited, cross-sectional evidence suggests that family ethnic-racial socialization (e.g., preparation for bias) may contribute, in part, to adolescents' perceptions of discrimination (Kulish et al., 2019).

The current study extends previous work by teasing out the directionality of associations between ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination on a daily basis. Similar to previous literature, we expect that family and peer ethnic-racial socialization may both influence and be influenced by adolescents' daily experiences of ethnic-racial discrimination. It is unclear, however, whether these associations are more salient for family versus peer ethnic-racial socialization. Given that parents are posited as the primary socialization agents for heritage culture (Umaña-Taylor et al., 2009), family (vs. peer) ethnic-racial socialization may also be more closely tied to ethnic-racial discrimination. Yet, it is also possible that peers may witness adolescents' discrimination experiences directly during the day and, thus, provide more immediate support. These competing hypotheses are tested in this study.

The current study

Using daily data collected from a sample of ethnic-racial minority adolescents over 2 weeks, this study tested a daily transactional model for ethnic-racial socialization, identity, and discrimination. We were interested in the following bidirectional associations (see conceptual models in Figure 1): (1) between family and peer ethnic-racial socialization (Figure 1a); (2) between ethnic-racial socialization and identity (Figure 1b); and (3) between ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination (Figure 1c). The current analyses were relatively exploratory in nature: we generally expected to identify daily bidirectional associations between each pair of these ethnic-racial constructs; however, we did not pose hypotheses for whether the associations were more evident for family versus peer ethnic-racial socialization. Because previous research has documented important variations in the associations among ethnic-racial socialization, identity, and discrimination by gender, ethnicity-race, and generational status (Huguley et al., 2019; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2013), we also examined how the targeted daily associations varied by these demographic variables. Findings would provide novel insights regarding how ethnic-racial dynamics unfold across multiple developmental settings in adolescents' everyday life.

Details are in the caption following the image — **FIGURE 1**
Open in figure viewer PowerPoint

Conceptual model linking daily family and peer ethnic-racial socialization, discrimination, and identity. (a) Cross-day associations between FERS and PERS. (b) Cross-day associations between ethnic-racial socialization and ERI. (c) Cross-day associations between ethnic-racial socialization and DS. Solid lines indicate associations of primary interest; dash lines indicate associations that are an integrative part of the model but not of primary interest. DS, ethnic-racial discrimination; ERI, ethnic-racial identity; ERS, ethnic-racial socialization; FERS, family ethnic-racial socialization; PERS, peer ethnic-racial socialization; t, day t; t − 1, day t − 1. For all three models, separate models were fitted for cultural socialization and preparation for bias. For model (b) and (c), separate models were fitted for ethnic-racial socialization from family and peers.

METHOD

Participants

Data for the current study were drawn from a larger project that investigates daily ethnic-racial processes and adolescent development. The larger project included 231 9th graders who were ethnically and racially diverse (41% Black, 16% Latinx, 8% Asian, 5% Native, 21% White, 9% Other) and of primarily low socioeconomic status (SES; 71% of the participants' mothers and 80% fathers did not have a college degree). The full sample is representative of the larger student population in the school district in terms of ethnic-racial diversity (46% Black, 17% Latinx, 6% Asian, 23% White, 7% Other) and low SES background (75% economically disadvantaged; Michigan's Center for Educational Performance and Information, 2017).

The analytic sample included 177 9th graders from ethnic-racial minority groups (i.e., 52% Black, 20% Latinx, 10% Asian American, 6% Native American, and 12% Other [e.g., multiracial] based on self-reports) for whom constructs of ethnic-racial discrimination, socialization, and identity are particularly relevant. The sample included 49% male and 51% female based on self-reports. No participants selected “Other” gender (followed by an option to specify their gender identity) at this wave of data collection. The average age is 14.48 years old (SD = 0.71). Most participants came from low SES families: 37% of the participants' mothers and 33% of their fathers had less than a high school degree; 26% of mothers and 38% of fathers had a high school degree; 22% of mothers and 19% of fathers had some college education; 15% of mothers and 10% of fathers had a four-year college degree or beyond. Slightly over half (52%) of the participants were living with both parents. The majority of the sample and their parents (75% of adolescents, 67% of mothers, 64% of fathers) were born in the United States. There were 25% of adolescents who were first generation (i.e., adolescents and their parents were born outside of the United States), 11% were second generation (i.e., adolescents were U.S. born, whereas at least one of the parents was foreign born), and 64% were third generation or later (i.e., adolescents and their parents were all U.S. born).

As with other daily diary research, there were missing data in the current study. We collected 2271 days of data from the 177 participants over 14 consecutive days, with an average completion rate of 92% (i.e., each participant completed 12.83 days of data, SD = 1.91). Missing patterns were explored in multiple ways. At the within-person level, we examined if a variable's missingness was associated with (1) its own level on the previous day, (2) other primary study variables on the previous day, and (3) within-person covariates (i.e., weekend vs. weekday, daily social support). At the between-person level, we examined if a variable's number of missing days was associated with demographics. No significant patterns of missingness emerged at either the within-person or the between-person level. The missing data were handled by the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method under Bayesian estimation (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2021).

Procedures

Participants were recruited from all three high schools in a public school district in the Midwest of the United States. The project was approved by the PI's university (IRB protocol number LEGACY 17-797) and the school district. The research team visited all 9th grade classrooms for recruitment and invited all 9th graders to the project. Students who returned parent consent and student assent continued to participate. The research team first met with participants in small groups (ns = 10 to 20) in a 30-min presurvey session, either after school hours or during a time that was approved by the school. The presurvey inquired about demographics, general social experiences, and outcomes. For the next two consecutive weeks, participants completed a 5-min online survey on their daily experiences and outcomes each night. The research team sent daily reminders to each participant, and contacted participants if their surveys were missing for two consecutive days. Although participants were able to submit late surveys (e.g., on the second day after when they were due), these data were not used in the analyses. At the end of the project, participants were compensated for $20 to $40 depending on their daily survey completion rate. Data were collected from three cohorts of students (ns = 40 in Cohort 1 who participated in 2017–2018; 98 in Cohort 2 who participated in 2018–2019; 39 in Cohort 3 who participated in 2019–2020). Cohorts were compared across demographic characteristics (age, gender, ethnicity-race, parental education, family structure, generational status): Cohort 1 was older than Cohorts 2 and 3 (F(2, 176) = 9.39, p < .001), and Cohorts 1 and 2 were more likely to be third generation or later (χ²(2, N = 176) = 8.87, p = .01).

