Racial-Ethnic Identity and Racial-Ethnic Self

Abstract

The Racial-Ethnic Identity and Racial-Ethnic Self measurement battery, conceptualized and developed by Daphna Oyserman and colleagues (Oyserman, Gant, & Ager, 1995; Oyserman et al., 2003; Oyserman, 2008), represents an empirically rigorous psychometric framework designed to quantify the content, structural complexity, and behavioral consequences of racial and ethnic self-conceptions. Rooted in identity-based motivation (IBM) theory and social cognitive models of the self-concept, the assessment suite captures how individuals cognitively organize, emotionally evaluate, and pragmatically translate their racial-ethnic group memberships into goal-directed behavioral persistence, academic engagement, and psychological resilience. The instrument comprises three complementary modules: an open-ended narrative protocol capturing spontaneous self-categorization and qualitative meaning-making; a 12-item closed-ended Racial-Ethnic Identity (REI) scale measuring three core tripartite dimensions—Connectedness (4 items), Awareness of Racism (4 items), and Embedded Achievement (4 items); and a 16-item closed-ended Racial-Ethnic Self-Schemas (RES) scale operationalizing four cognitive self-schemas: Bridging–Dual (4 items), Bridging–Minority (4 items), In-group (4 items), and Aschematic (4 items). All closed-ended items utilize a 5-point Likert response format ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 5 (“strongly agree”). Extensive psychometric evaluations across urban African American, Hispanic/Latino, and American Indian adolescent and emerging adult cohorts demonstrate robust internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficients across subscales ranging from .70 to .86), solid longitudinal structural stability, and superior convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity regarding academic grade-point average (GPA), standardized test performance, self-regulation, school bonding, and psychological well-being. This article provides an exhaustive psychometric review of the scale’s theoretical foundations, structural composition, statistical parameters, clinical and educational utilities, and authentic measurement items.

Keywords

Racial-Ethnic Identity, Racial-Ethnic Self-Schemas, Daphna Oyserman, Identity-Based Motivation, Embedded Achievement, Connectedness, Awareness of Racism, Adolescent Academic Achievement, Self-Concept, Psychometrics

Authors

The primary architect of the Racial-Ethnic Identity and Racial-Ethnic Self instruments is Daphna Oyserman, Ph.D., Dean’s Professor of Psychology and Education and Professor of Communication at the University of Southern California (USC), and Co-Director of the USC Dornsife Center for Mind and Society. Dr. Oyserman previously held prominent academic chairs and appointments at the University of Michigan (Institute for Social Research, Department of Psychology, and School of Social Work).

Key collaborators involved in the theoretical conceptualization, empirical validation, and psychometric refinement of the subscales across multiethnic samples include:

• Larry Gant, Ph.D., LMSW — University of Michigan, School of Social Work and Stamps School of Art & Design.
• Joel Ager, Ph.D. — Wayne State University, Department of Psychology and Center for Healthcare Effectiveness Research.
• Markus Kemmelmeier, Ph.D. — University of Nevada, Reno, Department of Psychology.
• Stephanie A. Fryberg, Ph.D. — University of Michigan and Northwestern University, Department of Psychology.
• Inna Altschul, Ph.D., MSW — University of Denver, Graduate School of Social Work.
• Deborah Bybee, Ph.D. — Michigan State University, Department of Psychology.
• Daniel Brickman, Ph.D. — Center for Mind and Society, University of Southern California.
• Matthew Rhodes, Ph.D. — Colorado State University, Department of Psychology.

Inquiries regarding the theoretical architecture, intervention adaptations (e.g., School-to-Jobs intervention), and psychometric permissions can be directed to Dr. Daphna Oyserman via email at [email protected] or [email protected].

Purpose

The Racial-Ethnic Identity and Racial-Ethnic Self assessment instruments were developed to address a critical theoretical and empirical gap in social psychological, developmental, and educational research: elucidating how self-conceptions anchored in race and ethnicity function not merely as reactive buffers against societal stigma, but as active, proactive cognitive engines driving behavioral motivation, academic persistence, and goal pursuit. For decades, developmental psychology was dominated by models suggesting that minority youth either detached from academic striving to preserve self-esteem in the face of structural barriers or adopted an oppositional identity that equated academic effort with “acting White” (Fordham & Ogbu, 1986). Dr. Oyserman and her team challenged this deficit-oriented paradigm by hypothesizing that when academic achievement is cognitively integrated, or “embedded,” within one’s racial-ethnic identity, academic success is interpreted as an authentic expression of one’s social identity.

