Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, Vol. 90, No. 1
doi:10.1007/s11524-012-9755-x
* 2012 The New York Academy of Medicine
Financial Distress and Depressive Symptoms
among African American Women: Identifying
Financial Priorities and Needs and why it Matters
for Mental Health
Angelica JoNel Starkey, Christopher R. Keane,
Martha Ann Terry, John H. Marx, and Edmund M. Ricci
ABSTRACT Prior research found that financial hardship or distress is one of the most important
underlying factors for depression/depressive symptoms, yet factors that contribute to financial
distress remain unexplored or unaddressed. Given this, the goals of the present study were (1)
to examine the relationship between perceived financial distress and depressive symptoms, and
(2) to identify financial priorities and needs that may contribute to financial distress. Surveys
from 111 African American women, ages 18–44, who reside in Allegheny County, PA, were
used to gather demographic information and measures of depressive symptoms and financial
distress/financial well-being. Correlation and regression analyses revealed that perceived
financial distress was significantly associated with levels of depressive symptoms. To assess
financial priorities and needs, responses to two open-ended questions were analyzed and coded
for common themes: “Imagine you won a $10,000 prize in a local lottery. What would you do
with this money?” and “What kinds of programs or other help would be beneficial to you
during times of financial difficulties?” The highest five priorities identified by the participants
were paying bills and debt, saving, purchasing a home or making home repairs, and/or helping
others. The participant’s perceived needs during times of financial difficulty included tangible
assistance and/or financial education. The findings from this study can be used to create new
and/or enhance existing programs, services, and/or interventions that focus on the identified
financial priorities and needs. Collaborative efforts among professionals in different disciplines
are also needed, as ways to manage and alleviate financial distress should be considered and
discussed when addressing the mental health of African American women.
KEYWORDS African American women, Depression, Depressive symptoms, Risk factors
for depression, Perceived financial distress, Financial strain, Economic strain, Financial
priorities, Financial needs
INTRODUCTION
Of all mental illnesses, major depressive disorder (MDD), referred to in this article
as depression, is the most commonly occurring affective or mood disorder.1–8
Starkey, Keane, and Terry are with the Department of Behavioral and Community Health Sciences,
University of Pittsburgh, Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Marx is with the
Department of Sociology, University of Pittsburgh, School of Arts and Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA, USA;
Ricci is with the Institute for Evaluation Science in Community Health, University of Pittsburgh, Graduate
School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Correspondence: Angelica JoNel Starkey, Department of Behavioral and Community Health
Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. (E-mail:
angelicajstarkey@yahoo.com)
This work was partially supported by the Joseph and Brigida Ricci Scholarship Fund offered by the Behavioral
and Community Health Sciences Department at the University of Pittsburgh, Graduate School of Public Health.
83
84
STARKEY ET AL.
Research clearly shows that women are more likely than men to become
depressed.8–12 What is not as clear is the prevalence rate of depression among
women. Some studies note that the rates among African American women are similar
or lower than rates for white women, yet other studies estimate the rates of depression
to be 50 % higher for African American women.2,13 Numerous explanations exist
that illuminate the difficulty in accurately assessing the true prevalence of depression.
Depression among African American women remains under detected, inadequately
treated, “missed diagnosed,” mis-diagnosed, and under-diagnosed.6,8,10,14–26A lack of
knowledge and disbelief that they are or could be suffering from depression coupled
with trying to live up to the image of being a “strong black woman” contributes to
their not seeking treatment for depression.10,11,13,15,21,27 They also have alternative
ways of coping that cause delays or conflicts with seeking care from a professional.9,15,18,28–30 They are also less likely to participate in mental health research
studies.17 Of note is that in addition to the individual factors mentioned above, misdiagnosis by a professional (physician or other medical and/or health care
professional) can also result in depression being under-diagnosed in this population.
Health Focus: Depressive Symptoms
Even with different measures and different methods, research generally points out
that younger African American women, ages 18–44, have higher levels of depressive
symptoms than white women, African American men, and white men.2 At any given
time 16 % to 28 % of African American women have psychological distress that is
indicative of clinical depression, and consequences of high levels of depressive
symptoms may be just as debilitating as those of depression.2,8–10,13,31 So in lieu of a
focus on depression, which requires a formal diagnosis, numerous mental health
research studies have focused on psychological distress.2
Depressive symptoms can occur as part of the psychological stress response, and
the presence of depressive symptoms is the most commonly used indicator of
psychological distress.2
Risk Factor: Financial Distress
In this article, the terms “financial distress,” “financial strain,” “financial stress,”
“economic stress,” and “economic hardship” will be used interchangeably.
Financial strain is composed of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral responses to
the experience of financial (economic) hardship that occurs when real expenses
exceed income and one is unable to meet his/her financial responsibilities.32 Thus, it
is not solely dependent upon income. Similarly, financial distress has been defined as
a reaction (mental or physical discomfort) to stress about one’s state of general
financial well-being, including perceptions about one’s capacity to manage economic
resources (such as income and savings), pay bills, repay debts, and provide for the
needs and wants of life.33 Financial distress can last a short time, or it can become a
persistent state for individuals or families at all income levels.33
Financial strain/stress/distress are subjective reactions. Measuring these reactions
can help researchers understand individuals’ perceptions about and reactions to their
financial condition.33 Although objective measures of an individual’s financial state
(household income and/or debt-to-income ratio) provide evidence of where one
stands financially, two individuals with the same levels of income and economic
resources may have different levels of perceived financial distress and financial wellbeing.33 For example, people who are financially distressed, including persons who
are not by definition living in poverty, often live paycheck to paycheck.33 Thus,
FINANCIAL DISTRESS/DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS AMONG AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN
85
using subjective measures such as financial distress will provide invaluable insight
above and beyond objective measures alone.