Measures

Daily ethnic-racial socialization across context

Adolescents reported daily ethnic-racial socialization from their family and peers on two indicators, cultural socialization and preparation for bias. All items were adapted from established scales for daily assessment. Family cultural socialization was assessed using the Cultural Socialization across Contexts Scale (Wang et al., 2015). Each day, adolescents rated six items capturing both explicit (e.g., talked about the values and beliefs of one's ethnic background) and implicit family practices (e.g., listened to music or watched tv and movies by artists from one's ethnic-cultural background) that celebrated their ethnic-racial heritage. Participants used a scale ranging from 0 (no), 1 (sort of), to 2 (yes). Peer cultural socialization was assessed by an identical set of six items, with “your friends and peers” substituted for “your family”. Participants responded to each item on a scale ranging from 0 (no), 1(sort of), to 2 (yes); they could also select 3 (did not see friends or peers today), which was recoded as 0 in analyses. We created an average score for family and peer practices separately, with higher scores indicating greater cultural socialization on that day. Because the distributions of family and peer cultural socialization scores were positively skewed, we dichotomized the scores of each variable into either 0 (no) or 1 (sort of or yes). Scores from each scale showed good reliabilities at the within-person and between-person levels (see Table 1 for details). Previous research has also demonstrated the measurement equivalence of this scale for assessing cultural socialization across family and peer contexts and across various demographic groups (Wang et al., 2015).

TABLE 1. Descriptive statistics and bivariate associations of primary study variables.

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
Bivariate associations
1. Family CS	—	.22***	.34***	.10***	.05*	.07**	.01	.14***
2. Peer CS	.74***	—	.12***	.16***	.04	.08**	.02	.29***
3. Family PB	.54***	.48***	—	.18***	.06*	.06*	.03	.17***
4. Peer PB	.40***	.62***	.77***	—	.01	.01	−.02	.24***
5. ERI centrality	.22**	.17*	.04	.07	—	.77***	.72***	.03
6. ERI private regard	.23**	.16*	−.06	.01	.93***	—	.72***	.05
7. ERI public regard	.15	.14	.05	.07	.81***	.81***	—	.02
8. Discrimination	.39***	.57***	.64***	.77***	−.07	−.17*	−.08	—
Descriptives (raw scores)
N (number of participants)	177	177	177	177	177	177	177	177
n (number of days)	2251	2243	2245	2243	2248	2248	2248	2244
M	0.47	0.30	0.18	0.09	2.41	2.47	2.23	0.12
SD	.50	.46	.38	.28	.74	.73	.74	.33
Minimum	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	0.00
Maximum	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	1.00
Skewness	0.11	0.88	1.70	2.93	−0.93	−1.07	−0.44	2.29
Kurtosis	−1.99	−1.23	0.90	6.60	−0.63	−0.38	−1.20	3.24
Intraclass correlation	.48	.39	.44	.42	.70	.69	.67	.45
Within-person reliability^a	.87	.86	^b	^b	.79	.82	.78	.83
Between-person reliability^a	.95	.97	^b	^b	.97	.98	.95	.99

Note: Bivariate associations were estimated in a multilevel structural equation modeling framework in Mplus 8.6. Coefficients above the diagonal are within-person and coefficients below the diagonal are between-person.
Abbreviations: CS, cultural socialization; ERI, ethnic-racial identity; PB, preparation for bias.
^a Reliability was based on McDonald's omega, a reliability indicator for multilevel data.
^b Reliability was not available because the two variables were each based on a single item.
* p < .05
** p < .01
*** p < .001.

Family preparation for bias was assessed by a single item (“said that you might be treated differently or unfairly because of your race and ethnicity”). The item was created based on items with the highest loadings from the Parental ethnic-racial socialization Scale (talk to the child about racism; tell the child that some people may treat them badly or unfairly because of their race or ethnicity; Hughes & Chen, 1997). Each day, adolescents rated the item on a scale ranging from 0 (no), 1 (sort of), to 2 (yes). Peer preparation for bias was assessed by an identical item by changing the question stem from “your family” to “your friends or peers”. Participants responded on a scale of 0 (no), 1 (sort of), 2 (yes), and 3 (did not see friends or peers today; recoded as 0 in analyses). Because the distributions of family and peer preparation for bias scores were positively skewed, we dichotomized the scores of each variable into 0 (no) or 1 (sort of or yes).

Daily ethnic-racial identity

Ethnic-racial identity was assessed by items from the Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity (Sellers et al., 1997) adapted for daily assessment among ethnically and racially diverse groups. Each day, adolescents rated three items on centrality (importance of ethnicity and race for one's identity; for example, “feel that your race-ethnicity is an important part of your self-image”), three items on private regard (positive feelings towards one's ethnicity and race; for example, “feel happy that you are a member of your racial-ethnic group”), and three items on public regard (perceptions regarding others' positive views towards one's ethnicity and race; for example, “feel that society views your racial-ethnic group as an asset”). Participants rated each item using a scale ranging from 1 (no) to 3 (yes). Reliabilities for all outcomes were acceptable to high at the within-person level and high at the between-person level (see Table 1).

Daily ethnic-racial discrimination

Adolescents reported their daily discrimination related to ethnicity and race by five items (e.g., was treated unfairly by other kids because of ethnicity and race) adapted from the Adult and Peer Discrimination Measure (Way, 1997) for daily assessment. Participants rated each item using a scale ranging from 0 (no), 1 (sort of), 2 (yes), and 3 (did not see friends or peers today; recoded as 0 in analyses). Scale scores demonstrated good reliabilities at the within-person and between-person levels (see Table 1). Because the distributions of discrimination scores were positively skewed, we dichotomized the scores into 0 (no) or 1 (sort of or yes).

Covariates

Within-person covariates included weekend (1) versus weekday (0) and daily social support. We used two items (e.g., get emotional support and understanding; talk about how I feel) to assess parent and peer support separately, and an average score for daily social support was created. Days in the study (1, 2, …, 14) were used to adjust for different spacing between measurements via the TINTERVAL function in dynamic structural equation modeling (DSEM). Between-person covariates included adolescent gender (1 = female, 0 = male), generational status (1 = third generation or later, 0 = first or second generation; the latter two groups were combined due to small group sizes), and ethnicity-race (Latinx, Asian, Native, and Other; Black as reference). Adolescent age, parental education, and family structure were not significantly related to adjustment indicators and were excluded from analyses for model parsimony.

