PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

Black, Displaced, & Distressed:

The Psychological and Sociological Effects of Gentrification on Black Communities

JM Bagley

National Louis University

August, 13th 2017

PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

Introduction

Few phenomena have had greater effect in shaping the American city over the past 70 years than

Gentrification. This is a fact that has played out in academic discourse and research over the past 30 years.

More significantly, it has been a harsh reality for the individual lives of the displaced and the collective

consciousness of communities torn apart by “urban development and renewal.” While the effects of

gentrification are similar across ethnic and racial demographics, few have felt these negative effects more

deeply than the Black communities who’s histories are intertwined with the creation of the American inner city

ghetto and the national movement to reclaim them.

There exists in the collective consciousness of many urban Black communities a sense of bitter nostalgia;

a lament for the loss of connectedness. This sense is not wholly unique: communities across demographics

have decried the loss of social cohesiveness brought by the exponential digitization of our lives and social

spheres. However, along with this dynamic, urban communities of African Americans have experienced a

decades long effort of national, state, and local forces(both governmental and private) to physically demolish

their neighborhoods in favor of the expansion of increasingly globalized central business districts. In this paper

I argue that the collective psyche of the Black community has been negatively effected by the dialectically

opposed goals of gentrification over a course of decades. The structural inequalities that arise from

gentrification not only serve to exacerbate this collective socio-psychological harm, but also perpetuate

conditions in Black communities which are often psychologically traumatic to its members.

Considerations

This research paper endeavors to connect the existing quantitative and qualitative research surrounding

American urban renewal and gentrification and is therefore limited to drawing from the work of previous

research, survey analyses, and ethnographic studies. In making these connections, this paper also aims to find

the common threads of thousands of destroyed neighborhoods, while acknowledging the diversity in the

circumstances and outcomes of each individual community. I endeavor to speak to a larger common psyche

shared by members of the Black community with full knowledge that what is true for many is not necessarily

true for all.

PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

Analysis

Structure

The research here contained will first examine the history of gentrification in the United States. From this

historical perspective I will analyze the structural implications of gentrification and their effects on the

collective and individual psyches of displaced African American citizens. In conclusion, I examine possible

solutions and reflect on the role that education has played in this trauma and the ways it could help pave the

way forward.

The History of American Gentrification

1940 - 1970: First Wave Gentrification. In order to understand the present effects of gentrification, it is

imperative to discuss the history of urban renewal in the United States. While local and state renewal projects

were a reality before the 1950s, the Housing Act of 1949 was the ‘gunshot start’ of a nation wide movement to

expand the Central Business Districts (CBDs) of American cities. (Chronopoulos, 2016; Fullilove, 2016; Hyra,

2012) The rationale behind the Housing Act of 1949 can be understood in the convergence of 3 main factors:

Firstly, post World War II, African Americans moved en mass from the rural south to northern cities where post

war industrialization continued to boom, and where potential economic opportunity was an upgrade to the

financial oppression experienced in the south (Gregory, 2007). Secondly, in response to the influx of new,

relatively poor black residents, white Americans moved their families to growing suburban areas outside of the

city: an escalation of a trend observable as early as the 1920s (Chronopoulos, 2016; Gregory, 2007) . Finally,

political and business leaders feared the encroachment of Blacks and White ethnics, and sought to, at once,

expand their central urban centers of business and create a buffer against the ghettos created by the Second

Great Migration and ‘White Flight’ (Chronopoulos 2016; Hyra, 2012).

This first wave of gentrification, triggered by the Housing Act of 1949, aimed to rehabilitate urban

neighborhoods, very often home to growing communities of African Americans, that had seen a drastic decline

in property values as a result of prejudicial valuations and real estate practices (Chronopoulos, 2016; Gregory,

2007). Within the civic discourse of this period the concept of “urban blight” became a popular way to frame

the state of these neighborhoods. While there was indeed observable poverty and increased criminality in

these ghettos, the extent to which they were blighted was often greatly exaggerated (Chronopoulos, 2016;

Fullilove, 2016). In fact “blight” as a political term was constructed for the specific purpose of identifying prime
PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

targets for the resources and developmental avenues made available through the Housing Act of 1949

(Fullilove, 2016).

