1 / 45

By Angela LaRocque

Psychological Distress Between American Indian and Majority Culture College Students Regarding the Use of the Fighting Sioux Nickname and Logo. By Angela LaRocque. Introduction. The word “Indian” can trigger an array of images.

sylvia
Download Presentation

By Angela LaRocque

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Psychological Distress Between American Indian and Majority Culture College Students Regarding the Use of the Fighting Sioux Nickname and Logo By Angela LaRocque

  2. Introduction • The word “Indian” can trigger an array of images. • Unfortunately, society tends to focus on the stereotypic image of American Indians of the past and ignore American Indians of the present and future. • The subset of American society that most reflects inaccuracies are professional, high school, and college athletic teams that choose to use American Indians as mascots, nicknames and logos. • The imagery is often bias, distorted, and misrepresented.

  3. Introduction • American Indians often view American Indian mascots, nicknames, and logos as stereotypic, offensive and dehumanizing. • Many American Indian students attending schools and universities outside Indian communities are often subjected to racial slurs and attacks because of preconceived attitudes resulting from stereotypes (Hansen & Rouse, 1987).

  4. Introduction • Conflict exists over the use of American Indians as sport symbols. • Controversy continues to exist about whether the use of American Indians as mascots, nicknames, and logos is an actual honor to American Indian or a form of racism. • The teams and fans justify their use by proclaiming their team is bringing tradition and honor to American Indians and that they should feel proud about the recognition that these mascots, nicknames, and logos bring (Davis, 1993).

  5. Studies on American Indian Nicknames and Logos • Sigelman (1998) conducted an independent study on the Washington Redskins football team. • Results: No need to discontinue the use of the name. Supporters reported that the name was positive because it is associated with bravery, wisdom, spirituality, courage, and they failed to realize their depictions as racial stereotyping. • Survey study was done by Fenelon (1999) regarding the Cleveland Indians’ “Chief Wahoo.” • Results: A distinctive split among ethnic groups. -Caucasians wanted to keep the logo at all costs despite protests by American Indians. -African Americans remained neutral. -American Indians wanted a change. • Over 50% of Caucasians did not find Wahoo offensive, did not empathize with American Indians, and did not think the logo was stereotypic or racist.

  6. Effects of Stereotypes, Discrimination, Prejudice, and Racism • Zakhar (1987) examined experiences of American Indians at a Midwestern university. • Conclusions: American Indian students were subjected to stereotyping and racism from the beginning of their elementary education through college. They confronted racism on both a personal level and at an institutional level. • The racism inflicted both emotional and academic hardship.

  7. Effects of Stereotypes, Discrimination, Prejudice, and Racism • Huffman (1991) examined cultural, social, economic, academic, and financial problems among American Indian students at a Midwestern university. • Results: American Indian students experienced racism in the form of verbal harassment. Remarks ranged from derogatory to general. • Verbal remarks were in the form of name-calling and racial slurs stemming from common stereotypes held by non-Indians.

  8. The University of North Dakota Nickname and Logo Conflict • LaRocque (2001) conducted a study examining the differences between non-Indian and American Indian college students’ attitudes, beliefs, and reactions to the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo at UND. • Participants filled out a survey on attitudes, beliefs, and reactions to the “Fighting Sioux” logo/nickname and its surrounding controversy.

  9. The University of North Dakota Nickname and Logo Conflict • Results for the American Indians revealed: • the nickname did not honor UND or the Lakota/Dakota/Nakota people. • it was used in a disrespectful manner and that it should be changed. • historically and recently there has been an atmosphere at UND that promotes discrimination. • they have experienced discrimination. • they felt their personal safety was threatened. • they have experienced cultural clashes from the controversy that lead to levels of tension in classrooms. • they have greater levels of stress and tension resulting from the nickname issue.

  10. The University of North Dakota Nickname and Logo Conflict • Results for the non-Indians were the complete opposite of the American Indian results. • They were in support of its continued use and were not affected by the controversy surrounding its use.

  11. The University of North Dakota Nickname and Logo Conflict • Jollie-Trottier (2002) examined differences between American Indians and Caucasians in level of sport fan identification and sport fan motivation at UND. A question regarding the continued use of the nickname and logo was also asked. • Results: Caucasian participants highly identified with the nickname and were more likely to attend athletic events. They also did not support a name change.