Analysis plan

Analyses were conducted using two-level time series analyses with a bivariate first-order autoregressive AR(1) model (McNeish & Hamaker, 2019) in a DSEM framework in Mplus 8.7 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2017). DSEM integrates features from structural equation modeling, multilevel modeling, and time series analyses. The two-level AR(1) models disaggregate within- and between-person effects and simultaneously account for the proximity of repeatedly assessed observations (McNeish & Hamaker, 2019), thus allowing for the estimation of daily bidirectional associations, as proposed in the current study.

We first examined daily bidirectional associations between family and peer ethnic-racial socialization (see model specifications in Figure S1). Ethnic-racial socialization was examined by cultural socialization and preparation for bias separately. In each model, family and peer ethnic-racial socialization were each decomposed into a within-person component and a between-person component using the default latent centering approach. At the within-person level, we estimated an AR(1) model wherein family and peer ethnic-racial socialization were each predicted by their prior-day levels (i.e., autoregressive paths; family ERS_t−1 → family ERS_t; peer ERS_t−1 → peer ERS_t). We also estimated the cross-lagged paths between the two constructs (i.e., family ERS_t−1 → peer ERS_t; peer ERS_t−1 → family ERS_t), which captured daily bidirectional associations between family and peer ethnic-racial socialization that were of primary interest in the current study. The intercepts, variances, autoregressive paths, and cross-lagged paths were all estimated as random effects, correlated at the between-person level. Both within-person and between-person covariates were included.

We then examined daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization and identity (see model specifications in Figure S2). Separate models were fitted for ethnic-racial socialization by family and peers, for cultural socialization and preparation for bias, and for each ethnic-racial identity indicator (centrality, private regard, public regard). In each model, at the within-person level, we estimated the autoregressive paths (i.e., ERS_t−1 → ERS_t; ERI_t−1 → ERI_t) and cross-lagged paths (i.e., ERS_t−1 → ERI_t; ERI_t−1 → ERS_t; primary interest of the study) between ethnic-racial socialization and identity. To ensure robustness of the findings, we also controlled for ethnic-racial discrimination and socialization from the context that was not the focus of a given model (e.g., controlling for peer ethnic-racial socialization in models examining family ethnic-racial socialization and identity). The intercepts, autoregressive paths, and cross-lagged paths were all estimated as random effects (i.e., 6 random effects were estimated in total), correlated at the between-person level. Both within-person and between-person covariates were included.

An identical set of analyses was conducted to examine daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination (see model specifications in Figure S3). Separate models were fitted for each ethnic-racial socialization indicator (family vs. peer, cultural socialization vs. preparation for bias). We were primarily interested in the cross-lagged paths (i.e., ERS_t−1 → DS_t; DS_t−1 → ERS_t) between ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination at the within-person level. To ensure robustness of the findings, we controlled for ethnic-racial identity (an average score was created across centrality, private regard, and public regard) and ethnic-racial socialization from the context that was not the focus of a given model (e.g., controlling for peer ethnic-racial socialization in models examining family ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination).

Lastly, we examined demographic variations in the studied associations by adolescent gender (female vs. male), ethnicity-race (i.e., Black, Latinx, Asian, Native, Other; the reference group was rotated; Native was included but not reported due to its small group size, n = 11), and generational status (third generation or later vs. first and second generations). For each tested model, we estimated the effects of dummy-coded demographic variables on the intercept, autoregressive paths, and cross-lagged paths. Here we were primarily interested in the effects of demographic variables on cross-lagged paths (i.e., daily bidirectional associations) between each pairing of ethnic-racial socialization, discrimination, and identity (see solid paths depicted in Figures S1–S3).

All models used Bayesian MCMC estimation (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2021). We specified noninformative priors by Mplus default, 1000 iterations, and thinning of 200. Model convergence was evaluated by potential scale reduction factors (close to 1), trace plots (i.e., no upward or downward trend of parameters with two chains overlapping well), and autocorrelation plots (i.e., around or lower than 0.1; Muthén, 2010). Because some of the primary variables (e.g., preparation for bias, discrimination) occurred with low frequency (see Table 1 for descriptive statistics), we made several adjustments to facilitate model convergence (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2022). First, we restricted each set of analyses to include only those participants who had at least 10 days of valid data on the primary study variables (i.e., ethnic-racial socialization, discrimination, and identity) during the 2 weeks (3 out of the 177 participants were excluded). We also removed clusters with no variation on primary study variables (the numbers of participants and days included in each set of analyses are reported in Tables 2–4); this approach is unlikely to change the overall analysis substantially, given the limited amount of information offered by the excluded clusters (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2022). Moreover, when needed, we set random effects with small residual variances uncorrelated at the between-person level (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2022). This was done for some models involving discrimination and peer preparation for bias, when their between-person residual variance was close to 0. It is less meaningful to estimate the associations in models with this close-to-0 residual variance. Finally, DSEM guidelines recommend having more cluster sizes (10–14 in the current study) than the number of random effects (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2022). As such, we ran separate models for the socialization-identity and socialization-discrimination linkages (6 random effects in each model), instead of estimating ethnic-racial socialization, identity, and discrimination in the same model (12 random effects including 3 random intercepts, 3 autoregressive paths, and 6 cross-lagged paths in each model).

RESULTS

Descriptive statistics of daily ethnic-racial socialization, discrimination, and identity

Descriptive statistics of primary study variables are shown in Table 1. Regarding the frequencies of daily ethnic-racial socialization, on average, adolescents reported family cultural socialization for 6.02 days (SD = 4.68), peer cultural socialization for 3.79 days (SD = 3.81), family preparation for bias for 2.23 days (SD = 3.39), and peer preparation for bias for 1.10 days (SD = 2.35) over the 2 weeks. The intraclass correlations (ICCs) of each ethnic-racial socialization dimension were between .39 and .48, indicating that 52% to 61% of the variances in ethnic-racial socialization can be attributed to within-person, day-to-day variability instead of between-person differences. These findings highlight the need to investigate family and peer ethnic-racial socialization on a daily basis.