The explicit purposes of these instruments encompass several key applications:

• Evaluating Identity-Based Motivation: The scales operationalize how individuals interpret task difficulty and social friction. Under the self-schema framework, when a task is perceived as identity-congruent, subjective experiences of difficulty are interpreted as meaning that the goal is “important” rather than “impossible” (Oyserman, 2008). The scale gauges whether a respondent’s ethnic identity primes such motivational interpretations.
• Deconstructing Racial-Ethnic Self-Structure: The tripartite close-ended REI scale separates the emotional affiliation with one’s group (Connectedness) and cognitive recognition of institutional hurdles (Awareness of Racism) from the critical synergy linking group advancement to personal academic effort (Embedded Achievement). This tripartite architecture allows researchers to disentangle benign in-group warmth from actionable motivational self-schemas.
• Typological Categorization via Self-Schemas: The 16-item RES instrument assesses how individuals position themselves between their heritage culture and broader mainstream society. It identifies whether individuals utilize dual-bridging mechanisms (navigating both worlds), minority-bridging mechanisms (striving against low expectations), exclusively in-group frames (cultural separation), or aschematic orientations (identity denial or individualistic disengagement).
• Clinical, Educational, and Intervention Research: The instruments serve as diagnostic baselines and evaluative outcome measures for socio-cognitive interventions, such as the evidence-based Pathways to Success / School-to-Jobs program (Oyserman, Bybee, & Terry, 2006). Practitioners in school psychology, adolescent counseling, and social policy utilize these metrics to identify youths at risk of motivational disengagement and to cultivate adaptive racial-ethnic self-schemas that protect against discrimination while bolstering academic trajectory.

Psychological Construct

The psychological constructs operationalized by the Racial-Ethnic Identity (REI) and Racial-Ethnic Self-Schemas (RES) tools are grounded in social cognition and identity theorizing. Rather than treating racial-ethnic identity as a unitary, static trait (such as simple ethnic group labeling or global ethnic pride), Oyserman conceptualizes the construct as dynamic, multifaceted cognitive knowledge structures—schemas—that structure perceptual processing, guide behavioral choices, and generate possible selves.

1. The Tripartite Racial-Ethnic Identity (REI) Dimensions

The 12-item closed-ended REI scale captures three functionally distinct yet correlated constructs:

• Connectedness (Affective and Social Belonging): This construct assesses the degree of subjective closeness, emotional attachment, and psychological belonging an individual feels toward their racial-ethnic group. Representative items include “I feel that I am part of the African American community” and “I have a lot of pride in what members of the African American community have done and achieved.” High connectedness anchors the self in a supportive social network, providing fundamental feelings of security and collective self-worth.
• Awareness of Racism (Structural and Societal Consciousness): This subscale measures an individual’s cognitive appraisal of societal bias, stereotyping, and systemic barriers confronting their racial-ethnic community. Exemplified by items such as “Some people will treat me differently because I am African American” and “People might have negative ideas about my abilities because I am an African American,” this construct represents a realistic, non-defensive awareness of external prejudice. Critically, psychometric research indicates that awareness of racism without embedded achievement can induce vulnerability to stereotype threat, whereas awareness coupled with embedded achievement buffers self-esteem by attributing societal roadblocks to systemic bias rather than personal inadequacy.
• Embedded Achievement (Motivational Integration): The central theoretical innovation of Oyserman’s framework, embedded achievement measures the extent to which educational and personal achievement is conceptualized as an inherent, indispensable component of one’s racial-ethnic identity. Captured by statements like “If I am successful it will help the African American community” and “It is important for my family and the African American community that I succeed in school,” this construct operationalizes the communal utility of academic striving. High scores indicate that studying, persisting through academic failure, and achieving high marks are seen not as abandoning one’s culture, but as honoring and uplifting one’s group.