  12. The University of North Dakota Nickname and Logo Conflict • American Indians participants on the other hand, did not identify with the nickname and were not likely to attend athletic events. • Many of the American Indian students reported that they were sport fans, but did not attend games because of the nickname and logo. • They also reported that the nickname was encouraging racism and supported a name change.

  13. Purpose of Current Study • To investigate to what extent, if any, the “Fighting Sioux” nickname and logo affects American Indian and Majority Culture college students emotionally. • The study compared American Indian and Majority Culture students differences of emotional reactions and distress to 2 different slide shows using images of the “Fighting Sioux” nickname and logo found around campus at UND.

  14. Hypotheses • American Indians will have more negative affect as a result of viewing the neutral images of the Fighting Sioux nickname/logo than Majority Culture participants. • Majority Culture participants will experience more negative affect as a result of viewing the controversial images than American Indian participants. • American Indian participants will have higher levels of psychological distress than non-Indian participants.

  15. Hypotheses • The Orthogonal Theory of Biculturalism was utilized to examine how the nickname/logo affects bicultural, traditional, assimilated and marginal American Indian students. • Traditional American Indian participants will have higher scores of negative affect and psychological distress than Assimilated American Indians after viewing the Neutral slide show.

  16. Methodology • Participants: 36 Majority Culture and 33 American Indian students attending UND. • Materials: Research packet consisted of 1)informed consent form 2) a demographic questionnaire 3) three Multiple Affect Adjective Checklists (MAACL-R) and 4) the Nickname and Logo Distress Scale (NLDS). American Indian participants also filled out the Northern Plains Biculturalism Inventory (NPBI).

  17. Methodology • Recruitment consisted of soliciting students from psychology and Indian studies classes, sending an e-mail message to American Indian students, and research assistants approaching American Indian students at the American Indian Center. • The study was conducted in a lab in the Psychology building. Each participant was run separately.

  18. Methodology • Participants read through the consent form and signed it if they chose to participate-a copy was also given to them. They were then given specific instructions about the study. • They first completed the demographic questionnaire and American Indians also filled out the NPBI. Participants then filled out the first MAACL-R to establish a baseline for each participant. • They then viewed either the Neutral slide show or the Controversial slide show. The slide shows were counterbalanced. • After viewing each slide show, participants were instructed to fill out the MAACL-R to measure if there was a change in emotional state.

  19. Methodology • After the last MAACL-R was completed, they were then instructed to fill out the Nickname and Logo Distress Scale. The study lasted approximately 45 minutes. • Upon completion of the study, each participant was thanked for their time and were awarded either one hour of extra credit towards their class or five dollars for their participation.

  20. Results • Pearson Product Moment correlations were conducted to examine the relationships between variables and the NLDS as well as with the MAACL-R. See handout • Two (group) X 3 (MAACL-R) mixed factor ANOVA for each subscale of the MAACL-R. • Independent t-tests to see if there were significant differences on mean scores on the NLDS (American Indians vs Majority Culture, Traditional vs Assimilated).

  21. ResultsDescriptive Analyses for Entire Sample • N=69: 36 Majority Culture (19 females & 17 males); 33 American Indian (19 females & 15 males). • Mean age was 23.55 (SD=6.20). • 32% were freshman, 22% were sophomores, 17% juniors, 20% were seniors, and 9% were graduate students. • Majors: 15% psychology; 12% nursing; 10% elementary education, and 9% aviation. • Years attended UND: Mean length was 2.33 (SD=1.78).