Once a neighborhood was identified as blighted by a city, its administrators were tasked with figuring a

workable plan to be enacted once the land had been cleared of blight - a process that included the relocation

of families living in homes and public housing that was designated for seizure using the governments power of

eminent domain through use of the legislation (Fullilove, 2016). The process played on the public sentiment

that the poor were trapped in the poverty of these neighborhoods. The claim of development stakeholders

was that new public housing, paid for by federal funds provided in the legislation, along with revitalized city

centers would benefit both the urban poor and city at large (von Hoffman, 2000). Though the aim of the

Housing Act was to provide “a decent home and a suitable living environment for every American family,” it

was instead used as a tool of CBD stakeholders in over 130 cities to forcefully possess well positioned land for

“businesses, educational [&] cultural institutions, and residences for middle- and upper-income people”

(Fullilove, 2016, ch.3). As author Mark Weiss explains: “Urban renewal agencies in many cities demolished

whole communities inhabited by low income people in order to provide land for private development of office

buildings, sports arenas, hotels, trade centers, and high income luxury buildings.” (Weiss, 1985). Indeed By

1967 while over 400,000 residential units had been demolished under the authority of the Housing Act of 1949

Title I, only 10,760 low-rent public housing units had been built in their place (Weiss, 1985).

The Housing Act of 1949 continued to be the main vehicle of urban renewal until the late 1970s when

national policies of development could no longer bear the weight of the criticisms from numerous interests

groups. The legislation was easy to criticize, as it had done very little that it said it would do, though opponents

would argue that the expansion of business districts and urban city centers was exactly what the law was

intended to do. In the words of author and civic psychiatrist Mindy Thomas Fullilove: “The changing needs of

American capitalism were the impetus for the reorganization of the cities, and it was powerful men who

sought solutions and pushed for their enactment into law” (Fullilove, 2016, ch.3). The enduring legacy of the

Housing Act of 1949 is the fracturing of predominantly minority neighborhoods ( Fulilove, 2016; Hyra, 2012;

Teaford, 2000; von Hoffman, 2000) and the concentration of poverty that followed housing destruction and

the picking apart of communities (Teaford, 2000; von Hoffman, 2000).

1960- 1980: Black Freedom and Community Organizing. Even as the Housing Act of 1949 continued to

displace many urban African Americans, Black neighborhoods persisted as the Second Great Migration from
PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

the American South to the North and West continued through 1970. Concurrently, middle/upper class whites

continued to move out of the city. While perceptions from the outside of these communities was that they

were slums plagued with poverty, juvenile delinquency, violence and drug use (Chronopoulos, 2016; von

Hoffman, 2000) residents had a much different experiences of their neighborhoods. Existing research is not

silent on this difference in perception (Chronopoulos, 2016; Fullilove, 2016) and the qualitative research and

ethnographic study of these neighborhoods is filled with stories of communities characterized by strong formal

and informal social, cultural, and political connectedness. “The African American community, which was

largely excluded from the political process, had no opportunity to present its side of the story. Survivors,

through their stories and photographs, contended that the city’s gross characterization of the area belied its

heterogeneity and overlooked its high level of functioning.” (Fullilove, 2016 ch.3).

Even so, from 1960-1980 many Black communities, especially empowered by the Black Freedom

Movement, exercised control of the future of their neighborhoods. Stakeholders in these communities

organized community development corporations (CDCs), economic cooperatives, social committees, and

political organizations to ensure control over their neighborhoods (Chronopoulous, 2016; Fullilove, 2016;

Gregory, 2007; Weiss, 1985) Current scholarship on urban renewal (Fulillove, 2015; Chronopoulos, 2016;

Weiss, 1985) argues that these grassroots efforts were much more successful than previous efforts advanced

via the Housing Act of 1949 because “they rejected top down government interventions and believed that they

could create a self-sufficient and independent urban world dominated by low-income blacks” (Chronopoulos,

2016 p. 304). Moreover, these organizations (political, religious, community, and social) stood in direct

opposition to outside exertions of power (commercial and political) that sought to gain control of, or exploit

these communities (Chronopoulos, 2016; Weiss, 1985). The mobilization of these organizations, especially in

the political sphere, allowed them to be proactive actors in speaking out against urban renewal, actively

resisting top down redevelopment , and to promote civic policy that would actually benefit their communities

(Patillo, 2003; Weiss, 1985)