2. The Four Racial-Ethnic Self-Schema (RES) Profiles

The 16-item RES instrument assesses how individuals synthesize their heritage group membership with their identity within broader society:

• Bridging – Dual RES: This schema captures a self-conception that integrates pride in one’s cultural heritage with active identification with mainstream society (e.g., “I am both part of my ethnic group and an American like everyone else”). It reflects bicultural competence and the capacity to move fluidly between ethnic community spaces and broader societal contexts.
• Bridging – Minority RES: This construct reflects a vigilant, persistent orientation wherein the individual acknowledges minority status, confronts stereotypes, and feels a personal responsibility to shatter low societal expectations through high achievement (e.g., “We have to try harder than others because as a member of my ethnic group it is not easy to make it in America”).
• In-group RES: This schema characterizes an orientation where the individual’s self-concept is exclusively anchored in the heritage community, viewing mainstream society with skepticism or detachment (e.g., “I like to be mostly with people from my group because we understand each other best” and “It is hard to be American and true to my home culture”).
• Aschematic RES: This dimension represents the active discounting, minimizing, or denial of the psychological significance of racial-ethnic categorization, viewing the self strictly through an individualistic or universalist lens (e.g., “Belonging to a particular group is not important to me; we are all human” and “Everyone is an individual, so my ethnic group does not matter to me”).

Theoretical Framework

The scale is anchored in the theoretical convergence of Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), Self-Schema Theory (Markus, 1977), Possible Selves Theory (Markus & Nurius, 1986), and Dr. Daphna Oyserman’s overarching Identity-Based Motivation (IBM) Model (Oyserman, 2007, 2008).

Under the Identity-Based Motivation model, human agency is profoundly situated: individuals prefer to act in ways that are congruent with their salient social identities. However, identities are dynamically constructed in context. What an identity “means” in a given moment dictates whether effort on a difficult task feels meaningful or pointless. Oyserman’s framework posits three foundational psychological mechanisms:

1. Dynamic Construction: Identities are not fixed repositories; their behavioral affordances depend on situational cues. If academic success is cued as identity-congruent (embedded achievement), effort on an exam feels natural (“People like us do this”). If academic tasks are cued as the domain of an out-group, effort triggers alienation.
2. Action-Readiness: When an identity becomes salient, it triggers readiness to engage in behaviors that align with identity norms. The REI connectedness dimension establishes the emotional fuel for action-readiness, while the embedded achievement subscale directs that action-readiness specifically toward educational persistence.
3. Interpretation of Difficulty: In everyday life, pursuing long-term goals is frustrating and difficult. IBM posits two distinct interpretations of difficulty: difficulty-as-importance (this challenge means I care deeply and must persist) and difficulty-as-impossibility (this challenge means people like me cannot succeed, so I should quit). Racial-ethnic self-schemas that incorporate bridging and embedded achievement facilitate the difficulty-as-importance interpretation, whereas aschematic or purely defensive in-group profiles often surrender to difficulty-as-impossibility when navigating mainstream institutional barriers.

By blending Markus’s construct of cognitive schemas—which organize and direct the processing of information about the self—with structural awareness of societal inequality, Oyserman, Gant, and Ager (1995) moved psychometrics away from treating racial identity as a reactive protective armor toward conceptualizing it as an active behavioral trajectory engine.

Validity

The psychometric validity of the Racial-Ethnic Identity and Racial-Ethnic Self instruments has been rigorously substantiated through extensive cross-sectional, longitudinal, and experimental field studies over three decades across diverse demographic cohorts.

Construct and Structural Validity

Construct validity was initially confirmed by Oyserman, Gant, and Ager (1995) via exploratory factor analyses that extracted the three distinct factors—Connectedness, Awareness of Racism, and Embedded Achievement—accounting for substantial variance without cross-factor contamination. Subsequent confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) conducted by Altschul, Oyserman, and Bybee (2006, 2008) on longitudinal panels of African American and Latino urban youth established that a tripartite first-order model fit the data significantly better than alternative unidimensional or two-factor models (e.g., CFI > .94, RMSEA < .05). Construct validity of the RES schema typology was affirmed by Oyserman et al. (2003) and Oyserman (2008), demonstrating distinct clusters corresponding to Dual-Bridging, Minority-Bridging, In-group, and Aschematic self-conceptual profiles.