Depression and depressive symptoms have been strongly associated with financial
adversity or strain.34–39 Schulz et al.40 found that financial stress was the strongest
direct predictor of symptoms of depression. In fact, McLoyd and Wilson called
depression a “normative and situational response to economic hardship.”34 It
appears that as financial distress increases, individuals may experience a myriad of
stress-related mental and physical symptoms and illnesses.36,37,41,42 Some selfreported health effects of financial problems included worrying, anxiety, and
tension; insomnia and sleep disorders; headaches and migraines; high blood
pressure/hypertension; stomach, abdominal, and digestive problems; depression;
aches and pains (e.g., back, chest); ulcers or possible ulcers; appetite disorders and
weight gain or loss; fatigue and feeling tired/weak; drug, alcohol, or cigarette use;
and an inability to afford or access recommended health maintenance practices and
health care services.41,42 As expected, individuals reporting lower financial distress/
higher financial well-being reported better health.43 In fact, it was found that
financial satisfaction plays the most influential role in determining global life
satisfaction among black women.31
The occurrence of different types of financial stressors affects the level of financial
distress that an individual feels. One major stressor is living at or below poverty. For
the purposes of this article, the definition of poverty as found in the book, An Atlas
of Poverty in America: One Nation, Pulling Apart, 1960–2003 by Glasmeier44 will
be used: “Being in poverty means that you receive or earn insufficient income to pay
for necessities of daily living; Poverty… reflect[s] a state or condition of being in
which an individual lacks the ability to enjoy life due to lack of access to basic needs
such as food, clothing, shelter, health care, and essential requirements for a
successful work life such as a decent education and access to a vehicle.” Other
stressors include negative financial events such as receiving overdue notices from
creditors and collection agencies, issuing checks with funds insufficient to cover
them, getting behind on bill payments, family money squabbles, and not being
financially prepared for emergencies or major life events.33,43 The frequency of these
negative stressor events adds to the level of financial distress a person feels. For
example, events that occur on a regular basis or very often increase distress. Given
this, although incidental, one-time, or sporadic occurrences of stressor events may
lead to an increase in the level of financial distress an individual experiences,
cumulative events may prove to be more detrimental over time.
The effects of financial strain can also spread to all those in the household who
are dependent upon the income providers.32 Economic hardship has been shown to
influence adolescent outcomes through its effect on parental emotional health/
depressive symptoms and parenting behavior, and it has been shown to increase the
likelihood of depression in the children of those families.32,35 Financial strain can
also cause marital stress; in fact, many family and marriage counselors have
identified financial difficulties as one of the most common causes of marital
difficulties.32
On a note of caution, some researchers argue that it may be the onset or
worsening of a health condition that exacerbates already existing financial
problems.41 A study by Lyons and Yilmazer41 found poor health significantly
increased the probability of financial strain, but found little evidence that financial
strain contributed to poor health. Though this appears to refute the above findings,
one must note that the use of cross-sectional data makes it difficult to establish
86
STARKEY ET AL.
causality. This is not to deny the fact that in some cases poor health does worsen
financial situations; it is to say that numerous research findings have confirmed the
opposite as well, that financial strain indeed affects mental and physical
health.33,35,37,40,42,45,46
Study Focus: Financial Priorities and Needs
There were two main purposes for conducting this study. First, the authors sought to
examine the association of financial distress and depressive symptoms among
African American women, and it was anticipated that there would be a positive
relationship between perceived financial distress and depressive symptoms. Second,
the authors wanted to explore what the identified financial priorities and needs are
of the women in this study as this may prove beneficial to professionals seeking to
address and improve the mental health of African American women.
METHODS
Recruitment
A survey was administered to a cross-sectional sample of African American women,
ages 18–44, who resided in Allegheny County, PA. Participants were recruited over a
period of 4 months via flyers that were posted at various health care centers and
distributed via email. Participants were self-selecting and also referred other individuals
from within their social networks who met eligibility criteria. Women requested packets
if they were interested. Each survey packet contained an informational script and receipt
of a completed survey by mail was consent for participation in the study.
Approval to conduct the study was granted by the University of Pittsburgh IRB
(number PRO10010073, June 28, 2010).
Measures
Socio-demographic data were collected through questions regarding how the
participant heard about the study, the participants’ age, religious affiliation, number
of children, marital status, employment status, highest level of education, income,
and overall religious coping. Additionally, questions inquired about the presence of
other chronic health conditions, recent major life events, a previous diagnosis of a
mental illness, and current mental health treatment.
The Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology—Self-Report 16 (QIDSSR16)47 was used to measure depressive symptoms. It is designed to assess the
severity of depressive symptoms and includes all criterion symptom domains for the
diagnosis of a major depressive episode as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders 4th edition (DSM-IV).47 Strengths of the QIDS include
well-established validity, good internal consistency, and generalizability to a variety of
patient populations (e.g., non-psychotic and psychotic major depressive disorder,
postpartum depression, dysthymic disorder, bipolar disorder) and settings (e.g.,
inpatient and outpatient psychiatry clinics, primary care, clinical trials).47 The total
score ranges from 0 to 27 (continuous measure) with higher scores indicating higher
levels of depressive symptoms.47 Participant’s scores from the QIDS-SR16 were also
grouped by severity of depression (categorical measure) based on the data presented in
Table 3 of the article titled, Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS) & Quick
Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS).47 Scores are noted in parentheses:
none (0–5), mild (6–10), moderate (11–15), severe (16–20), and very severe (21–27).47
FINANCIAL DISTRESS/DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS AMONG AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN
87
The Personal Financial Wellness Scale (PFW), a self-report, eight-item instrument, was
used to measure perceived financial distress/financial well-being.36 A total score was
calculated for each participant by summing the number of points for responses to each
of the eight items and then dividing the total by eight.36 For individuals with fewer than
eight responses, the total number of points for responses was divided by the total
number of items answered. The total score ranges from 1 to 10 (continuous measure)
with lower scores indicating higher levels of financial distress/lower levels of financial
well-being.36 According to Prawitz et al.,36 the scores can be interpreted as follows:
1.0 Overwhelming financial distress/lowest financial well-being
2.0 Extremely high financial distress/extremely low financial well-being
3.0 Very high financial distress/very poor financial well-being
4.0 High financial distress/poor financial well-being
5.0 Average financial distress/average financial well-being
6.0 Moderate financial distress/moderate financial well-being
7.0 Low financial distress/good financial well-being
8.0 Very low financial distress/very good financial well-being
9.0 Extremely low financial distress/extremely high financial well-being
10.0 No financial distress/highest financial well-being.
Two open-ended questions were analyzed by coding for common themes to assess
priorities and needs. The question “What kinds of programs or other help would be
beneficial to you during times of financial difficulties?” was used to assess what the
participants identified as needed support when experiencing financial hardship. The
second question “Imagine you won a $10,000 prize in a local lottery. What would
you do with this money?” was used to assess financial priorities of the participants
by exploring what they would determine as important obligations if given a lump
sum of money.
Statistical Analyses
SPSS was used for all analyses. Frequencies were used to assess the responses to the
socio-demographic questions and to describe the study population. Frequency
distributions and summary statistics (means, score ranges, and standard deviations)
were also examined for depressive symptoms and financial distress.
The dependent (depressive symptoms) and independent (financial distress)
variables were checked for normality using the Lilliefors corrected Kolmogorov–
Smirnov (K-S) test. K-S was used because although the Shapiro–Wilks W (S-W)
test has more power to detect differences from normality, it does not work well
when several values are the same in the data set.48,49 Both values were still
reported.
To investigate the relationship between the continuous measures of perceived
financial distress and depressive symptoms, Pearson’s correlations and simple linear
regression were used. To assess differences and make comparisons in mean financial
distress scores by severity of depression, a one-way ANOVA was used. Since there was
only one continuous predictor (financial distress), in order to use the one-way ANOVA,
severity of depression was considered the predictor and financial distress was
considered the outcome variable.50 Also, the five categories for severity of depression
were further condensed into three groups (none, mild, and moderate to very severe).
Categorization into three groups was chosen because there were too few cases in the
depression categories of severe (one case) and very severe (three cases).
88
STARKEY ET AL.
Effect size estimates (r, adjusted R2, and η2) were also reported to estimate the
magnitude of associations as they are resistant to sample size influence, thus
providing a truer measure of the magnitude of effect between variables.51 For
Pearson’s r, interpretation of the effect sizes are as follows: recommended
minimal = 0.2, moderate = 0.5, and strong = 0.8. 51 For adjusted R 2 and η 2 ,
interpretation of the effect sizes are as follows: recommended minimal= 0.04,
moderate = 0.25, and strong = 0.64.51
Qualitative Analysis
The responses to the two open-ended questions were entered into a spreadsheet,
read thoroughly, and coded for common themes and subthemes. The qualitative
data was initially coded by a single individual who revisited and revised the
themes and subthemes multiple times to arrive at the final codes. This
information was then reviewed by two other individuals, independent of one
another to check for agreement. Once the themes and subthemes were agreed
upon, the results were analyzed (summarized) in order to answer the research
questions proposed.
RESULTS
Participants
Of the 239 packets requested, 113 were returned. Two surveys were excluded
because of age ineligibility; one participant was older than 44 and another
participant’s age was unknown. This brought the total of eligible returned surveys
to 111 for a response rate of 46 %. According to some research, there is no standard
response rate, as several factors determine an acceptable response rate including the
population being studied and the survey’s purpose.52–54 However, as a rule of
thumb for mail surveys, a return rate of 50 % is considered adequate, 60 % is
considered good, and 70 % is considered very good.55,56 For this study, the response
rate would be considered near adequate, but the aims of this study were exploratory
in nature and generalization was not the purpose.
The socio-demographic characteristics of the participants are presented in Table 1.
The average age of the participants was 31, and a majority of the women heard
about the study from someone they knew (66.1 %). The highest percentage of
responses for religious affiliation was protestant (48.1 %). A majority of the women
(82.8 %) had no (30.6 %), one (26.1 %), or two (26.1 %) children under 18 and
85.6 % of the respondents had no children over 17. Over half of the women that
participated in the study were single/never married (62.2 %) and employed full-time
(62.2 %). In regards to education, more than half of the women (62.7 %) attended
some college (20 %), had a technical or Associates degree (22.7 %), or held a
Bachelor’s degree (20 %). When considering income, 77.9 % of the women had
incomes that were less than $40,000. Over 75 % of the women had no chronic
medical conditions (86.5 %). Within the past 6 months, 53.2 % of the women had
no major life events taking place and 27.5 % had one major life event. Twenty-nine
of the 111 (26.1 %) women who participated in the study reported being previously
diagnosed with depression or a mental illness and 13.5 % of the women (15 of the
111) reported that they were currently receiving mental health treatment. Of the 15
women who were currently receiving mental health treatment, 93 %, or 14, also
reported being formerly diagnosed with depression or another mental illness.