1980-2000: Intra-Racial Class Conflict and the Future of the Urban Black Neighborhood. From the mid to

late 80’s through the 90’s middle class Black families began to move back to these urban neighborhoods, many

with a mind to contribute to the growth that was occurring (Chronopoulos, 2016; Patillo, 2003). However, the

visions middle class African Americans had for these urban communities was distinctively different than the

future that many existing community members had fought for. Working class members of these communities
PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

had long prioritized programs that alleviated the burden of poverty for their less fortunate neighbors. “For

successful black professionals, the values of middle class America—the importance of education, the ideal of

home ownership, the work ethic, self initiative, and self-reliance—shape[d] their visions of what life in the

community should be” (Taylor, 2002 p. 84). These newcomers “did not necessarily support public housing,

squatting, rooming houses, working class establishments, alternative lifestyles based on limited resources, or

radical political ideas and organizations” (Chronopoulos, 2016 p. 306).

The nature of many community organizations changed as middle class African Americans became more

involved in their leadership. These different visions of progress often conflicted, especially in debate over high

priced development. The projects supported by the Black middle class would drive up the value of property

and the cost of living past where many of their less affluent neighbors could manage (Chronopoulos, 2016;

Hyra 2006). While the efforts of the Black middle class brought a new sense of life, culture, and uplift to these

urban neighborhoods, the change in priorities crippled the working class who relied on community

organizations to represent their interests (Chronopoulos, 2016; Hyra, 2006; Patillo, 2003). Many of these were

pushed out of their revitalizing neighborhoods to more impoverished areas where housing was more

affordable (Chornopoulos, 2016; Hyra 2006). There was therefore often a stratification of black neighborhoods

- the revitalizing middle class centers of culture and the surrounding second ghettos.

1990 - Present: Second Wave Gentrification. In many cities this intra-racial conflict set the stage for the

second wave of gentrification from the early 1990s to the late 2000s. Cities globalized as foreign economies

became intertwined and urban renewal once again became a tool for the expansion of CBDs. Public housing

and low income communities around urban CBDs became the targets of politicians and real estate developers

looking to capitalize on the increase of urban commercial interest and the influx of upper and middle class

professionals back to the city (Chronopoulos, 2016; Fullilove 2016). Federal programs like Housing

Opportunities for People Everywhere (HOPE VI) and the EZ Initiative targeted “public housing in distressed

communities” to create new mixed income housing as well as “stimulate business development and job

creation in low-income areas”(Hyra, 2012 p. 506). Therefore, starting from 1992 when HOPE VI was passed

there were 2 forms of gentrification occurring: one - a bottom-up push by middle class Black community

leaders to bring urban neighborhoods in line with wider middle class ideals; and the other - a top down

national project that aimed to expand CBDs and centralize these districts as centers of global commerce where

professionals wanted to live.

PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

The continued influx of college educated millennials and both domestic and foreign professionals to city

neighborhoods in the present perpetuates this pattern, even as African American communities remain

disproportionately displaced by urban renewal. This has cause a shift in the urban locus of poverty from the

inner city neighborhood to the inner suburb (Hyra, 2012). While the second wave of gentrification slowed

significantly through the economic collapse of 2007 (Hyra, 2012) the overall effects of the Great Recession

were acute but fleeting. Moreover, many black neighborhoods, especially those with higher concentrations of

lower to lower-middle class residents, felt and continue to feel the effects of the collapse of sub-prime

mortgages, foreclosures, and unemployment more deeply than other demographic regions (Hyra & Rugh,

2016). This only continues to make these communities and the people who call them home greater targets for

gentrification and the displacement that often follows.

The Sociological Implications of Gentrification and their Psychological Effects

A careful survey of the history of urban renewal in America gives rise to a number of long term

consequences:

The Loss of Community Bonds and the Separation from Place. Within this narrative of gentrification,

though it looks different at different points in our recent history, the negative effects of displacement on

community continually surface as essential parts of the process of urban renewal. That is not to say that

equitable renewal of city spaces inhabited by people of Color (or otherwise inhabited) is not possible, but to

assert that this has not been the mode of urban gentrification through it’s over half century history in the

United States. Instead the goals of gentrification have regularly been at the expense of poor Black

communities. Through 1963, durring the first wave of gentrification 2/3rds of the displaced population were

people of color, the majority of which were Black (Fullilove, 2016). In the second wave of gentrification, though

they only accounted for 48% of the national public housing population, 80% of people displaced by the

demolition of public housing were African American.