Regarding ethnic-racial discrimination, on average, adolescents reported it for 1.57 days (SD = 2.85) over the 2 weeks. The ICC of ethnic-racial discrimination was .45, indicating that a substantial portion (55%) of its variance can be attributed to within-person, day-to-day variability instead of between-person differences. Similarly, the ICCs of ethnic-racial identity (centrality, private regard, public regard) were between .67 and .70, indicating smaller but still considerable within-person variation (30% to 33% of the total variance) in these constructs.

Our descriptive statistics also examined bivariate associations among ethnic-racial socialization, discrimination, and identity. At the within-person level, all ethnic-racial socialization dimensions (family vs. peer, cultural socialization vs. preparation for bias) were positively associated with each other on the same day. These ethnic-racial socialization practices were also positively related to ethnic-racial discrimination on the same day. In terms of the same-day associations between ethnic-racial socialization and identity, family cultural socialization and preparation for bias were positively related to centrality and private regard (but not public regard); whereas peer cultural socialization (but not preparation for bias) was positively associated with private regard (but not centrality or public regard). Similar patterns were observed at the between-person level: family and peer ethnic-racial socialization were positively associated with each other across dimensions; these practices were positively related to ethnic-racial discrimination; family and peer ethnic-racial socialization were also positively related to centrality and private regard.

Daily bidirectional associations between family and peer ethnic-racial socialization

We first examined daily bidirectional associations between family and peer ethnic-racial socialization (see Table 2). Estimates for all model relations are reported in Table S2. Ethnic-racial socialization was examined by cultural socialization and preparation for bias separately. Significant daily bidirectional associations emerged for family and peer cultural socialization: on days when adolescents reported greater family cultural socialization, they also reported greater peer cultural socialization on the next day; and vice versa. In contrast, no significant associations emerged between family and peer preparation for bias across days.

TABLE 2. Daily bidirectional associations between family and peer ethnic-racial socialization.

Predictor (day t − 1)	Outcome (day t)	n	k	Random slope
				B	Posterior SD	95% CI		β
				B	Posterior SD	LL	UL	β
Cultural socialization
Family CS	Peer CS	162	2245	.08*	.03	.02	.14	.09
Peer CS	Family CS			.11*	.04	.04	.18	.10
Preparation for bias
Family PB	Peer PB	105	1464	.03	.03	−.03	.09	.04
Peer PB	Family PB			.12	.06	−.002	.24	.10

Abbreviations: CI, credibility interval; CS, cultural socialization; k, number of days; LL/UL, lower/upper level; n, number of participants; PB, preparation for bias.
* p < .05.

Daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization and identity

We then examined daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization across contexts and adolescents' ethnic-racial identity (see Table 3). Ethnic-racial socialization was examined by cultural socialization and preparation for bias separately. Identity contents (centrality, private regard, public regard) were also examined in separate models. Estimates for all model relations are reported in Tables S3 (family cultural socialization and identity), S4 (peer cultural socialization and identity), S5 (family preparation for bias and identity), and S6 (peer preparation for bias and identity). Focusing on cultural socialization across contexts (see top portion of Table 3), no significant associations emerged between family cultural socialization and ethnic-racial identity. In contrast, a unidirectional association emerged from peer cultural socialization to all ethnic-racial identity dimensions: on days when adolescents reported greater cultural socialization from their peers, they also reported higher levels of centrality, private regard, and public regard on the next day, but not the reverse. No significant associations emerged between preparation for bias (regardless of whether family or peer socialization was considered) and ethnic-racial identity (see bottom portion of Table 3).

TABLE 3. Daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization and identity.

Predictor (day t − 1)	Outcome (day t)	n	k	Random slope
				B	Posterior SD	95% CI		β
				B	Posterior SD	LL	UL	β
Cultural socialization
Family CS	ERI centrality	169	2342	.04	.03	−.03	.10	.04
ERI centrality	Family CS			.01	.04	−.07	.07	.004
Family CS	ERI private regard	169	2341	.04	.04	−.03	.12	.04
ERI private regard	Family CS			.05	.04	−.03	.12	.06
Family CS	ERI public regard	171	2369	.01	.04	−.06	.09	.01
ERI public regard	Family CS			−.04	.03	−.10	.02	−.07
Peer CS	ERI centrality	169	2342	.07	.04*	.000	.14	.07
ERI centrality	Peer CS			−.04	.03	−.10	.02	−.05
Peer CS	ERI private regard	169	2341	.11	.04*	.04	.19	.10
ERI private regard	Peer CS			.03	.04	−.04	.09	.04
Peer CS	ERI public regard	171	2369	.08	.04*	.01	.17	.07
ERI public regard	Peer CS			−.02	.03	−.08	.03	−.03
Preparation for bias
Family PB	ERI centrality	138	1919	.09	.06	−.03	.22	.07
ERI centrality	Family PB			.03	.03	−.04	.08	.05
Family PB	ERI private regard	134	1862	.05	.06	−.07	.18	.04
ERI private regard	Family PB			.02	.03	−.05	.08	.04
Family PB	ERI public regard	146	2025	.08	.06	−.05	.20	.06
ERI public regard	Family PB			.03	.03	−.02	.09	.06
Peer PB	ERI centrality	138	1919	.07	.08	−.07	.22	.04
ERI centrality	Peer PB			−.01	.02	−.05	.03	−.02
Peer PB	ERI private regard	107	1486	−.003	.07	−.13	.13	.000
ERI private regard	Peer PB			−.003	.02	−.04	.03	−.004
Peer PB	ERI public regard	146	2025	.01	.06	−.11	.13	.004
ERI public regard	Peer PB			−.002	.02	−.03	.03	−.01

Abbreviations: CI, credibility interval; CS, cultural socialization; ERI, ethnic-racial identity; k, number of days; LL/UL, lower/upper level; n, number of participants; PB, preparation for bias.
* p < .05.

Daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination

Next, we examined daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization across contexts and ethnic-racial discrimination (see Table 4). Ethnic-racial socialization was examined by cultural socialization and preparation for bias separately. Estimates for all model relations are reported in Table S7. Focusing on cultural socialization (see the top portion of Table 4), significant daily bidirectional associations emerged between family cultural socialization and ethnic-racial discrimination: on days when adolescents experienced greater ethnic-racial discrimination, they also reported greater family cultural socialization on the next day; and vice versa. A unidirectional association emerged from peer cultural socialization to discrimination: on days when adolescents reported greater peer cultural socialization, they also reported greater discrimination on the next day, but the reverse direction was not observed.