FINANCIAL DISTRESS/DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS AMONG AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN
TABLE 1
89
Socio-demographic characteristics
Characteristic
How did you hear about this survey (n=109)
Health center
Received an email
Other (i.e., researcher, friend, co-worker, relative, Facebook)
Agea, years (n=111)
18–26
27–35
36–44
Average age
Religious affiliation (n=104)
Catholic
Muslim
No religious affiliation
Other (i.e., Confused, Christian, Lutheran, Methodist, Non-denominational)
Prefer not to say
Protestant (i.e., Baptist, COGIC, Methodist, Seventh-day Adventist, Jehovah’s
Witness, Pentecostal)
Total number of children 17 and under (n=111)
0
1
2
3
4
5
7
Total number of children older than 17 (n=111)
0
1
2
3
6
Marital/relationship status (n=111)
Single, never married
Married
Divorced
Living with a significant other/domestic partner
Employment (n=111)
Employed (full-time)
Employed (part-time)
Self-employed
Homemaker
Student
Retired
Unemployed
Education (n=110)
Grades 9–11
Grade 12 or GED
Some college, but did not finish
Technical or Associate degree
Bachelor’s degree
Some graduate work
Number
Percent
14
23
72
12.8
21.1
66.1
28
51
32
31.57
25.2
45.9
28.8
6
1
12
27
8
50
5.8
1.0
11.5
26
7.7
48.1
34
29
29
9
4
4
2
30.6
26.1
26.1
8.1
3.6
3.6
1.8
95
9
2
4
1
85.6
8.1
1.8
3.6
0.9
69
24
7
11
62.2
21.6
6.3
9.9
69
7
8
4
9
1
13
62.2
6.3
7.2
3.6
8.1
0.9
11.7
4
16
22
25
22
9
3.6
14.5
20
22.7
20
8.2
90
STARKEY ET AL.
TABLE 1
Continued
Characteristic
Master’s degree
Professional degree
Doctorate degree
Annual income (n=109)
Less than $10,000
$10,000–$24,999
$25,000–$39,999
$40,000–$54,999
$55,000–$69,999
$70,000–$84,999
$85,000–$100,000
Over $100,000
Number of medical conditions (n=111)
0
1
2
4
How often medical conditions interfere with daily activities (n=111)
Never
Rarely
Sometimes
Not applicable
Number of major life events (past 6 months) (n=109)
0
1
2
3
4
5
How often major life events interfere with daily activities (n=111)
Never
Rarely
Sometimes
All the time
Not applicable
Diagnosis of depression or mental illness (n=111)
Yes
No
Currently receiving mental health treatment (n=111)
Yes
No
a
Number
Percent
10
1
1
9.1
0.9
0.9
29
25
31
14
6
2
0
2
26.6
22.9
28.4
12.8
5.5
1.8
0
1.8
96
11
3
1
86.5
9.9
2.7
0.9
3
2
10
96
2.7
1.8
9
86.5
58
30
14
4
1
2
53.2
27.5
12.8
3.7
0.9
1.8
8
15
21
9
58
7.2
13.5
18.9
8.1
52.3
29
82
26.1
73.9
15
96
13.5
86.5
No participants were 20 or 39 years of age
Depressive Symptoms and Perceived Financial Distress
Normality of the Variables Depressive symptom scores ranged from 0 to 21 and
followed a non-normal distribution, D(109)=0.123, pG0.001, W(109)=0.932,
pG0.001, whereas perceived financial distress/financial well-being scores ranged
from 1 to 9.9 and followed an approximately normal distribution according to the
FINANCIAL DISTRESS/DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS AMONG AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN
91
K-S test, D(111)=0.078, p=0.096, but not the S-W test W(111)=0.932, p=0.001.
Transformations were performed and the square root transformations were used for
both variables as it made both distributions closer to normal; D(109)=0.080, p=0.083,
W(109)=0.976, p=0.044, and D(111)=0.061, p=0.200, W(111)=0.977, p=0.057,
respectively.
Relationships Perceived financial distress/financial well-being (M=4.031; SD=2.134)
was significantly associated with levels of depressive symptoms (M=7.39; SD=4.393),
r=−0.397, pG0.001, n=109, in that higher levels of personal financial well-being/
lower levels of financial distress were indicative of lower levels of depressive
symptoms.
The results of the simple linear regression were also statistically significant F
(1,107)=20.075, pG0.001, with and adjusted R2 of 0.150, meaning 15 % of the
variability for depressive symptoms was explained by levels of perceived financial
distress/financial well-being. Figure 1 illustrates the relationship.
Differences and Comparisons When looking at participants’ scores for depressive
symptoms (n=109), according to the categories for severity of depression (Figure 2),
44 women had scores indicative of no depression, 40 had scores indicative of mild
depression, 21 had scores indicative of moderate depression, one had a score
indicative of severe depression, and three had scores indicative of very severe
depression.
According to the one-way ANOVA performed, there was a significant difference
in the mean financial distress scores among three categories for severity of
depression (none, mild, and moderate to very severe), F(2,108)=8.877, p=0.000,
η2 =0.141. Post hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD test indicated that the
average financial distress score for individuals with moderate to very severe levels of
depressive symptoms significantly differed from the average financial distress score
for individuals with no (p=0.000) and mild (p=0.003) levels of depressive
symptoms. There was no significant difference between average financial distress
scores for individuals with no and mild (p=0.731) levels of depressive symptoms.
FIGURE 1. Scatterplot showing the relationship between perceived financial distress and levels of
depressive symptoms.
92
FIGURE 2.
STARKEY ET AL.
Severity of depression among participants.
Table 2 presents the means, standard deviations, confidence intervals, and the
minimum and maximum scores for perceived financial distress by severity of
depression.
