Table 2 - uploaded by Ann Morning
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
This paper presents national estimates of the population likely to identify with more than one race in the 2000 census as a result of a new federal policy allowing multiple racial identification. A large number of race-based public policies-including affirmative action and the redistricting provisions of the Voting Rights Act-may be affected by the...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... will not be possible using data gathered under the ''mark one or more'' format planned for the 2000 census, since no follow-up questions will elicit the strength of identification. Table 2 provides estimates of the joint primary-secondary race distribution of the multiple-race population obtained from the CPS ''high'' classification and the census data. The table also provides estimates from two additional surveys, the 1993 round of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (http:www. ...
Context 2
... personal communication), which did not explicitly allow multiple responses but did code multiple responses if they were given. We see in Table 2 that all four sources show a consistent pattern: the vast majority-from 64 to 82%-of the multiple- race population list White as their primary race. The most common secondary race is American Indian. ...
Similar publications
This study presents a method of estimating the degree to which people change their racial/ethnic identity from one census enumeration to another. The technique is applied to the classification of skin colour in Brazil (white, black, brown, yellow). For the period 1950-80, the findings show a deficit of 38 per cent in the black category and a gain o...
Citations
... A particularly contentious challenge we sought to address was the misrepresentation of respondents with multiple ethnicities, which has seen increased interest in the 21st century as one of the fastest growing (Song 2012) and most under-and misrepresented (Del Pinal et al. 2007; see also Goldstein and Morning 2000;Song 2012) ethnic minoritised populations. ...
The question of how we measure, categorise, and represent ethnicity poses a growing challenge for identifying and addressing ethnic inequalities. Conceptual critiques and qualitative studies highlight the complexities and challenges of measuring ethnicity, yet there remains a lack of quantitative studies investigating the implications of these complexities for inequalities research. This paper addresses this gap by scrutinizing methodological processes and analysing the implications of measurement and categorisation in the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW), critiquing the UK’s standardised measurement of ethnicity in national survey data and government statistics. Based on our comparative quantitative analysis of standardised ethnicity categories and regional origins and our evaluation of the CSEW and census’ methodologies, we propose an alternative categorisation of ethnicity, focusing on the ‘Mixed’, ‘Asian’, and ‘Latinx/Hispanic’ ethnic groups. Using adjusted crosstabulations and logistic regression models, we found variations in ethnic patterns of violence based on standardised measures and our alternative recategorisation, particularly relating to the distinction between ‘Asian’ sub-groups, the recategorisation of ‘Mixed’ ethnicities, and the inclusion of ‘Latinx/Hispanic’ as a distinctive ethnic group. Our findings reveal valuable insights into the implications of ethnic categorisation for understanding violence inequalities, with significant implications for further policy and research areas.
... This approach has important limitations, as many studies did not report on race/ethnicity following Census categories (e.g., studies reported information in a single group for participants who were Asian, American Indian, and Pacific Islander, or studies reported on race and ethnicity together, rather than as separate constructs). Moreover, this approach does not consider evolving race/ethnicity categories or include individuals who identify with multiple races and fails to consider changes over time and across contexts in racial or ethnic self-identification (Goldstein & Morning, 2000;Liebler et al., 2017). For example, the current United States Census ethnicity category of Hispanic or Latino was first introduced in 1997, and there is currently a proposed addition of the race category of Middle Eastern or North African. ...
Although researchers seek to understand psychological phenomena in a population, quantitative research studies are conducted in smaller samples meant to represent the larger population of interest. This systematic review and quantitative synthesis considers reporting of sociodemographic characteristics and sample composition in the Journal of Abnormal Psychology (now the Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science) over the past 3 decades. Across k = 1,244 empirical studies, there were high and increasing rates of reporting of participant age/developmental stage and sex/gender, low but increasing reporting of socioeconomic status/income, and moderate and stable reporting of educational attainment. Rates of reporting of sexual orientation remained low and reporting of gender identity was essentially nonexistent. There were low to moderate but increasing rates of reporting of participant race and ethnicity. Approximately three-quarters of participants in studies over the past 3 decades were White, while the proportion of participants who were Asian, Black or African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, or Hispanic/Latino was much lower. Approximately two-thirds of participants were female, with this proportion increasing over time. There were also notable differences in the proportion of study participants as a function of race and sex/gender for different forms of psychopathology. Basic science and theoretical psychopathology research must include sociodemographically diverse samples that are representative of and generalizable to the larger human population, while seeking to decrease stigma of psychopathology and increase mental health equity. Recommendations are made to increase sociodemographic diversity in psychopathology research and the scientific review/publication process.