The presumption in urban renewal is that displaced residents will either find new communities or settle

into the replacement residences. However whether due to failures to build adequate numbers of replacement

units or the lack of choices available to poor working class African Americans, this expectation rarely plays out.

This is to say nothing of the fundamental changes that occur in these renewed neighborhoods when residents

decide to stick around. The entire culture of their homes has been altered. Our identities, individually and
PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

collectively, are indeed attached to physical spaces (Fullilove 1998; Ross, Reynolds, & Geis, 2000). In our lives

we build strong associations and attachments to physical spaces such that in instances of natural disaster or

sudden catastrophe there is an acute physiological response to loss of place (Fullilove 1998). Moreover, all of

our socialization happens within the context of place and space (Fullilove 1998; Ross, Reynolds, & Geis, 2000).

It should be unsurprising then, that displaced residents felt and feel not only an acute sense of loss, but a

communal and often generational sense of nostalgia and bitterness for the destruction of their homes and the

inability to recover what once was home (Chronopoulos, 2016; Fullilove, 2016).

This sort of “Root Shock” as Dr. Fullilove frames it “undermines trust, increases anxiety about letting

loved ones out of one’s sight, destabilizes relationships, destroys social, emotional, and financial resources,

and increases the risk for every kind of stress-related disease, from depression to heart attack” (2016, ch. 1).

When these physical spaces are destroyed, not only are the social ties attached to them severed, but the

displaced are forced to find other places of safety and identity outside of home environments, often to little or

no avail (Fullivlove, 1998, 2016; Tester & Wingfield, 2013).

Alienation and the loss of the Black Spatial Imaginary. The dynamic between the working and middle

class Black residents of city neighborhoods must also be further analyzed. Before 1980 there existed in these

neighborhoods a Black Spatial Imaginary (Lipsitz, 2011) that cast the Black neighborhood as one in which the

collective effort of people, across economic class, could work to rebuild independently and without outside

influence. As discussed earlier, it is this ideology which empowered grassroots organizations from the 60s to

the 90s to work towards a vision of urban renewal that invested resources in both the people and the places of

their neighborhoods (Chronopoulos, 2016; Hyra, 2006; Lipsitz, 2011). This paradigm runs counter to the White

Spatial Imaginary which prioritizes the increased value and efficient use of space (Lipsitz, 2011). When White

or middle/ upper class spatial paradigms control the process of renewal, the improvement of the physical

space takes priority: within this framework, an investment in the lives of the poor is implicit in the

improvement of space (Chronopoulos, 2016; Fullilove, 2016).

In the study of gentrification, much attention is given to the fracturing of social connections caused by

displacement and neighborhood instability. More importantly for the goals of this study is the erosion of the

Black spatial imaginary when it is undercut by more efficiency based perspectives of valuation. If the

community is spatially and socially fragmented, then the ability to organize grassroots opposition to outside

forces and dictate a community oriented vision for neighborhood renewal is severely hampered (Ginwright
PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

2011; Weiss, 1985). For displaced citizens this fragmentation“ sap[s] resources and deplete[s] strength in a

manner that increase[s] the vulnerability of the uprooted not simply for a few years, but for many decades to

come” (Fullilove, 2016 ch.4).

Psychologically this loss of control is linked to a loss of overall identity and alienation rather than a strong

sense of place identity and the corresponding belongingness that springs from it (Chronopoulos, 2016; Patillo,

2003, Tester & Wingfield, 2013). “Because people identify with the localities in which they live, the loss of

visibility has led to a profound collapse of self-pride. The psyche is injured…as a result of the involution of

one’s place. (Fullilove, 1996 p. 1519).

Perpetuation of poverty, violence, and trauma. As Derek Hyra writes: “The slum clearance of the urban

renewal period did not alleviate urban blight and poverty; rather it shifted it from one city area to another.

Many displaced people relocated to replacement public housing in other sections of the city” (Hyra, 2012 p.