Financial Needs
One hundred one participants provided responses to the question “What kinds of
programs or other help would be beneficial to you during times of financial
difficulties?” Half (50.5 %) of the women said tangible assistance, followed by a
need for financial education (44.6 %). Table 3 and Figure 3 present the types and
numbers of beneficial programs and/or help identified.
Financial Priorities
One hundred ten participants responded to the question “Imagine you won a
$10,000 prize in a local lottery. What would you do with this money?” The top
responses provided were that participants would pay bills (49.1 %), pay debt
(41.8 %), and save (38.2 %); use it towards purchasing a home or making home
repairs (21.8 %) and/or they would give it to others (21.8 %). Table 4 and Figure 4
present how and the numbers of ways participants’ would spend the lottery prize.
DISCUSSION
As previously stated, depression and depressive symptoms have been strongly
associated with financial adversity or strain.34–39 In line with previous research
findings, this study hypothesized and found a positive relationship between
perceived financial distress and depressive symptoms. Perceived financial distress
was also found to significantly predict levels of depressive symptoms.
When comparing average levels of financial distress, a significant difference in
average scores between women who were experiencing moderate to very severe
TABLE 2
Average financial distress scores by severity of depression
Perceived financial distress
Severity of depression
n
M
SD
95 % CI
None (0–5)
Mild (6–10)
Moderate–very severe (11–27)
Total
44
42
25
111
4.62
4.29
2.58
4.03
1.91
2.06
2.05
2.13
[4.04,
[3.65,
[1.73,
[2.03,
5.20]
4.93]
3.42]
4.44]
Min–max scores
1.5
1.0
1.0
1.0
9.0
9.9
9.5
9.9
FINANCIAL DISTRESS/DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS AMONG AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN
TABLE 3
93
Participants’ indicated financial needs (n=101)
Beneficial programs or helpa
1. Tangible assistance
1a. Housing
1b. Food
1c. Medical insurance
1d. Utility assistance
1e. Money
1f. For children (i.e., childcare, pampers, formula)
1g. Loan forgiveness/debt relief
1h. Education assistance
1i. Transportation assistance
2. Financial education
2a. Money management
2b. Advisor/counselor/trainer
2c. Empowerment/literacy/entrepreneurship
3. Employment
4. Talking to someone
5. Programs…
5a. Church programs
5b. For mothers, single parents
5c. For kids
5d. That give according to need
6. Education
7. Loans
8. Change guidelines/policies
8a. Lower utility costs
8b. Qualifications for programs
8c. Enforce help from non-custodial parent
9. Resources
10. Spirituality
11. Other
12. I do not have any financial difficulties
13. None/unsure
Total count
Percent
8
9
2
4
18
2
5
2
1
51
50.5
32
10
3
7
10
45
7
10
44.6
6.9
9.9
2
4
3
6
2
5
17
2
5
16.8
2.0
5.0
1
8
2
4
3
2
3
4
11
4
3
2
3
4
10.9
4.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
a
Participants may have identified more than one beneficial program or service
FIGURE 3.
Total number of beneficial programs or help identified by participants (n=101).
94
STARKEY ET AL.
TABLE 4
Participants’ indicated financial priorities (n=110)
Lottery prizea
1. Pay bills (not specified)
1a. Car (insurance, note)
1b. Tuition/school
1c. Mortgage
1d. In advance
1e. Past due bills
2. Pay debt (not specified)
2a. Medical bills
2b. Credit (credit cards, credit repair)
2c. Loans (student, people owed)
2d. Fines
3. Save ($1,000–$5,000; money market account; emergency or
“rainy day”)
4. House
4a. Down payment/purchase
4b. Repairs/improvements
5. Kids (not specified)
5a. Clothes/shoes/school supplies
5b. Education
5c. Save
6. Purchases/spend it (not specified)
6a. Household (items, furniture, groceries/food)
6b. “Things I need”
6c. “Things I want” (have fun, shop, wedding)
7. Vehicle
8. Give to/spend on others (not specified)
8a. Family
8b. Donate/charity
9. Church (includes tithes)
10. Trip/travel/vacation
11. Towards a business
12. Invest
a
30
2
5
1
5
11
21
3
9
12
1
42
18
6
1
4
5
4
3
6
5
5
10
5
15
4
16
8
5
3
Total count
Percent
54
49.1
46
42
41.8
38.2
24
21.8
14
12.7
19
10
17.3
9.1
24
16
8
5
3
21.8
14.5
7.3
4.5
2.7
Participants may have identified more than one way in which they would spend the lottery prize
FIGURE 4.
Total number of ways to spend $10,000 lottery prize (n=110).
FINANCIAL DISTRESS/DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS AMONG AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN
95
levels of depressive symptoms and women who were experiencing no depressive
symptoms was found. There was also a significant difference in average scores found
between women who were experiencing moderate to very severe levels of depressive
symptoms and women who were experiencing mild depressive symptoms. Yet, no
significant difference was found in average financial distress scores between women
experiencing mild depressive symptoms and women experiencing no depressive
symptoms.
The above findings illuminate the fact that financial distress is a significant factor
that should be addressed when working with potentially depressed African
American women. It also supports and adds to what was found in an earlier study
by Falconnier,57 which found that a majority of the patients (86 %) participating in
therapy identified problems of finances, work, or unemployment (economic
stress).57 The study noted that therapists commonly avoided the topic of economic
stress by changing the subject, but when they did pay more attention to the matter,
improved outcomes were noted.57
When looking at responses to the open ended questions, 50.5 % of the responses
listed tangible assistance as being beneficial when experiencing financial difficulties.
Tangible assistance included housing, food, medical insurance, utility assistance,
money, childcare, disposable diapers, formula, loan forgiveness/debt relief, education assistance, and transportation assistance. Moreover, 44.6 % of the responses
stated that financial education would be beneficial. Financial education included
money management, a financial advisor, counselor, or trainer, financial literacy, and
information on entrepreneurship. A majority of the responses (71 %) in this
category were related to money management.