An identical pattern emerged for preparation for bias (see the bottom portion of Table 4). Significant daily bidirectional associations between family preparation for bias and ethnic-racial discrimination emerged: on days when adolescents experienced greater discrimination, they also reported greater family preparation for bias on the next day; and vice versa. A unidirectional association emerged from peer preparation for bias to ethnic-racial discrimination: on days when adolescents reported greater peer preparation for bias, they reported greater experiences of ethnic-racial discrimination on the next day, but the reverse direction was not observed.

TABLE 4. Daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination.

Predictor (day t − 1)	Outcome (day t)	n	k	Random slope
				B	Posterior SD	95% CI		β
				B	Posterior SD	LL	UL	β
Cultural socialization
Family CS	Discrimination	167	2315	.09*	.03	.03	.14	.11
Discrimination	Family CS			.12*	.05	.02	.22	.08
Peer CS	Discrimination	167	2315	.10*	.03	.04	.16	.16
Discrimination	Peer CS			.01	.06	−.11	.14	.03
Preparation for bias
Family PB	Discrimination	118	1640	.13	.04	.04	.20	.15
Discrimination	Family PB			.13*	.06	.002	.24	.11
Peer PB	Discrimination	94	1304	.20*	.07	.07	.33	.18
Discrimination	Peer PB			.04	.05	−.05	.15	.07

Abbreviations: CI, credibility interval; CS, cultural socialization; Discrimination, ethnic-racial discrimination; k, number of days; LL/UL, lower/upper level; n, number of participants; PB, preparation for bias.
* p < .05.

Demographic variations

We also explored demographic variations in the above studied associations by gender, ethnicity-race, and generational status (see Tables S8–S13). Since there were multiple comparisons, we used 99% CI for variations by ethnicity-race, and no significant differences emerged. We also did not observe significant differences by gender or generational status (whether based on 95% or 99% CI).

DISCUSSION

Research has typically examined ethnic-racial socialization in the family context, with limited attention to other development settings or to its transactional nature across settings (Hughes et al., 2016). Using daily data over 2 weeks from a diverse sample of ethnic-racial minority adolescents, this study examined a daily transactional model of ethnic-racial socialization across family and peer contexts, identity, and discrimination. Results suggest that peer groups are an important source of ethnic-racial socialization messages: cross-day, bidirectional associations were observed between family and peer cultural socialization; and peer but not family cultural socialization promoted adolescents' ethnic-racial identity (centrality, private regard, public regard) on the next day. Daily associations also emerged between ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination: adolescents' experiences of ethnic-racial discrimination predicted family but not peer ethnic-racial socialization (cultural socialization, preparation for bias) on the next day; family and peer ethnic-racial socialization predicted adolescents' reports of discrimination on the next day.

Family and peer ethnic-racial socialization in adolescents' everyday life

A key contribution of the current study is the investigation of ethnic-racial socialization across family and peer contexts, as well as their bidirectional associations on a daily basis. Previous research has rarely considered ethnic-racial socialization outside the family context (Ruck et al., 2021), and studies that have done so are all based on cross-sectional designs (Nelson et al., 2018; Wang & Benner, 2016), precluding the investigation of how family and peer ethnic-racial socialization relate to one another. By utilizing a daily design that disentangled directionality on a daily basis, the current study highlights the dynamic nature of family and peer cultural socialization from 1 day to another. Adolescence is a period when young people engage in active exploration of issues related to ethnicity and race (Umaña-Taylor et al., 2014). As such, it is possible that adolescents bring ethnic-racial messages they receive from different contexts and engage in active processing of these messages on a daily basis. For example, adolescents can share with their parents conversations or activities related to ethnicity and race they have had with peers at school; they can also bring in their parents' perspectives when discussing ethnic-racial issues with peers. This finding shows that family and peers are active, interrelated sources from which adolescents obtain ethnic-racial messages in everyday life. It also contributes to a growing body of work that calls for a greater attention to ethnic-racial socialization at the intersection of multiple contexts in future research (Hughes et al., 2016; Sladek et al., 2022).

Daily associations between ethnic-racial socialization and identity

Moving to the daily associations between ethnic-racial socialization and identity, we observed unidirectional effects of peer, but not family, cultural socialization on next-day ethnic-racial identity (centrality, private regard, public regard). This finding is not surprising given the salience of peer influences in adolescence (Brown & Larson, 2009). It is also in line with recent work highlighting the role of peer ethnic-racial socialization in adolescents' ethnic-racial identity development (Nelson et al., 2018). More importantly, the observed within-person effects teased out trait-like individual characteristics that may confound between-person associations, shedding light onto more transitory, in-the-moment peer effects in everyday life. For example, qualitative research shows that peer ethnic-racial socialization may occur as a result of class activities, school and community events, and media exposure on a given day (Sladek et al., 2022). Adolescents may remember the conversations or activities they have had with peers that celebrated their ethnic-racial heritage, thus reporting more positive ethnic-racial identity on the next day. The current finding echoes previous work documenting the central role of cultural socialization (as opposed to preparation for bias) in promoting centrality and private regard (Butler-Barnes et al., 2019; Rivas-Drake et al., 2009; Witherspoon et al., 2021). In contrast, while previous studies tend to show null findings between family cultural socialization and public regard, peers may be especially influential in conveying how “others” think about adolescents' ethnic-racial group, thus having a more consistent effect for public regard (Santos et al., 2017). The current finding highlighted the importance of peers in adolescents' everyday ethnic-racial identity. How these short-term, daily effects may accumulate to influence ethnic-racial identity development over time is an area of research with great potential.

Daily associations between ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination

Moving to the daily associations between ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination, we observed significant effects of ethnic-racial discrimination on family, but not peer, ethnic-racial socialization (cultural socialization, preparation for bias). Existing evidence is mixed in terms of whether adolescents' experiences of discrimination may be linked to family ethnic-racial socialization or not (Saleem et al., 2020; White-Johnson et al., 2010; Woo et al., 2020) at the between-person level. We suspect that, at a daily level, parents may tailor their ethnic-racial socialization practices to children's experiences more flexibly. For example, on days when adolescents experience ethnic-racial discrimination in peer groups, they may bring the issues home and discuss them with their family members continuously over the next days, seeking help to better process these experiences. Parents, remembering their children's experiences on the previous day, may also follow up with additional ethnic-racial socialization, in both affirmative and preparatory forms, to better support their children. These findings highlighted the central role of parents in guiding adolescents through the experiences of discrimination and engaging in challenging race conversations in everyday life. The findings also underlined the value of taking a daily perspective to understand the fluid nature of family ethnic-racial socialization. More research is needed to further explore when and how families may tailor the ethnic-racial messages they convey based on adolescents' everyday experiences, and how the fluid nature of family ethnic-racial socialization matters for adolescent adjustment.

