In this article we advance scholarship on consumer racial profiling (CRP), in general, and the practice as it occurs in restaurant establishments, in particular, by presenting findings from a survey of restaurant consumers that was designed to ascertain the degree to which discriminate service is evident in black and white customers' perceptions and evaluations of their servers' behaviors. We found no evidence of interracial differences in subjects' perceptions of being the recipients of subtle server behaviors that are discretionally conveyed (e.g., recommend entrée, compliment food choice, joke with, etc.) or those that constitute standard markers of service quality (e.g., eye contact, smiling, expressing appreciation, etc.). We did, however, find some evidence of CRP in customers' perceptions of their servers' attentiveness/promptness. Additionally, we found that African Americans tend to subjectively appraise their servers' performance less favorably than their white counterparts and this is the case even when other indicators of service discrimination are held constant. Findings taken as a whole suggest that servers' extend similar cues of hospitality but do so in qualitatively different ways (e.g., less sincere) across racial groups. We discuss the implications of these findings and conclude by encouraging additional scholarship on the subtle nature of racial discrimination in consumer settings.

Introduction The Alzheimer's Disease Prevention Registry (ADPR) of the Joseph and Kathleen Bryan Alzheimer's Disease Research Center at Duke University has been successful in achieving a racially diverse and “research ready” cohort of cognitively healthy volunteers. Methods The ADPR is based on an infrastructure that includes: (1) an administrative leadership team; (2) a coordinating center; (3) an IT management team; (4) a community engagement team; and (5) collaborations with study partners across disciplines. Results The ADPR currently has more than 4677 members, 26% of whom are African American. The ADPR has supported 21 studies including 8 biomarker studies, 7 clinical trials, 4 cognitive neuroscience studies, and 2 studies assessing novel computerized measures. Discussion We describe our experiences establishing and maintaining a diverse ADPR as well as insights on recruitment strategies to increase the representation of African Americans in Alzheimer's disease studies.

Purpose: Heightened Alzheimer disease (AD) risk among African Americans represents a racial disparity in aging. This study examines perceptions of AD risk factors among nondemented older African Americans. Methods: Participants indicated how important nine factors were in increasing one’s AD risk using a Likert-type scale with endpoints 1=not at all important to 4=extremely important. We examined perceptions of AD risk factors as a function of age, education, gender, and global cognition using separate logistic regression models. Patients: Participants were from The Minority Aging Research Study (N=610) with a mean age of 74.5 years, a mean education of 14.9 years, and 24% were men. Results: Of the AD risk factors, predictors were significantly related to genetics and God’s Will. Younger participants (est.=−0.06, P=0.02) and those with more education (est.=0.14, P=0.02) were more likely to report genetics as extremely important. Participants with more education were less likely to indicate God’s Will as extremely important (est.=−0.14, P<0.0005). Conclusions: Among older African Americans, age and education were important characteristics for the perception of AD risk factors. Findings can facilitate designing effective, culturally competent educational tools for meaningful engagement with older African Americans about AD.

Background To focus on critical care needs of coronavirus patients, elective operations were postponed and selectively rescheduled. The effect of these measures on patients was unknown. We sought to understand patients’ perspectives regarding surgical care during the CoVID-19 pandemic to improve future responses. Methods We performed qualitative interviews with patients whose operations were postponed. Interviews explored patient responses to: 1) surgery postponement; 2) experience of surgery; 3) impacts of rescheduling/postponement on emotional/physical health; 4) identifying areas of improvement. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed through an integrated approach. Results Patient perspectives fell within the following domains: 1) reactions to surgery postponement/rescheduling; 2) experience of surgery during CoVID-19 pandemic; 3) reflections on communication; 4) patient trust in surgeons and healthcare. Conclusions We found no patient-reported barriers to rescheduling surgery. Several areas of care which could be improved (communication). There was an unexpected sense of trust in surgeons and the hospital.

No abstract