It was also of interest to assess how the women would spend a lump sum of
money if given the opportunity. The assumption was that they would spend
according to whatever they felt were priorities or the most pressing financial
concerns. The top two responses involved paying bills (49.1 %) and paying debt
(41.8 %), followed by saving (38.2 %). Bills included car insurance and payments,
school tuition, mortgages, past due bills, and paying bills in advance. Debts included
medical bills, credit cards, loans, and fines.
So how do we use this knowledge? The identified priorities and needs found in
this study can provide insight and a starting point for professionals seeking to
improve the mental health of African American women. Since we know that
financial distress is an important risk factor for depressive symptoms, decreasing
financial distress will mitigate depressive symptoms, and the mental health of
African American women should improve. The key is to design interventions and/or
programs that address financial distress and ensure they are adapted and targeted
specifically for African American women. For example:
Employ treatment options and counseling strategies that are based on an
assessment of an individual’s current stage of financial distress;32 health and
social service managers and policy makers could then encourage links between
professionals who have contact with families (e.g., social workers, mental health
counselors) and debt counseling and advice services.37
Integrate educational programs and research about the health and financial
areas.43 Increasing an individual’s awareness about finances, financial distress,
and depression/depressive symptoms, and how the three interact can lead to
improvements in psychological well-being via financial planning, savings, and
seeking help for depression.
96
STARKEY ET AL.
Develop and implement programs and policies that promote financial growth and
savings. Money 2000, developed by the Rutgers Cooperative Extension in 1995,
had the goal of improving financial well-being for participants through increased
savings and/or debt reduction via educational services (classes, newsletters,
conferences, computer analyses, home study courses, and web sites).58 The
program was shown to be successful in achieving its goals.
Since policies relevant to fundamental causes of disease form a major part of the
national agenda, we (public health professionals) should broaden the concept of
health policy to include areas not normally considered when thinking about
health, such as education, taxes, recreation, transportation, employment, welfare,
bankruptcy, housing, and criminal justice,59–61 all of which are related to how
individuals perceive financial hardship (distress). Public health professionals can
then describe the impact on health by evaluating whether a proposed policy will
improve or worsen specific health problems.61
Conduct research to find appropriate measures to assess perceived financial
distress so that practitioners can provide effective education and counseling
interventions and measure whether people’s lives are changed for the better as a
result.33 If an individual’s or population’s perceived financial distress/financial
well-being is known, programs can be designed and delivered to help reduce
individual and family distress about personal finances and help improve financial
well-being.33
The interventions/solutions suggested here are merely ideas and are not
exhaustive. It may be necessary to think outside the box, rewrite policies, step into
other arenas, and collaborate with professionals and experts of other fields in order
to address this issue. After all, as public health professionals our top priority is to
promote and enhance the health of the entire population.
LIMITATIONS
Major limitations of this study are due to the study design, the sampling strategy,
and the targeted population.
The research design used was a non-probability, cross-sectional descriptive study
as it is an effective design for investigating prevalence and association, and it is the
preferred design for looking at the population at a single point in time.62 The main
disadvantage of this design is that it is difficult to make causal inferences62–64;
therefore, the study results are not generalizable and are not appropriate for making
inferences about the entire population within Allegheny County, the surrounding
area, or other areas in the USA. Nonetheless, causal inference was not the purpose,
and given the exploratory nature of the study, the results may serve as a basis for
similar or future research in other comparable areas with a similar population.
The sampling techniques employed were convenience and snowball (purposive).65,66 Snowball sampling is a chain referral sampling method that relies on
referrals from initial subjects to generate additional subjects.64 Convenience
sampling is a non-probability sampling technique where subjects are selected
because of their convenient accessibility and proximity to the researcher.67 For this
study, women were recruited via email and from facilities that they often frequented
(health centers) and they then referred other individuals from within their social
networks who met eligibility criteria, and those individuals in turn referred others.
These sampling methods can introduce bias in terms of the target population
FINANCIAL DISTRESS/DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS AMONG AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN
97
because participants will tend to refer other respondents who are similar to
themselves; in turn, as already stated, this may not be reflective of the general
population in the area.64,68,69 This also leads to the exclusion of individuals not in
the social network of the participants. Self-selection bias has the potential to be
present as well since people had a choice of whether to complete the surveys or not
and those who did may actually be different from those who chose not to.63 Finally,
individuals who had a particular interest in research topic were probably more likely
to return the questionnaires than those who were less interested.53
Since completion of the survey was anonymous, the researchers could not identify
or follow up with non-responders in an effort to increase the response rate; thus,
another limitation of the study is the low response rate. However, response rates are
thought to be more important when the study’s purpose is to measure effects or
make generalizations to a larger population and less important if the purpose is to
gain insight.56 Again, the aims of this study were exploratory in nature; therefore,
the results can be seen as a beginning on which to base future studies.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. Richard Day for providing
statistical consultation. Appreciation is also expressed to the Personal Finance
Employee Education Foundation @ http://www.personalfinancefoundation.org/
scale/well-being.html for permission to use the PFW scale.
REFERENCES
1. Beato CV. Mental Health and Mental Disorders. Healthy People 2010 Progress Review:
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2003.
2. Brown DR, Keith VM. The epidemiology of mental disorders and mental health among
African American women. In: Brown DR, Keith VM, eds. In and Out of Our Right
Minds. New York: Columbia University Press; 2003: 23–58.
3. Dwight-Johnson M, Lagomasino IT. Addressing depression treatment preferences of
ethnic minority patients. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2007; 29(3): 179–181.