Moving to the alternative direction of the associations, both family and peer ethnic-racial socialization (cultural socialization, preparation for bias) were associated with greater next-day discrimination. While previous cross-sectional research has suggested a potential link from family ethnic-racial socialization to adolescents' perceptions of discrimination (Kulish et al., 2019), this study provided more direct evidence by disentangling directionality between the variables on a daily basis. It is possible that both cultural socialization and preparation for bias can heighten issues of ethnicity and race and increase adolescents' awareness of racism (Hughes et al., 2016). As such, they are more likely to report discrimination due to ethnicity and race when these events occur. Previous research has suggested that being able to correctly attribute unfair treatment to discrimination is adaptive for ethnic-racial minority youth navigating these challenges (Graham et al., 2009). Future work is needed to further unpack how ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination conjointly influence adolescent well-being on a daily basis.

Implications, limitations, and future directions

A key strength of the current study is the investigation of the timing and sequential order in which ethnic-racial dynamics such as socialization, identity, and discrimination occur and change on a daily basis. These findings have important practical implications, as recent research suggests that levers of change identified by these daily associations may be more effective at improving individual outcomes in everyday life (Snippe et al., 2016). For example, given the significant role of peer cultural socialization in cultivating adolescents' ethnic-racial identity on a daily basis, prevention and intervention efforts can focus on peer groups as a central context to improve everyday identity development for ethnically and racially diverse youth. In contrast, given that families may be a major source that engage adolescents in challenging conversations about racism and help adolescents process these experiences, educational programs can be designed to provide strategies and messages that parents can use in their immediate responses to adolescents' ethnic-racial experiences outside their family context.

The current study should also be interpreted within its caveats and limitations. While this study focused on cross-day effects, the target constructs may also influence each other on the same day. For example, adolescents' ethnic-racial identity may be affected by the socialization messages they received that day; adolescents may initiate more ethnic-racial conversations with their family and peers when they think ethnic-racial identity is more important that day; parents and peers can also provide ethnic-racial socialization on the same day after discrimination occurs. These dynamics are, in part, captured by the bivariate, same-day associations in the descriptive analyses. However, the current data cannot fully disentangle directionality among these same-day variables. Future research that samples multiple timepoints within a day or uses mixed methods is better positioned at exploring how ethnic-racial dynamics occur within the same day and unfold across days.

Regarding daily discrimination, although the current study identified a similar frequency as in most previous daily research (about 1 to 2 days per week; Cheeks et al., 2020; Feng et al., 2020; Seaton & Iida, 2019), a few studies have observed more frequent occurrences (two to five events per day; English et al., 2020; Seaton & Douglass, 2014). These discrepancies may be due to variations in the source of discrimination assessed (e.g., the current study assessed interpersonal discrimination perpetrated by peers, without distinguishing the online versus offline context; English and colleagues assessed interpersonal and vicarious discrimination perpetrated by peers and other individuals more generally, occurring both online and offline), the response scale used (e.g., a binary yes-or-no scale vs. number of events each day), participant socio-demographics (e.g., age, ethnicity and race), and potentially other contextual characteristics (e.g., geographic locations). Future research is needed to explore the factors contributing to the variations in adolescents' daily experiences of ethnic-racial discrimination.

Additionally, although the current study was able to disentangle directionality between the target variables using a daily design, these associations were examined within a specific period of time (i.e., 9th grade). Future research is needed to explore whether the current findings hold for other developmental periods. Moreover, although we did not observe significant demographic differences for the studied associations, larger samples are needed to further explore potential subgroup variations. Finally, the current study focused on linear associations. There is research suggesting that preparation for bias may have curvilinear effects for adolescent outcomes, wherein moderate levels of preparation for bias appear most optimal (Harris-Britt et al., 2007). While our modeling technique (i.e., DSEM) currently does not have a feature to explore nonlinear associations, this is an area ripe for future research.

Despite these limitations, the current study contributes to the existing literature on ethnic-racial socialization in several important ways. Peers emerged as an active source of ethnic-racial messages that dynamically link to family ethnic-racial socialization efforts, and are a key factor contributing to adolescents' ethnic-racial identity on a daily basis, highlighting the importance of expanding the investigation of ethnic-racial socialization to include contexts outside the family, such as peer groups. Moreover, family and peers may take on differential socialization roles in everyday life, with peer cultural socialization being particularly promotive of adolescents' ethnic-racial identity and family ethnic-racial socialization being critical in facilitating coping after youth have experienced discrimination on a given day. By establishing a daily transactional model of ethnic racial socialization, identity, and discrimination, the current study highlights the dynamic nature of ethnic-racial socialization, which is sensitive to and influential for adolescents' everyday ethnic-racial experiences across different developmental settings. Future research that recognizes the fluid nature of ethnic-racial socialization will be better positioned to understand adolescents' everyday well-being within the ethnic-racial context.

FUNDING INFORMATION

This research is supported by William T. Grant Foundation. The content is solely the responsibility of the author and does not necessarily represent the official views of William T. Grant Foundation.

Open Research

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The data necessary to reproduce the analyses presented here are not publicly accessible. Data are available from the first author upon reasonable request. The analytic code and materials necessary to reproduce the analyses presented in this paper is publicly accessible at OSF (https://osf.io/79kpm). The analyses presented here were not preregistered.

Supporting Information

REFERENCES

Albert, D., Chein, J., & Steinberg, L. (2013). Peer influences on adolescent decision making. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 114–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721412471347
10.1177/0963721412471347
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2021). Bayesian estimation of single and multilevel models with latent variable interactions. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 28, 314–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2020.1761808
10.1080/10705511.2020.1761808
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2022). Practical aspects of dynamic structural equation models. Mplus.

