Other Projects + Abstracts
Project: The Moderating Role of John Henryism on Black College Students’ Relationship with Institutional Race-Related Stressors and Anxiety
College is a critical time of emerging adulthood that is marked by a period of change, self exploration and increased stress. Black students and Black immigrant students attending Predominantly White Institutions (PWIs) may experience added stressors from institutional racism and xenophobia, in part of the Eurocentric practices, policies, and programs that are structurally embedded in the system. Experiencing institutional discrimination can affect the mental health of Black students and has been shown to exacerbate the development of mental health issues, such as anxiety. Thus, students experiencing institutional racism may use John Henryism, a high effort coping mechanism, to mitigate the effects. When Black achievement is undermined in comparison to White achievement, John Henryism may serve as an effort to showcase mastery and “value.” This study explored the moderating role of John Henryism on anxiety for Black college students who experience institutional racism and xenophobia based on ethnic group membership. This project was done under the guidance of Dr. Adaurennaya Onyewuenyi. 
Project: A Review of Error in Decision Making and Proposed Classification of Suitable Hygiene Methods
Despite its prevalence in everyday existence, judgments and decisions are rooted in human evaluation and are thus always susceptible to error. Daniel Kahneman, a notable figure in the study of decision making, posits that error can be broken down into two components: bias and noise. While bias is systematic and directional, noise is random and non-directional—but both ultimately impact the decision making process. These errors may result in trivial inaccuracies but also hold the potential to pervade significantly impactful settings, such as criminal justice, education, and medicine. Considering this, methods have been proposed in the literature for error reduction and judgment accuracy promotion through the prevention or identification of bias and noise. Given the prevalence of decision errors, there is a need for an accessible framework that systematically presents methods of decision hygiene in an organized manner. This project established such a framework, organizing decision hygiene methods into broad categories based on shared fundamental processes and characteristics. This decision hygiene-centered approach highlighted opportunities for decision improvement and serve as a tool for enhancing judgment. Ultimately, hygiene was broken down into 4 broad categories: guidelines and policy, models and statistics, judgment process structuring, and reflection and deliberation. This project was done under the guidance of Dr. John Ruscio.
Project: A Review and Cross-Cultural Assessment of Jonathan Haidt’s Moral Foundations Theory
Jonathan Haidt’s Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) provides a model of five innate foundations from which one’s morality is built. Its essential argument maintains that all individuals are equipped with the same set of moral foundations, but use and develop each foundation differently as a result of cultural and experiential growth. Through reviewing advancement in the field of moral theory and Haidt’s own process of theory development, MFT emerges as a novel tool for assessing moral decision-making across individuals and cultures. This project enumerated the essential properties of MFT—or the fundamental concepts from which the theory was built—as well as the final framework proposed by Haidt and his collaborators, Craig Joseph and Jesse Graham. As Haidt’s intended purpose was to understand the origins of cross-cultural moral variation, Geert Hofstede’s cultural dimensions were also be used to analyze MFT’s application in contexts of cultural differences. The theory’s effectiveness in accounting for the nuances in culture across nations, as well as elements within nations, was assessed and discussed. As a result, future possibilities for research on moral judgment were highlighted in the associations between Haidt’s foundations and Hofstede’s dimensions. This project was done under the guidance of Dr. John Ruscio.
Project: The Role of Rumination as a Transdiagnostic Factor in Comorbid Depression and Anxiety
Between 10% and 20% of adults will visit their primary care physician during an anxiety or depressive disorder episode in any given 12-month period. Of this group, more than 50% suffer from a comorbid second depressive or anxiety disorder. Considering the high rate of comorbidity in anxiety and depression, rumination has been introduced as a transdiagnostic factor in hopes of further understanding and treating the development of these comorbid disorders. Rumination—more specifically, depressive rumination—is defined as a pattern of repetitive thinking about one’s symptoms and the consequences of said symptoms. Reflection and brooding are the two branches of rumination focused on in this review. While brooding refers to negative thoughts centered around self-criticism or comparison—and is typically associated with negative outcomes—reflection is considered to have mixed outcomes, focusing on passive problem-solving. In a clinical context, both types of rumination may influence the development and comorbidity of anxiety and mood disorders when used as a response style. Ultimately, this project sought to understand what rumination’s role in the co-occurrence of anxiety and depression is, and what the most important factors to consider are. By developing a more thorough understanding of the factors that promote comorbidity, treatment for this widespread occurrence can be improved, and potentially new interventions can be formed on the basis of ruminative thinking. This project was done under the guidance of Dr. Ashley Borders.