  22. ResultsDescriptive Statistics for Dysphoria Composite Scale Ethnic GroupMSDN Baseline Majority Culture 43.41 8.49 36 American Indians 47.36 14.85 33 Total 45.30 12.04 69 Neutral Majority Culture 47.61* 13.41 36 American Indians 67.48* 20.05 33 Total 57.11 19.54 69 Controversy Majority Culture 67.19* 20.72 36 American Indians 77.90* 21.01 33 Total 72.31 21.39 69 *=significant at α=.05

  23. Results • Main effect of MAACL-R [F(2,67)=66, p=.000] α=.05 • MAACL-R *Ethnic GroupInteraction [F(2,67)=5.77, p=.000] α=.05 • Main effect of Ethnic Group [F(1,67)=14.16, p=.000] α=.05

  24. ResultsDescriptive Statistics for PASS Composite Scale Ethnic GroupMSDN Baseline Majority Culture 51 9.10 36 American Indians 51.48 9.57 33 Total 51.23 9.26 69 Neutral Majority Culture 48.97* 9.87 36 American Indians 36.54* 12.85 33 Total 43.02 12.92 69 Controversy Majority Culture 42.30* 10.92 36 American Indians 31.48* 11.09 33 Total 37.13 12.21 69 *=significant at α=.05

  25. Results • Main effect of MAACL-R [F(2,67)=49.94, p=.000] α=.05 • MAACL-R *Ethnic GroupInteraction [F(2,67)=11.88, p=.000] α=.05 • Main effect of Ethnic Group [F(1,67)=14.16, p=.000] α=.05

  26. ResultsDescriptive Statistics for Anxiety Subscale Ethnic GroupMSDN Baseline Majority Culture 44.41 8.62 36 American Indians 45.84 11.48 33 Total 45.10 10.04 69 Neutral Majority Culture 45.08* 10.14 36 American Indians 51.30* 12.44 33 Total 48.05 11.65 69 Controversy Majority Culture 47.77 8.83 36 American Indians 48.66 7.99 33 Total 48.20 8.39 69 *=significant at α=.05

  27. Results • Main effect of MAACL-R [F(2,67)=3.23, p<.043] α=.05 • MAACL-R *Ethnic GroupInteraction [F(2,67)=2.20, p>.118] α=.05 • Main effect of Ethnic Group [F(1,67)=2.51, p>.117] α=.05

  28. ResultsDescriptive Statistics for Depression Subscale Ethnic GroupMSDN Baseline Majority Culture 45.38 7.77 36 American Indians 48.48 11.64 33 Total 46.86 9.86 69 Neutral Majority Culture 46.61* 7.83 36 American Indians 63.12* 20.48 33 Total 54.50 17.26 69 Controversy Majority Culture 51.05* 8.13 36 American Indians 64.18* 17.71 33 Total 57.33 15.01 69 *=significant at α=.05

  29. Results • Main effect of MAACL-R [F(2,67)=18.99, p=.000043] α=.05 • MAACL-R *Ethnic GroupInteraction [F(2,67)=7.51, p<.001] α=.05 • Main effect of Ethnic Group [F(1,67)=16.29, p=.000] α=.05

  30. ResultsDescriptive Statistics for Hostility Subscale Ethnic GroupMSDN Baseline Majority Culture 47.16 10.18 36 American Indians 49.39 11.77 33 Total 48.23 10.95 69 Neutral Majority Culture 54.80* 26.09 36 American Indians 81.24* 33.51 33 Total 67.44 32.49 69 Controversy Majority Culture 95.58* 48.48 36 American Indians 111.09* 45.28 33 Total 103 47.28 69 *=significant at α=.05

  31. Results • Main effect of MAACL-R [F(2,67)=70.13, p=.000043] α=.05 • MAACL-R *Ethnic GroupInteraction [F(2,67)=3.31, p<.039] α=.05 • Main effect of Ethnic Group [F(1,67)=44.84, p=.000] α=.05

  32. Results-Traditional vs Assimilated • Scatter plot reflecting American Indian participant’s data points according to the Orthogonal Theory of Biculturalism. • Bicultural (n=4), Traditional (n=11), Marginal (n=4), Assimilated (n=10).

  33. Results-Repeated Measures Mixed Design • The results revealed that there was no significant difference between the Traditional and Assimilated American Indians on the Dysphoria Composite Scale’s mean scores (negative affect).

  34. ResultsIndependent t-Test • An independent t-Test was conducted between American Indian and Majority Culture participant’s mean scores on the Nickname and Logo Distress Scale. • There was a statistically significant difference between the total scores [t(67)=-5.95, p=.000] at α=.05. • American Indians had a mean score of 15(SD=5.6) and Majority Culture had a mean score of 8.8 (SD=2.67) • The higher mean score indicates that American Indian participants had higher levels of distress due to the “Fighting Sioux” nickname and logo.