504). Indeed the prevailing spatial imaginary leaves very little room for investment in the urban poor. That is

not to say that developers and administrators are not concerned with their well being, but that it has not

historically factored into the calculus used to plan urban renewal. The displaced are continually pushed further

and further to poorer living situations (Weiss, 1985). Though an individual may not be displaced by urban

development multiple times, the collective effect of neighborhood instability perpetuates social isolation and

poverty (Chronopoulos, 2016; Fullilove 2016; Ross, Reynolds, & Geis, 2000). As detrimental as neighborhood

instability can be to social cohesion, residential stability in the poorest neighborhoods is actually negatively

correlated to social cohesion and positively correlated to higher levels of stress (Ross, Reynolds, &Geis, 2000).

As the cost of living in city neighborhoods rises, the urban poor are increasingly being relegated to these inner

suburb “communities of last resort.” (Ross, Reynolds, & Geis, 2000 p. 582). Because the root causes of urban

poverty are not addressed in gentrified development, any improvement in the conditions of one neighborhood

is a deflection of the problem to another.

It follows that increased stress and violence arise from situations of poverty especially in these

neighborhoods of last resort. However what is unique in the case of gentrification is the convergence of the

loss of physical place, alienation, and the lack of ability to organize towards a common vision of what could be.

All of these factors together, in addition to financial stress and high levels of crime, create a unique

psychological burden: “People who feel at risk in their neighborhood at the same time that they feel powerless
PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

to change their lives have high distress levels, over and above levels of fear or powerlessness alone” (Ross,

Reynolds, & Geis, 2000 p. 594).

Recent discourse on urban Black distress has focused on increases in violent crime in inner city

neighborhoods and the spotlight of the public consciousness on violence against people of color, in particular

through police brutality. A growing voice of such research is highlighting the increase of symptoms of post

traumatic stress disorder in urban Black communities, specifically among young Black men and women (Hong

& Burnett-Zeigler, 2016; Ross, Reynolds, & Geis, 2000, Smith & Patton 2016) . For African American men in

these communities, the symptoms are often glossed over with culturally acceptable expressions of toughness

or are compartmentalized through the use of avoidant and rationalizing psychological responses (Smith &

Patton, 2016). Similarly, Black women, both younger and older, experience symptoms of PTSD associated with

stress and loss. While these women often do not report experiencing the violence first hand, 51% of the

women participating in the study of an under-privileged Chicago neighborhood reported experience of

symptoms associated with PTSD, while 29% met the qualifications for an official diagnosis (Hong & Burnett-

Zeigler, 2016). Much of the present study in this line of inquiry is smaller in scale, but the proportion of

participants experiencing such strong symptoms of psychological and physiological distress should be

extremely disconcerting.

Conclusion

Re-conceptualizing Urban Renewal and Restoring the Black Urban Imaginary

It is too easy to cast a single narrative of what gentrification is and has been; the truth is that the history

has played out in a variety of ways involving a complicated web of actors, interests, and circumstances. What

cannot go overlooked, however, is the undeniable fact that urban Black citizens have been, and continue to be

uniquely and detrimentally effected by urban renewal. It behooves us to understand both the race and the

class dynamics implicit in these changes, but more importantly an examination of the history and the

continued effects of gentrification must call into question the dominant spatial imaginary that has prioritized

places over people. Furthermore, city planning and urban housing policy must be much more holistic in their

scope - exhibiting a much greater concern for the collateral cost (Ross, Reynolds, & Geis, 2000; Weiss, 1985).

There is a good portion of research detailing how creating avenues of civic engagement for young African

Americans leads to greater levels of mental health. “It is important to develop intimate spaces where young
PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

people cultivate resistance against beliefs, attitudes, and practices that can erode a Black child’s self-

confidence and impair her positive identity development” (Ginwright 2011). There is positive evidence that

creating these avenues can promote involvement and growth of community organizations which are

instrumental in maintaining the health of urban neighborhoods.

Re-prioritizing Black Trauma

Research on the growing trends of psychological distress and disorder in the Black community needs to

be updated and furthered. The small sample sizes of recent studies highlight the need for larger studies, with

both qualitative and quantitative analyses. The initial findings could be representative of a public health crisis

within the Black community, the root causes of which our nation is still unprepared to confront. Serious inquiry

into the proportion of Black citizens experiencing similar symptoms of distress triggered by trauma has the

potential to bring these concerning trends to the forefront of our academic and national discourse.

