Child Development, November/December 1999, Volume 70, Number 6, Pages 1348–1359 Social Risks and Psychological Adjustment: A Comparison of African American and South African Children Oscar A. Barbarin In the United States, race is highly associated with social risk factors such as poverty and family structure that may account by themselves for developmental outcomes often attributed to race alone. This cross-national study assesses the effects of social risks on adjustment of racially similar groups of 306 African American and 625 South African 6-year-olds. Poverty and gender were confirmed as risk factors but single female headship was not. Moreover, poverty and gender posed less risk for South African than for African American children. Poverty placed children at risk for immaturity, hyperactivity, and difficulty in peer relations. Boys were more likely to have behavior problems than were girls. African Americans exhibited higher rates of emotional symp- toms but lower rates of bullying, destructiveness, and social rejection than did South Africans. African Ameri- cans, particularly the males, scored higher on the opposition and hyperactivity scales than did South Africans. Distinctive social contexts and cultural resources may account for differences in adjustment. INTRODUCTION Considerable evidence links social risk factors such as poverty, gender, and family structure to a range of ad- verse psychological outcomes in children (Brooks- Gunn & Duncan, 1997; Costello, 1989). For example, emotional distress, behavioral disorders, and cogni- tive deficits have all been associated with poverty (Capaldi & Patterson, 1994; Werner & Smith, 1989). The magnitude of the impact of poverty, however, ap- pears to differ considerably by psychological domain. The largest effects are observed for cognitive develop- ment and academic achievement (McLoyd, 1998). In the same vein, Brooks-Gunn, & Duncan (1997) report data in which effect sizes of poverty are greatest for cognitive functioning, followed by behavioral func- tioning, and then emotional functioning. Moreover, even though poor children are more likely than non- poor children to present with symptoms of emotional distress and behavioral problems, poverty is inconsis- tently associated with higher-than-expected rates of diagnosable mental disorders as defined by the DSM IV criteria (Gore, Aseltine, & Coldon, 1993; Hammen & Rudolph, 1996; Whitaker et al., 1990). Recent studies also show that the effects of poverty are more perva- sive and detrimental when poverty is chronic or when it occurs early in the life of the child than when it is acute, temporary, or first appears after the child has reached adolescence (McLoyd, 1998). Gender is another widely recognized risk factor for psychological problems. Compared to girls, boys are more likely to exhibit deficits in regulation of behav- ior and attention (Offord, Alder, & Boyle, 1986). They are more often conduct-disordered and under- controlled and are more aggressive than girls. Alter- natively, girls are more likely than boys to encounter problems of emotion regulation such as irritability, de- pression, anxiety, and mood swings. The social risks identified in broadly representative samples of Ameri- can children appear to operate in similar ways within specific populations such as African Americans. For example, Barbarin & Soler (1993) observed, in a na- tionally representative sample of African American children, that young boys under 12 years of age were more likely than young girls to act impulsively, ex- hibit anger, break things, be withdrawn, feel worthless, have problems concentrating, be disobedient, and have problems getting along with adults. At the same time, children from single adult households tend to have more symptoms of anxiety-depression, oppositional behavior, immaturity, and difficulties with peers than children living in two-adult and multi-generational households (Barbarin & Soler, 1993). Race, too, has come to be viewed as a social risk factor for problems of achievement and psychological adjustment. A growing body of comparative research reveals what has been identified as the “race gap” in educational achievement (Frederick D. Patterson Research Institute, 1997). In addition, African Ameri- cans fare more poorly than do other racial groups on a host of psychological indicators. In spite of method- ological limitations and conceptual problems associ- ated with the use of race as an independent variable in the social sciences, the empirical basis of our un- derstanding of the psychological and developmental status of African American children rests largely on a foundation of Black–White comparative research. For © 1999 by the Society for Research in Child Development, Inc. All rights reserved. 0009-3920/99/7006-0007