4. Dwight-Johnson M, Sherbourne CD, Liao D, Wells KB. Treatment preferences among
depressed primary care patients. J Gen Intern Med. 2000; 15(8): 527–534.
5. Givens JL, Katz IR, Bellamy S, Holmes WC. Stigma and the acceptability of depression
treatments among African Americans and whites. J Gen Intern Med. 2007; 22(9): 1292–
1297.
6. Myers HF, Lesser I, Rodriguez N, et al. Ethnic differences in clinical presentation of
depression in adult women. Cultur Divers Ethnic Minor Psychol. 2002; 8(2): 138–
156.
7. Saver BG, Van-Nguyen V, Keppel G, Doescher MP. A qualitative study of depression in
primary care: missed opportunities for diagnosis and education. J Am Board Fam Med.
2007; 20(1): 28–35.
8. United States Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy People 2010:
Understanding and Improving Health. . Mental Health and Mental Disorders. Chapter
18. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 2000.
9. Carrington CH. Clinical depression in African American women: diagnoses, treatment,
and research. J Clin Psychol. 2006; 62(7): 779–791.
10. Van Hook MP. Women’s help-seeking patterns for depression. Soc Work Health Care.
1999; 29(1): 15–34.
11. Waite R, Killian P. Exploring depression among a cohort of African American women. J
Am Psychiatr Nurses Assoc. 2007; 13(3): 161–169.
98
STARKEY ET AL.
12. Ward EC. Examining differential treatment effects for depression in racial and ethnic
minority women: a qualitative systematic review. J Natl Med Assoc. 2007; 99(3): 265–274.
13. Black Women and Mental Health. Available at: http://www.blackwomenshealth.com/
2006/articles.php?id=56. Accessed January 28, 2008.
14. Baker FM. Diagnosing depression in African Americans. Community Ment Health J.
2001; 37(1): 31–38.
15. Brown C, Abe-Kim JS, Barrio C. Depression in ethnically diverse women: implications for
treatment in primary care settings. Prof Psychol Res Pract. 2003; 34(1): 10–19.
16. Das AK, Olfson M, McCurtis HL, Weissman MM. Depression in African Americans:
breaking barriers to detection and treatment. J Fam Pract. 2006; 55(1): 30–39.
17. Dubowitz H, Feigelman S, Lane W, et al. Screening for depression in an urban pediatric
primary care clinic. Pediatrics. 2007; 119(3): 435–443.
18. Jackson AP. The use of psychiatric medications to treat depressive disorders in African
American women. J Clin Psychol. 2006; 62(7): 793–800.
19. Keeley RD, Smith JL, Nutting PA, Dickinson LM, Dickinson WP, Rost KM. Does a
depression intervention result in improved outcomes for patients presenting with physical
symptoms? J Gen Intern Med. 2004; 19(6): 615–623.
20. Kohn LP, Oden T, Munoz RF, Robinson A, Leavitt D. Adapted cognitive behavioral
group therapy for depressed low-income African American women. Community Ment
Health J. 2002; 38(6): 497–504.
21. Mahan V. Challenges in the treatment of depression. J Am Psychiatr Nurses Assoc. 2006;
11(6): 366–370.
22. O’Malley AS, Forrest CB, Miranda J. Primary care attributes and care for depression among
low-income African American women. Am J Public Health. 2003; 93(8): 1328–1334.
23. Reinberg S. Depression May Be World’s Most Disabling Disease: Global Study Finds it
takes a bigger toll than other chronic conditions. Available at: http://abcnews.go.com/
Health/Healthday/story?id=4508589&page=1. Accessed February 1, 2008.
24. Simpson SM, Krishnan LL, Kunik ME, Ruiz P. Racial disparities in diagnosis and
treatment of depression: a literature review. Psychiatr Q. 2007; 78(1): 3–14.
25. Turner RJ, Lloyd DA. Stress burden and the lifetime incidence of psychiatric disorder in
young adults: racial and ethnic contrasts. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2004; 61(5): 481–488.
26. Borowsky SJ, Rubenstein LV, Meredith LS, Camp P, Jackson-Triche M, Wells KB. Who is
at risk of nondetection of mental health problems in primary care? J Gen Intern Med.
2000; 15(6): 381–388.
27. Hines-Martin V, Malone M, Kim S, Brown-Piper A. Barriers to mental health care access
in an African American population. Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2003; 24(3): 237–256.
28. Hines-Martin VP. African American consumers: what should we know to meet their
mental health needs? J Am Psychiatr Nurses Assoc. 2002; 8(6): 188–193.
29. Lang AJ. Mental health treatment preferences of primary care patients. J Behav Med.
2005; 28(6): 581–586.
30. Snowden LR. Barriers to effective mental health services for African Americans. Ment
Health Serv Res. 2001; 3(4): 181–187.
31. Keith VM. In and out of our right minds: strengths, vulnerabilities, and the mental wellbeing of African American women. In: Brown DR, Keith VM, eds. In and Out of Our
Right Minds. New York: Columbia University Press; 2003: 277–292.
32. Aldana SG, Liljenquist W. Validity and reliability of a financial strain survey. Financ
Counsel Plann. 1998; 9(2): 11–19.
33. O’Neill B, Prawitz AD, Sorhaindo B, Kim J, Garman ET. Financial distress: definition,
effects and measurement. Consumer Interest Annual. 2006; 52: 458–465.
34. Coiro MJ. Depressive symptoms among women receiving welfare. Women Health. 2001;
32(1–2): 1–23.
35. Jackson AP, Brooks-Gunn J, Huang CC, Glassman M. Single mothers in low-wage
jobs: financial strain, parenting, and preschoolers’ outcomes. Child Dev. 2000; 71(5):
1409–1423.