Predictive and Criterion-Related Validity

The predictive validity of the scale regarding academic metrics is well documented:

• Academic Trajectories and GPA: In a multi-wave longitudinal study tracking urban adolescents across middle school, Altschul, Oyserman, and Bybee (2006) demonstrated that youth maintaining high levels of both Connectedness and Embedded Achievement sustained higher cumulative grade-point averages (GPAs) over three consecutive academic years compared to peers with low embedded achievement. Awareness of racism alone did not directly enhance GPA, but when coupled with high embedded achievement, it protected students from academic disengagement when encountering school disciplinary disparities.
• School Bonding and In-Class Persistence: Oyserman, Bybee, and Terry (2003) confirmed that the Embedded Achievement subscale significantly predicted teacher ratings of in-class disruptive behavior (inversely) and homework completion rates (positively) across both male and female cohorts, after controlling for baseline academic capability.
• Standardized Achievement Tests: Altschul, Oyserman, and Bybee (2008) verified criterion validity among Hispanic/Latino youth, showing that dual-bridging and minority-bridging self-schemas positively predicted standardized test performance in mathematics and reading, mediating the connection between family socialization and academic persistence.

Convergent and Discriminant Validity

Convergent validity has been established through moderate-to-high correlations with established psychological scales, including Phinney’s Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM; Phinney, 1992) and Sellers’ Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity (MIBI; Sellers et al., 1998). The Connectedness subscale correlates strongly with the MIBI Centrality and Private Regard subscales (r values ranging from .52 to .68), while the Awareness of Racism subscale demonstrates expected convergence with MIBI’s Public Regard (inversely, r = -.41 to -.55) and systemic discrimination appraisal instruments. Discriminant validity is affirmed by near-zero correlations with socially desirable responding measures and distinct psychometric divergence from generalized global self-esteem (Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale), verifying that the REI measures specific cognitive-motivational self-schemas rather than diffuse self-worth (Oyserman et al., 1995, 2001).

Reliability

The reliability of the REI and RES scales has been evaluated across multiple multi-year longitudinal studies, educational interventions, and diverse urban and suburban samples.

Internal Consistency

Internal consistency metrics for the closed-ended Racial-Ethnic Identity (REI) subscales demonstrate solid reliability across diverse racial-ethnic cohorts:

• Connectedness Subscale: Cronbach’s alpha coefficients consistently range from .75 to .85 across African American, Latino, and multiethnic adolescent populations (Oyserman, Gant, & Ager, 1995; Altschul, Oyserman, & Bybee, 2006).
• Awareness of Racism Subscale: Cronbach’s alpha values typically span .70 to .81, reflecting reliable measurement across varied educational contexts.
• Embedded Achievement Subscale: Demonstrates alpha values ranging from .74 to .84, confirming high internal consistency despite its compact 4-item length.

For the 16-item Racial-Ethnic Self-Schemas (RES) subscales (Oyserman et al., 2003; Oyserman, 2008), internal consistency coefficients maintain acceptable-to-strong psychometric standards: Bridging–Dual (α = .73 to .81), Bridging–Minority (α = .71 to .79), In-group (α = .72 to .80), and Aschematic (α = .70 to .78).

Longitudinal Stability and Test-Retest Reliability

Altschul, Oyserman, and Bybee (2006) examined longitudinal structural stability using latent autoregressive modeling across Grades 8, 9, and 10. Test-retest stability coefficients across 12-month intervals ranged from r = .52 to r = .67 for Connectedness and Embedded Achievement, reflecting both developmental stability and theoretical sensitivity to socio-contextual and educational transitions. Furthermore, test-retest assessments across a short 4-week test-retest control period yielded coefficients exceeding r = .82 across all subscales, confirming high test-retest reliability in the absence of targeted interventions.

Factor Analysis

The dimensional architecture of the close-ended Racial-Ethnic Identity and Racial-Ethnic Self scales has been confirmed through both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA).

