Poster #67 - Disaggregating Dimensions of Critical Consciousness: Support for a Multidimensional Measure

• In Event: 1-115 - Poster Session 03
  In Poster Session: PS 03 Section - Diversity, Equity & Social Justice

Integrative Statement

Critical consciousness (CC) entails an assessment of how individuals recognize structural inequalities between socially constructed groups (i.e., critical reflection) and beliefs about effecting political change (i.e., political efficacy; Watts et al., 2011). Critical reflection and political efficacy beliefs may vary when reasoning about different group-based inequalities. Some people may be highly aware of inequalities based on race and less aware of gender-based inequalities, for example. Beliefs about group-based inequalities may further vary by domains, like inequality in economic, educational, and political opportunities. Existing measures of CC constructs have been unidimensional, failing to capture the beliefs youth hold about different group-based social inequalities across various domains. Therefore, the current study aimed to test domain-specific measurement models of critical reflection and political efficacy and examine whether levels vary across different group-based inequalities.

Participants were 441 college students aged 18 to 31 (M=19.55, SD=1.59; 81% female, 88% White) from a large university in an Appalachian state. Participants reported on four identity-based forms of critical reflection (race-, gender-, LGB, and trans-based), each comprised of five subscales representing perceptions of group-based inequality in economic, educational, political, legal opportunity, and assault prevalence. For political efficacy, participants reported on three items assessing beliefs about how responsive the government is to racial/ethnic minorities, women, LGB people, and transgender people, respectively.

Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were conducted to test the multidimensional nature of critical reflection and political efficacy. Means were created for each critical reflection subscale and used as indicators for four latent variables representing race-based, gender-based, LGB-based, and trans-based critical reflection. Four latent variables representing government-responsiveness toward racial-ethnic minorities, women, LGB, and transgender people was also conducted. Modelling critical reflection and political efficacy each as four separate latent variables provided a good and significantly better model fit than modeling each construct as a single general factor (ΔCFI=.094-.096), providing support for a multidimensional assessment of CC constructs. To test whether levels vary across group-specific forms of CC, a series of paired-samples-t-tests were conducted (Figure 1). For political efficacy, participants perceived the government as significantly more responsive to women, followed by LGB people. The government was considered least responsive to transgender people. For critical reflection, participants perceived greatest levels of inequality among racial and ethnic minorities, followed by transgender people. Mean levels of gender- and LGB-based critical reflection did not significantly differ. Follow-up t-tests examined differences in domain-specific critical reflection (Figure 2). Participants perceived more inequality in economic, educational, and legal opportunity for racial and ethnicity minorities relative to other marginalized groups. Political inequalities were perceived as more prevalent among transgender people, compared sexual minorities and women. Participants were most likely to perceive inequalities in the prevalence of assault for women than for other marginalized groups.

The current study provides insight into the multidimensional nature of critical consciousness in late adolescence. Findings point to important nuances in youths’ understanding of different forms of group-based inequalities that may have unique implications for political development. The presentation will explore associations with political action and discuss implications and future directions.

Authors

• Lauren Alvis, West Virginia University
  Presenting Author

• Aaron Metzger, West Virginia University
  Non-Presenting Author