FINANCIAL DISTRESS/DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS AMONG AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN
99
36. Prawitz AD, Garman ET, Sorhaindo B, O’Neill B, Kim J, Drentea P. In charge financial
distress/financial well-being scale: development, administration, and score interpretation.
Financ Counsel Plann. 2006; 17(1): 34–50.
37. Reading R, Reynolds S. Debt, social disadvantage and maternal depression. Soc Sci Med.
2001; 53(4): 441–453.
38. Schulz A, Parker E, Israel DB, Fisher DT. Social context, stressors, and disparities in
women’s health. J Am Med Womens Assoc. 2001; 56(4): 143–149.
39. Zimmerman FJ, Katon W. Socioeconomic status, depression disparities, and financial
strain: what lies behind the income–depression relationship? Health Econ. 2005; 14(12):
1197–1215.
40. Schulz AJ, Israel BA, Zenk SN, et al. Psychosocial stress and social support as mediators
of relationships between income, length of residence and depressive symptoms among
African American women on Detroit’s eastside. Soc Sci Med. 2006; 62(2): 510–522.
41. Lyons AC, Yilmazer T. Health and financial strain: evidence from the survey of consumer
finances. South Econ J. 2005; 71(4): 873–890.
42. O’Neill B, Sorhaindo B, Xiao JJ, Garman ET. Negative health effects of financial stress.
Consumer Interest Annual. 2005; 51: 260–262.
43. O’Neill B, Prawitz AD, Sorhaindo B, Kim J, Garman ET. Changes in health/negative
financial events, and financial distress/financial well-being for debt management program
clients. Financ Counsel Plann. 2006; 17(2): 46–63.
44. Glasmeier AK. An Atlas of Poverty in America: One Nation, Pulling Apart, 1960–2003.
New York: Routledge; 2006.
45. Drentea P, Lavrakas PJ. Over the limit: the association among health, race, and debt. Soc
Sci Med. 2000; 50(4): 517–529.
46. Price RH, Choi JN, Vinokur AD. Links in the chain of adversity following job loss: how
financial strain and loss of personal control lead to depression, impaired functioning and
poor health. J Occup Health Psychol. 2002; 7(4): 302–312.
47. University of Pittsburgh Epidemiology Data Center. Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS) & Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS). 2012. Available
at: http://www.ids-qids.org/index2.html. Accessed August 1, 2008.
48. Field A. Exploring Assumptions. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. 3rd ed. Thousand
Oaks: Sage; 2009: 131–165.
49. Yazici B, Yolacan S. A comparison of various tests of normality. J Stat Comput Simulat.
2007; 77(2): 175–183.
50. UCLA. SPSS Data Analysis Examples: Ordinal Logistic Regression. UCLA Academic
Technology Services, Statistical Consulting Group. Available at: http://www.ats.ucla.edu/
stat/spss/dae/ologit.htm. Accessed July 17, 2012.
51. Ferguson CJ. An effect size primer: a guide for clinicians and researchers. Prof Psychol
Res Pract. 2009; 40(5): 532–538.
52. Babbie ER. The Practice of Social Research. 12th ed. Belmont: Wadsworth; 2010.
53. Fowler FJ. Survey Research Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2002.
54. Taylor-Powell E, Hermann C. Collecting Evaluation Data: Surveys: University of
Wisconsin—Extension; 2000.
55. Olney C. Increasing Survey Response Rates [Powerpoint Presentation]. Available at: http://
nnlm.gov/scr/training/presentations/Olney_response_rate.pdf. Accessed July 10, 2012.
56. The University of Texas at Austin. Response Rates. September 21, 2011. Available at:
http://www.utexas.edu/academic/ctl/assessment/iar/teaching/gather/method/surveyResponse.php. Accessed July 17, 2012.
57. Falconnier L, Elkin I. Addressing economic stress in the treatment of depression. Am J
Orthopsychiatry. 2008; 78(1): 37–46.
58. Xiao J, O’Neill B, Prochaska J, et al. Application of the transtheoretical model of change
to financial behavior. Consumer Interest Annual [serial online]. 2001;47(April 4).
59. Braveman PA, Cubbin C, Egerter S, et al. Socioeconomic status in health research: one
size does not fit all. JAMA. 2005; 294(22): 2879–2888.
100
STARKEY ET AL.
60. Cohen H, Northridge M. Getting political: racism and urban health. Am J Public Health.
2000; 90(6): 841–642.
61. Moss N. Socioeconomic disparities in health in the US: an agenda for action. Soc Sci Med.
2000; 51: 1627–1638.
62. Levin KA. Study design III: cross-sectional studies. Evid Based Dent. 2006; 7: 24–25.
63. Heckathorn DD. Respondent-driven sampling II: deriving valid population estimates
from chain-referral samples of hidden populations. Soc Probl. 2002; 49(1): 11–34.
64. Johnston LG, Sabin K. Sampling hard-to-reach populations with respondent driven
sampling. Methodological Innovations Online. 2010; 5(2): 38–48.
65. Aday L, Cornelius L. Designing and Conducting Health Surveys. 3rd ed. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass; 2006: 124–153.
66. Neuman WL. Social Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. 6 ed.
Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education; 2006.
67. Experiment-Resources.com. Convenience Sampling. Available at: http://www.experimentresources.com/convenience-sampling.html. Accessed July 10, 2012.
68. Faugier J, Sargeant M. Sampling hard to reach populations. J Adv Nurs. 1997; 26: 790–797.
69. Goela S, Salganikb MJ. Assessing respondent-driven sampling. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A.
2010; 107(15): 6743–6747.