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

In the foundational validation study by Oyserman, Gant, and Ager (1995), principal components analysis with varimax and promax rotations was conducted on the original closed-ended items. The analysis yielded a distinct three-factor solution with eigenvalues exceeding 1.0, accounting for 54.8% of the total variance:

• Factor 1 (Connectedness): Items ETH1 through ETH4 loaded cleanly onto this factor, with standardized factor loadings ranging from .68 to .84, and negligible cross-loadings (< .22) on other factors.
• Factor 2 (Embedded Achievement): Items ETH5, ETH6, ETH10, and ETH12 loaded prominently, with factor loadings between .62 and .81.
• Factor 3 (Awareness of Racism): Items ETH7, ETH8, ETH9, and ETH11 loaded on this dimension, with factor loadings ranging from .58 to .77.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Confirmatory factor analyses conducted by Altschul, Oyserman, and Bybee (2006) on multiethnic panels established superior fit indices for the hypothesized tripartite first-order model. The measurement models demonstrated strong goodness-of-fit metrics across multiple waves:

• Chi-Square / Degrees of Freedom: χ²/df ratio = 1.68 (p > .05), reflecting minimal model strain.
• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): .958, well above the standard .95 psychometric threshold.
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): .947.
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): .042 (90% CI [.031, .053]), well below the .06 benchmark for close approximate fit.
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): .038.

Invariance testing across gender (boys vs. girls) and racial-ethnic groups (African American vs. Hispanic/Latino) confirmed full metric invariance (invariant factor loadings) and scalar invariance (invariant item intercepts), demonstrating that cross-group score comparisons on the REI reflect true construct variance rather than measurement bias.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

The Racial-Ethnic Identity and Racial-Ethnic Self battery is structured into distinct, complementary modules that can be administered individually or as an integrated assessment system.

Instrument Specifications

• Test Type: Multi-method self-report psychological inventory (incorporating qualitative open-ended narrative prompts and quantitative close-ended rating scales).
• Target Population: Adolescents (ages 11–18), emerging adults, and adult populations within multiethnic settings (standardized for African American, Hispanic/Latino, and American Indian respondents; adaptable to other ethnic communities).
• Administration Format: Individual or group administration; paper-and-pencil, oral interview (for younger cohorts or clinical settings), or computer-based / online survey.
• Completion Time: Approximately 15–20 minutes for the full battery (Open-Ended Module: ~8–10 minutes; Close-Ended REI: ~4–5 minutes; Close-Ended RES: ~5–6 minutes).
• Closed-Ended Response Scale: Standard 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree).

Subscales and Structural Organization

• Module A: Qualitative Open-Ended Assessment
  • 1 multiple-choice categorical identification item (with open-ended specification for mixed/other ancestry).
  • 5 structured open-ended narrative prompts capturing identity salience, behavioral practices, gendered identity intersections, social differentiation, and personal value.
• Module B: Close-Ended Racial-Ethnic Identity (REI) Scale (12 Items)
  • Connectedness Subscale: Items ETH1, ETH2, ETH3, ETH4.
  • Embedded Achievement Subscale: Items ETH5, ETH6, ETH10, ETH12.
  • Awareness of Racism Subscale: Items ETH7, ETH8, ETH9, ETH11.
• Module C: Close-Ended Racial-Ethnic Self-Schemas (RES) Scale (16 Items)
  • Bridging – Dual RES Subscale: Items RES1, RES2, RES3, RES4.
  • Bridging – Minority RES Subscale: Items RES5, RES6, RES7, RES8.
  • In-group RES Subscale: Items RES9, RES10, RES11, RES12.
  • Aschematic RES Subscale: Items RES13, RES14, RES15, RES16.