Google Scholar
Benner, A. D., & Graham, S. (2009). The transition to high school as a developmental process among multiethnic urban youth. Child Development, 80, 356–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01265.x
10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01265.x
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In R. M. Lerner & W. Damon (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology. Vol 1: Theoretical models of human development ( 6thed. ed., pp. 793–828). John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Google Scholar
Brown, B. B., & Larson, J. (2009). Peer relationships in adolescence. In R. M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology. Vol 2: Contextual influences on adolescent development ( 3rd ed., pp. 74–103). John Wiley & Sons Inc.
10.1002/9780470479193.adlpsy002004
Google Scholar
Butler-Barnes, S. T., Richardson, B. L., Chavous, T. M., & Zhu, J. (2019). The importance of racial socialization: School-based racial discrimination and racial identity among African American adolescent boys and girls. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 29, 432–448. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12383
10.1111/jora.12383
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Cheeks, B. L., Chavous, T. M., & Sellers, R. M. (2020). A daily examination of African American adolescents' racial discrimination, parental racial socialization, and psychological affect. Child Development, 91, 2123–2140. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13416
10.1111/cdev.13416
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
English, D., Lambert, S. F., Tynes, B. M., Bowleg, L., Zea, M. C., & Howard, L. C. (2020). Daily multidimensional racial discrimination among Black US American adolescents. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 66, 101068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2019.101068
10.1016/j.appdev.2019.101068
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Feng, Y., Cheon, Y. M., Yip, T., & Cham, H. (2020). Multilevel IRT analysis of the everyday discrimination scale and the racial/ethnic discrimination index. Psychological Assessment, 33, 637–651. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000906
10.1037/pas0000906
Web of Science®Google Scholar
French, S. E., Coleman, B. R., & DiLorenzo, M. L. (2013). Linking racial identity, ethnic identity, and racial-ethnic socialization: A tale of three race-ethnicities. Identity, 13, 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/15283488.2012.747438
10.1080/15283488.2012.747438
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Graham, S., Bellmore, A., Nishina, A., & Juvonen, J. (2009). “It must be me”: Ethnic diversity and attributions for peer victimization in middle school. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38, 487–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-008-9386-4
10.1007/s10964-008-9386-4
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Hamaker, E. L., & Wichers, M. (2017). No time like the present: Discovering the hidden dynamics in intensive longitudinal data. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 10–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416666518
10.1177/0963721416666518
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Harris-Britt, A., Valrie, C. R., Kurtz-Costes, B., & Rowley, S. J. (2007). Perceived racial discrimination and self-esteem in African American youth: Racial socialization as a protective factor. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 17, 669–682. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2007.00540
10.1111/j.1532-7795.2007.00540.x
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Hughes, D., & Chen, D. (1997). When and what parents tell children about race: An examination of race-related socialization among African American families. Applied Developmental Science, 1, 200–214. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532480xads0104_4
10.1207/s1532480xads0104_4
Google Scholar
Hughes, D., Rodriguez, J., Smith, E. P., Johnson, D. J., Stevenson, H. C., & Spicer, P. (2006). Parents' ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of research and directions for future study. Developmental Psychology, 42, 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.747
10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.747
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Hughes, D., Watford, J. A., & Del Toro, J. (2016). A transactional/ecological perspective on ethnic-racial identity, socialization, and discrimination. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 51, 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.acdb.2016.05.001
10.1016/bs.acdb.2016.05.001
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Huguley, J. P., Wang, M.-T., Vasquez, A. C., & Guo, J. (2019). Parental ethnic–racial socialization practices and the construction of children of color's ethnic–racial identity: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 145, 437–458. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000187
10.1037/bul0000187
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Huynh, V. W., & Fuligni, A. J. (2010). Discrimination hurts: The academic, psychological, and physical well-being of adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20, 916–941. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00670.x.
10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00670.x
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Kulish, A. L., Cavanaugh, A. M., Stein, G. L., Kiang, L., Gonzalez, L. M., Supple, A., & Mejia, Y. (2019). Ethnic-racial socialization in Latino families: The influence of mothers' socialization practices on adolescent private regard, familism, and perceived ethnic-racial discrimination. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 25, 199–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000222
10.1037/cdp0000222
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
McNeish, D., & Hamaker, E. L. (2019). A primer on two-level dynamic structural equation models for intensive longitudinal data in Mplus. Psychological Methods, 25, 610–635. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000250
10.1037/met0000250
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Michigan's Center for Educational Performance and Information. (2017). Student enrollment counts report. https://www.mischooldata.org/student-enrollment-counts-report/

Google Scholar
Muthén, B. O. (2010). Bayesian analysis in Mplus: A brief introduction. Mplus.