  35. Results-Traditional vs Assimilated Independent t-Test • Traditional and Assimilated American Indians did not differ in terms of psychological distress from the nickname/logo {t(19)=-2.01,p<.058}. • Traditional (M=19.20, SD=4.61), Assimilated (M=14.72, SD=5.46). • Because of the small number of participants in each group, conclusions are hard to make.

  36. Discussion • Results supported the first hypotheses that American Indian participants would have higher mean scores of negative affect than Majority Culture participants after viewing the Neutral slide show. • In fact, the American Indian group’s mean score after viewing the Neutral slide show was in the range for experiencing moderate distress whereas the Majority Culture participants still had scores in the normal range. • The supportive evidence for the current hypothesis becomes even clearer when the PASS Composite Scale mean scores are examined.

  37. Discussion • The second hypothesis that Majority Culture participants would have more negative affect as a result of viewing the Controversial images of the “Fighting Sioux” nickname/logo than American Indians was not supported. • Probably the most interesting result of the study is the findings from the examination of the Hostility subscale. The findings indicate that there was a significant difference between American Indian and Majority Culture participants on Hostility mean scores after each slide.

  38. Discussion • The American Indian group’s mean score after the Neutral slide show put American Indians in the extremely significant range for hostility and remained there after viewing the Controversial slide show. • The Majority Culture participants mean score hit the extremely significant range after they viewed the controversial slide show. • The extremely high scores indicate proneness to violence according to the MAACL-R manual. • The findings suggest that the American Indian participants left the study feeling depressed, angry, and with a total loss of positive affect.

  39. Discussion • Interestingly, American Indian participants had higher baseline scores on the negative affect scales of the MAACL-R. • Why? • Suggestions: • American Indian students could have initial higher levels of distress due to being a minority student in a predominately Caucasian university (Huffman, 1991; Zakhar 1987). • American Indian students experience a level of discrimination, racism, and prejudice that affects their daily emotional state (LaRocque, 2001). • American Indians are a higher risk for psychological instability due to historical trauma (Walker; 2001, Lester; 1999; Bryon1997).

  40. Discussion • American Indian students on campus may have higher levels of psychological distress on a daily basis simply from seeing images of the “Fighting Sioux” nickname and logo. • Seeing images may also make them more prone to hostility and feelings of depression. • Controversial images contribute to even higher levels of negative affect and psychological distress. • Negative affect experienced at that level can contribute to American Indian students having a hard time functioning in their daily living.

  41. Discussion • Limitations -the content of the controversial slide show -the slide show may have had images that may have been offensive to one group and not the other. -small amount of participants that were Lakota/Dakota/Nakota. -participants were not randomly selected.

  42. Conclusions • This study provides evidence that American Indian students and Majority culture students are experiencing negative affect and psychological distress due to the “Fighting Sioux” nickname/logo and its surrounding controversy but at different levels. • This is without even considering the added hype that occurs when a controversial issue is brought up on campus about the “Fighting Sioux” nickname/logo.

  43. Conclusions • Although this study provided some significant results, further research regarding the effects of American Indian stereotypical images is clearly needed. • More specific and meaningful research needs to be done in this area, other than offering opinion polls. • More evidence needs to be obtained regarding the direct psychological impact of using American Indians as nickname, logos, and mascots, not only on college campuses, but on a national level as well.

  44. Conclusions • It is clear that this is a serious issue that needs more attention since the findings of the current study do not contribute to a healthy learning environment for American Indian students. • If this problem is not addressed, this issue will continue to contribute to the many problems American Indians face and assist in hindering their psychological well-being.

  45. Conclusions • This study did not offer any potential solutions to the “Fighting Sioux” nickname/logo issue, but it did offer an area that needs to be addressed in regards to the seriousness of how American Indian students are being affected. • Hopefully, this study will contribute to the issue by providing further research in this area and by helping find a resolution to a long standing issue among schools, universities, and professional athletic teams.

More Related