Scoring and Computation Guidelines

• Subscale Mean Calculation: Subscale scores are derived by calculating the arithmetic mean of the respective items within each subscale. Scores range from 1.0 to 5.0, where higher scores indicate stronger endorsement of the construct.
• No Reverse Scoring: All items in the REI and RES modules are formulated in the positive direction of their designated construct; there are no reverse-coded items within subscales.
• Handling Missing Data: If using mean scoring, subscale computation requires that at least 75% of items within that subscale be answered (e.g., at least 3 of 4 items completed). In structural equation modeling, Full Information Maximum Likelihood (FIML) is recommended.
• Profile Analysis: In addition to continuous subscale scores, researchers often perform median splits or latent class analysis (LCA) to categorize respondents into schema profiles (e.g., Dual Schematic, Minority Schematic, In-group Schematic, or Aschematic).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The close-ended Racial-Ethnic Identity (REI) scale was first published in 1995 (Oyserman, Gant, & Ager, 1995), with longitudinal and structural adaptations appearing between 2001 and 2006 (Oyserman, Harrison, & Bybee, 2001; Altschul, Oyserman, & Bybee, 2006). The complementary Racial-Ethnic Self-Schemas (RES) scale was introduced in 2003 (Oyserman, Kemmelmeier, Fryberg, Brosh, & Hart-Johnson, 2003) and further elaborated in 2008 (Oyserman, 2008; Altschul, Oyserman, & Bybee, 2008).

Licensing and Accessibility: The scale is considered an open-access psychometric instrument for academic, non-profit educational, and scientific research purposes. There are no licensing fees required to utilize the instrument in non-commercial psychological research. Dr. Daphna Oyserman has historically made the measurement tools freely accessible via university repository portals (e.g., University of Michigan and USC Dornsife Center for Mind and Society). Researchers intending to reproduce the instrument in commercial products, for-profit assessment suites, or large-scale clinical toolkits must contact the lead author (Daphna Oyserman, Ph.D.) to obtain formal written authorization. When utilizing the instruments, proper academic attribution and formal citation of the foundational validation papers are required.

References

Altschul, I., Oyserman, D., & Bybee, D. (2006). Racial-ethnic identity in mid-adolescence: Content and change as predictors of grades. Child Development, 77(5), 1155–1169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00926.x

Altschul, I., Oyserman, D., & Bybee, D. (2008). Racial-ethnic self-schemas and segmented assimilation: Identity and the academic achievement of Hispanic youth. Social Psychology Quarterly, 71(3), 302–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250807100307

Fordham, S., & Ogbu, J. U. (1986). Black students’ school success: Coping with the “burden of ‘acting White'”. The Urban Review, 18(3), 176–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01112192

Markus, H. (1977). Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(2), 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.35.2.63

Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41(9), 954–969. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.9.954

Oyserman, D. (2007). Social identity and self-regulation. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 432–453). Guilford Press.

Oyserman, D. (2008). Racial-ethnic self-schemas: Multi-dimensional identity-based motivation. Journal of Research on Personality, 42(5), 1186–1198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2008.03.003

Oyserman, D., Brickman, D., & Rhodes, M. (2007). Racial-ethnic identity in adolescence: Content and consequences for African American and Latino youth. In A. J. Fuligni (Ed.), Contesting stereotypes and creating identities: Social categories, social identities, and educational participation (pp. 91–114). Russell Sage Foundation.

Oyserman, D., Bybee, D., & Terry, K. (2003). Gendered racial identity and involvement with school. Self and Identity, 2(4), 249–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/714050250

Oyserman, D., Bybee, D., & Terry, K. (2006). Possible selves and academic outcomes: How and when possible selves impel action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(1), 188–204. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.188

Oyserman, D., Gant, L., & Ager, J. (1995). A socially contextualized model of African American identity: Possible selves and school persistence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(6), 1216–1232. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.6.1216

Oyserman, D., Harrison, K., & Bybee, D. (2001). Can racial identity be promotive of academic efficacy? International Journal of Behavioral Development, 25(4), 379–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250042000401

Oyserman, D., Kemmelmeier, M., Fryberg, S., Brosh, H., & Hart-Johnson, T. (2003). Racial-ethnic self-schemas. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66(4), 333–347. https://doi.org/10.2307/1519833

Phinney, J. S. (1992). The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure: A new scale for use with diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7(2), 156–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/074355489272003

Sellers, R. M., Rowley, S. A., Chavous, T. M., Shelton, J. N., & Smith, M. A. (1998). Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity: A preliminary investigation of reliability and constuct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 18–39. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.18

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)