Google Scholar
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2017). Mplus user's guide ( 8th ed.). Muthen & Muthen.
10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.28.1.341
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Nagata, J. M., Ganson, K. T., Sajjad, O. M., Benabou, S. E., & Bibbins-Domingo, K. (2021). Prevalence of perceived racism and discrimination among US children aged 10 and 11 years: The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study. JAMA Pediatrics, 175, 861–863. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.1022
10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.1022
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Neblett, E. W., Jr., Rivas-Drake, D., & Umaña-Taylor, A. J. (2012). The promise of racial and ethnic protective factors in promoting ethnic minority youth development. Child Development Perspectives, 6, 295–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2012.00239.x
10.1111/j.1750-8606.2012.00239.x
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Nelson, S. C., Syed, M., Tran, A. G. T. T., Hu, A. W., & Lee, R. M. (2018). Pathways to ethnic-racial identity development and psychological adjustment: The differential associations of cultural socialization by parents and peers. Developmental Psychology, 54, 2166–2180. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000597
10.1037/dev0000597
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Rivas-Drake, D., Hughes, D., & Way, N. (2009). A preliminary analysis of associations among ethnic–racial socialization, ethnic discrimination, and ethnic identity among urban sixth graders. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 19, 558–584. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2009.00607.x
10.1111/j.1532-7795.2009.00607.x
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Ruck, M. D., Hughes, D. L., & Niwa, E. Y. (2021). Through the looking glass: Ethnic racial socialization among children and adolescents. Journal of Social Issues, 77, 943–963. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12495
10.1111/josi.12495
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Saleem, F. T., Lambert, S. F., Stock, M. L., & Gibbons, F. X. (2020). Examining changes in African American mothers' racial socialization patterns during adolescence: Racial discrimination as a predictor. Developmental Psychology, 56, 1610–1622. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000993
10.1037/dev0000993
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Santos, C. E., Kornienko, O., & Rivas-Drake, D. (2017). Peer influence on ethnic-racial identity development: A multi-site investigation. Child Development, 88, 725–742. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12789
10.1111/cdev.12789
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Seaton, E. K., & Douglass, S. (2014). School diversity and racial discrimination among African-American adolescents. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 20, 156–165. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035322
10.1037/a0035322
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Seaton, E. K., & Iida, M. (2019). Racial discrimination and racial identity: Daily moderation among black youth. American Psychologist, 74, 117–127. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000367
10.1037/amp0000367
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Sellers, R. M., Rowley, S. A. J., Chavous, T. M., Shelton, J. N., & Smith, M. A. (1997). Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity: A preliminary investigation of reliability and constuct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 805–815. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.4.805
10.1037/0022-3514.73.4.805
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Sellers, R. M., Smith, M. A., Shelton, J. N., Rowley, S. A. J., & Chavous, T. M. (1998). Multidimensional model of racial identity: A reconceptualization of African American racial identity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 18–39. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0201_2
10.1207/s15327957pspr0201_2
CASPubMedGoogle Scholar
Sladek, M. R., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Hardesty, J. L., Aguilar, G., Bates, D., Bayless, S. D., Gomez, E., Hur, C. K., Ison, A., Jones, S., Luo, H., Satterthwaite-Freiman, M., & Vázquez, M. A. (2022). “So, like, it's all a mix of one”: Intersecting contexts of adolescents' ethnic-racial socialization. Child Development, 93, 1284–1303. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13756
10.1111/cdev.13756
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Smith-Bynum, M. A., Anderson, R. E., Davis, B. L., Franco, M. G., & English, D. (2016). Observed racial socialization and maternal positive emotions in African American mother–adolescent discussions about racial discrimination. Child Development, 87, 1926–1939. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12562
10.1111/cdev.12562
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Snippe, E., Hartmann, J. A., Kramer, I., Viechtbauer, W., Delespaul, P., Myin-Germeys, I., Simons, C. J. P., Menne-Lothmann, C., Booij, S. H., & Wichers, M. (2016). Change in daily life behaviors and depression: Within-person and between-person associations. Health Psychology, 35, 433–441. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000312
10.1037/hea0000312
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Alfaro, E. C., Bámaca, M. Y., & Guimond, A. B. (2009). The central role of familial ethnic socialization in Latino adolescents' cultural orientation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 46–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00579.x
10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00579.x
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Quintana, S. M., Lee, R. M., Cross, W. E., Rivas-Drake, D., Schwartz, S. J., Syed, M., Yip, T., Seaton, E., & Ethnic and Racial Identity in the 21st Century Study Group. (2014). Ethnic and racial identity during adolescence and into young adulthood: An integrated conceptualization. Child Development, 85, 21–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12196
10.1111/cdev.12196
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Zeiders, K. H., & Updegraff, K. A. (2013). Family ethnic socialization and ethnic identity: A family-driven, youth-driven, or reciprocal process? Journal of Family Psychology, 27, 137–146. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031105
10.1037/a0031105
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Wang, M. T., Henry, D. A., Smith, L. V., Huguley, J. P., & Guo, J. (2020). Parental ethnic-racial socialization practices and children of color's psychosocial and behavioral adjustment: A systematic review and meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 75, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000464
10.1037/amp0000464
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Wang, Y., & Benner, A. D. (2016). Cultural socialization across contexts: Family-peer congruence and adolescent well-being. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45, 594–611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0426-1
10.1007/s10964-016-0426-1
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Wang, Y., Benner, A. D., & Kim, S. Y. (2015). The cultural socialization scale: Assessing family and peer socialization toward heritage and mainstream cultures. Psychological Assessment, 27, 1452–1462. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000136
10.1037/pas0000136
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Wang, Y., & Yip, T. (2020). Parallel changes in ethnic/racial discrimination and identity in high school. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49, 1517–1530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01186-w
10.1007/s10964-019-01186-w
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Way, N. (1997). Adult and peer discrimination measure [Unpublished manuscript].

Google Scholar
White-Johnson, R. L., Ford, K. R., & Sellers, R. M. (2010). Parental racial socialization profiles: Association with demographic factors, racial discrimination, childhood socialization, and racial identity. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16, 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016111
10.1037/a0016111
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Witherspoon, D. P., Wei, W., May, E. M., Boggs, S., Chancy, D., Bámaca-Colbert, M. Y., & Bhargava, S. (2021). Latinx youth's ethnic-racial identity in context: Examining ethnic-racial socialization in a new destination area. Journal of Social Issues, 77, 1234–1256. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12492
10.1111/josi.12492
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Woo, B., Maglalang, D. D., Ko, S., Park, M., Choi, Y., & Takeuchi, D. T. (2020). Racial discrimination, ethnic-racial socialization, and cultural identities among Asian American youths. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 26, 447–459. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000327
10.1037/cdp0000327
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Yip, T. (2014). Ethnic identity in everyday life: The influence of identity development status. Child Development, 85, 205–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12107
10.1111/cdev.12107
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Zeiders, K. H., Landor, A. M., Flores, M., & Brown, A. (2018). Microaggressions and diurnal cortisol: Examining within-person associations among African American and Latino young adults. Journal of Adolescent Health, 63, 482–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.04.018
10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.04.018
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume94, Issue6

November/December 2023

Pages 1566-1580

Family and peer ethnic-racial socialization in adolescents' everyday life: A daily transactional model with ethnic-racial identity and discrimination

Abstract

Abbreviations

Family and peer ethnic-racial socialization in adolescents' everyday life

A daily transactional model of ethnic-racial socialization, identity, and discrimination

Daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization and identity

Daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination

The current study

METHOD

Participants

Procedures

Measures

Daily ethnic-racial socialization across context

Daily ethnic-racial identity

Daily ethnic-racial discrimination

Covariates

Analysis plan

RESULTS

Descriptive statistics of daily ethnic-racial socialization, discrimination, and identity

Daily bidirectional associations between family and peer ethnic-racial socialization

Daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization and identity

Daily bidirectional associations between ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination

Demographic variations

DISCUSSION

Family and peer ethnic-racial socialization in adolescents' everyday life

Daily associations between ethnic-racial socialization and identity

Daily associations between ethnic-racial socialization and discrimination

Implications, limitations, and future directions

FUNDING INFORMATION

Open Research

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Supporting Information

REFERENCES

Citing Literature

Figures

References

Related

Information