... Recognizing that Jewish identity reflects a mixture of religion, ancestry, and culture (Heiberger 2022), we can draw several insights from the research literature on racial and ethnic categorization in official statistics. For example, the 2000 US Census introduced for the first time multiple racial identification, which better reflected the diversity of the American population (Goldstein & Morning 2000). The shift toward multiple race categorization was premised upon the understanding that grew in the aftermath of World War II and the Holocaust that race (and ethnicity) are not rigid biological categories but rather dynamic social constructs (Goodman 2000;Nobles 2000). ...
... Unfortunately, this formulation of multiracial status obscures the fact that racial mixture often goes further back in many people's family trees (Patten 2015). In fact, it is not uncommon for a person with known mixed ethnic ancestry to report a single race on a survey (Goldstein and Morning 2000;Patten 2015;Liebler et al. 2017). Instead of reporting multiple races, they express their mixed racial heritage by reporting "ancestry or ethnic origins" that contrast with their race response(s) (e.g., Gullickson and Morning 2011). ...
Research on mixed heritage people has often focused on their reported race(s) and what these self-reports may reveal about their racial leanings. In the U.S., people are also asked: “What is this person’s ancestry or ethnic origin?” as a census fill-in-the-blank question. Existing research has analyzed the census data on race and ancestry and has uncovered meanings about ethnicity among White Americans, but little is known about the importance of ancestry in the case of mixed heritage people. In this paper, we draw on our interviews with 68 American-Indian-White, Black-White, and Asian-White mixed heritage people in the U.S. Given that many mixed heritage people’s connections with their disparate ancestries can be hindered by generational distance, lack of cultural contact and exposure, and social rejection, what motivates mixed heritage people to report their disparate ancestries, and how do their ancestry claims relate to their racial identities? How may the differential histories and racialization of groups in the U.S. shape mixed heritage people’s ability and inclination to assert either their White or minority ancestries? We found that mixed heritage individuals who were motivated to assert their ancestry claims did so for two main reasons: First, by claiming a specific ancestry (or ancestries), participants wished to assert a more individualistic sense of self than was typically allowed, given their racial treatment based upon their racial appearance; this could be especially meaningful if those individuals felt a mismatch between their racial assignment by others and their sense of self. Second, a claim to a specific ancestry was a way for individuals to forge connections with family, relatives, or an ancestry group that had not existed before. Overall, while most of our mixed heritage participants reported details of their European ancestries, it was their Black, American Indian, or Asian ancestries that were deemed to be most salient and/or meaningful to who they were.
... These data are also crucial for expert witness analysis on cases of gerrymandering (36)(37)(38). In addition, census data constitute the most reliable source of information used to validate estimation techniques and the coverage of administrative records (39), which are increasingly being used for research and policy decision-making (40)(41)(42). Last, census data are vital for planning and implementing the next round of census data collection, and for the public, research community, and representatives to evaluate those plans. ...
The application of a currently proposed differential privacy algorithm to the 2020 United States Census data and additional data products may affect the usefulness of these data, the accuracy of estimates and rates derived from them, and critical knowledge about social phenomena such as health disparities. We test the ramifications of applying differential privacy to released data by studying estimates of US mortality rates for the overall population and three major racial/ethnic groups. We ask how changes in the denominators of these vital rates due to the implementation of differential privacy can lead to biased estimates. We situate where these changes are most likely to matter by disaggregating biases by population size, degree of urbanization, and adjacency to a metropolitan area. Our results suggest that differential privacy will more strongly affect mortality rate estimates for non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics than estimates for non-Hispanic whites. We also find significant changes in estimated mortality rates for less populous areas, with more pronounced changes when stratified by race/ethnicity. We find larger changes in estimated mortality rates for areas with lower levels of urbanization or adjacency to metropolitan areas, with these changes being greater for non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics. These findings highlight the consequences of implementing differential privacy, as proposed, for research examining population composition, particularly mortality disparities across racial/ethnic groups and along the urban/rural continuum. Overall, they demonstrate the challenges in using the data products derived from the proposed disclosure avoidance methods, while highlighting critical instances where scientific understandings may be negatively impacted.
... Each participant could choose up to four race and ethnicity groups (white, non-Hispanic; Hispanic, Chicano/a/x, and Latino/a/x; Native American, American Indian, Alaska Native; Asian; Pacific Islander/Native Hawaiian; African or African American) or "prefer not to say." We allowed for multiple-race responses to be consistent with federal survey requirements despite limitations in data analyses (Goldstein & Morning, 2000;Liebler & Halpern-Manners, 2008). For example, we could not determine which respondents identified as bi-or multi-racial. ...