Personal Reflection: Education

In some ways it feels cruel to have a discussion of the increasing standards of Education right after an

indictment of our national approach to the collective health of our urban Black communities. More and more

education is seen as a way out: Raise the standards and the quality of education and you provide a student

with a pathway to class mobility. However, I would argue that this way out mentality contributes to the

erosion of alternative paradigms of living in community. Moreover the stress of high standards, especially

expressed in high stakes testing, does little to alleviate the distress that students may bear even before

walking into the classroom.

Stanford University professor Linda Darling-Hammond contends that high quality educational systems

across the globe take care of students first - ensuring that students are healthy and are having their

physiological needs met. Moreover these systems have often de-emphasized high stakes testing in favor of

curriculum that is organized around higher level thinking (Darling-Hammond, 2010). The utilization of these

strategies can reduce students stress and place the holistic health of urban students at the forefront of

education reform.

Since Maslow popularized the hierarchy of needs, educators have been aware that students must feel

healthy and safe before they can feel like they belong, or reach any form of self-realization. Our national

Education mechanism must seek to promote the holistic health and actualization of our students within the
PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

context of their communities. While this is just one part of a complicated road to recovery for urban

communities, it is an essential step towards owning the disproportionate effects of gentrification on America’s

urban Black neighborhoods.

PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

References

Chronopoulos, T. (2016). African Americans, Gentrification, and Neoliberal Urbanization: the Case of Fort

Greene, Brooklyn. Journal of African American Studies , 20(3-4), 294-322.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). The Flat World and Education: How America's Commitment to Equity Will

Determine Our Future. New York: Teachers College Press.

Fullilove, M. T., M.D. (1996). Psychiatric Implications of Displacement: Contributions From the Psychology of

Place. The American Journal of Psychiatry , 153(12), 1516-1523.

Fullilove, M. T. (2016). Root Shock: How Tearing Up City Neighborhoods Hurts America, And What We Can Do

About It. New York: New Village Press.

Ginwright, S. (2011). Hope, Healing, and Care: Pushing the Boundaries of Civic Engagement for African

American Youth. Liberal Education, 97(2), 34-39.

Gregory, J. N. (2007). The Southern Diaspora: How the Great Migrations of Black and White Southerners

Transformed America. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

Hong, S., & Burnett-Zeigler, I. (2016). The Frequency of PTSD and Subthreshold PTSD among African–American

Women with Depressive Symptoms in a Disadvantaged Urban Neighborhood: Pilot Study. Journal of

Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities.

Hyra, D. S. (2006). Racial Uplift? Intra-Racial Class Conflict and the Economic Revitalization of Harlem and

Bronzeville. City & Community, 5(1), 71-92.

Hyra, D. S. (2012). Conceptualizing the New Urban Renewal : Comparing the Past to the Present. Urban

Affairs Review, 48(4), 498-527.

Hyra, D. S., & Rugh, J. S. (2016). The US Great Recession: exploring its association with Black neighborhood rise,

decline and recovery. Urban Geography, 37(5), 700-726.

Lipsitz, G. (2011). How Racism Takes Place. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Patillo, M. (2003). Negotiating Blackness, for Richer or for Poorer. Ethnography, 4(1), 61-93.

Ross, C. E., Reynolds, J. R., & Geis, K. J. (2000). The Contingent Meaning of Neighborhood Stability for

Residents' Psychological Well-Being. American Sociological Review, 65(4), 581-597.

Smith, J. R., & Patton, D. U. (2016). Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms in Context: Examining Trauma Responses

to Violent Exposures and Homicide Death Among Black Males in Urban Neighborhoods. American Journal

of Orthopsychiatry , 86(2), 212-223.

PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION ON BLACK COMMUNITIES 1

Taylor, M. M. (2002). Harlem: Between Heaven and Hell. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Teaford, J. C. (2000). Urban Renewal and its Aftermath. Housing Policy Debate, 11(2), 443-465.

Tester, G., & Wingfield, A. H. (2013). Moving Past Picket Fences: The Meaning of "Home" for Public Housing

Residents. Sociology Forum, 28(1), 70-84.

von Hoffman, A. (2000). A Study in Contradictions: The Origins and Legacy of the Housing Act of 1949.

Housing Policy Debate, 11(2), 299-326.

Weiss, M. A. (1985). The Origins and Legacy of Urban Renewal. In Federal Housing Policy and Programs: Past

and Present, edited by J. P. Mitchell. New Brunswick: NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1985.