Background: American Indian and Alaska Native women had approximately twice the incidence of cervical cancer as white women. Preventive measures for cervical cancer rely on screening and HPV vaccination. However, vaccine series completion and catch-up vaccinations for eligible adults are low across all racial/ethnic groups. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify gaps in knowledge and evaluate the attitudes toward HPV and the vaccine among AIANs with various levels of training in the STEM and health-related fields. Methods: Survey data were collected from audience members at two national conferences geared towards American Indian and Alaska Natives in health and STEM fields in September 2017. A vignette study was administered via a live electronic poll to test knowledge (true/false questions), attitudes, and to collect demographic information. Results: Respondents self-identified as primarily American Indian and Alaska Native (74%), pursuing or completed a graduate degree (67%), and female (85%). Most respondents (86%) were aware of HPV-associated cancer in men. However, most (48-90%) answered incorrectly to detailed true/false statements about HPV and available vaccines. After educational information was provided, opinions collected via vignettes highlighted mainly positive attitudes toward vaccination; specifically, that vaccines are safe and all eligible community members should be vaccinated (75% and 84%, respectively). Conclusions: We observed that our respondents with higher educational attainment still lacked accurate knowledge pertaining to HPV and the vaccine. Overall, continued education about HPV and the vaccine is needed across all levels of education including American Indian and Alaska Native community members and health professionals.
... For one thing, the source of ancestry data used will affect the size (and other characteristics) of the population. Following Goldstein and Morning (2000) and Gullickson and Morning (2011), we use individuals' ancestry reports as indicators of multiple-race descent, which brings with it problems of recall and variation in knowledge of one's ancestors. In addition, this approach means that individual respondents' notions of racial categorization introduce variation into the reporting of multiracial ancestry. ...
Estimates of the size of the multiracial population in the United States depend on what prompts people to report multiple races on censuses and surveys. We use data from the 2015 Pew Survey of Multiracial Adults to explore how racial self-identification is shaped by the generational locus of an individual’s multiracial ancestry—that is, the place in one’s family tree where the earliest interracial union appears. We develop the theoretical rationale for considering generational heterogeneity and provide its first empirical demonstration for U.S. adults, by estimating what shares of the population identify multiracial ancestry in their parents’ or grandparents’ generation, or further back in their family tree. We find that multiracial generation is related to—and likely confounded with—the ancestry combinations that individuals report (e.g., white-Asian, black–American Indian). Finally, we show that later generations are less likely than their first-generation counterparts to select multiple races when they self-identify. Consequently, we argue that generational locus of multiracial ancestry should be taken into account by demographers and researchers who study outcomes for multiracial Americans.
... Identification studies have paid much less attention to whether the traditional regime of hyperdescent remains powerful among those of part-American Indian ancestry, despite an active field of research on American Indian racial classification overall (Garroutte, 2003;Nagel, 1996;Unrau, 1989;Wilson, 1992). In fact some scholars have extended the ''test of hypodescent'' to individuals of part-American Indian ancestry (Brunsma, 2005), seemingly ignoring a well-established literature that documents exactly the opposite phenomenon for those of part-American Indian ancestry. ...
Utilizing the nationally representative 2010–2014 American Community Survey Public Use Micro Sample data, we examine patterns and determinants of ethnic identity among US-born Arab Americans, an increasingly visible and growing ethnic group in the USA. Specifically, this study examines how various socioeconomic and sociodemographic factors affect the probability of reporting Arab-only and mixed ethnic identities. Applying the tenets of assimilation theory, we identify the multiple pathways of identity found among Arab Americans. Descriptive analysis illustrated about half of Lebanese and Syrians were listed as “mixed” and most of them are mixed with whites. By comparison, more than 70% of Yemenis, Kurdish, Palestinians, and Jordanians indicated an “Arab-only” identity. Logistic regression analysis controlled for key demographics and showed that only two ancestry groups, Lebanese and Syrian, were more likely to be mixed with “whites” if they ever mixed with non-Arabs. Findings uncover the saliency of national origin and key demographics, highlighting factors that encourage the presence of options, as well as showcasing the multiple paths of identity assimilation.
... Indicating multiple "races" is not necessarily the same thing as indicating a unique "mixed race" (Goldstein and Morning 2000), and this is even more obvious in the case of Canada. The gender-based provisions of the Indian Act of 1869 conferred full status on the descendants of any male Status Indian, regardless of his wife's status, while on the other hand, any female Status Indian who "married out" lost her status, and could not transmit it to her children. ...
Over the last 50 years, censuses have shown very substantial increases in the estimated sizes of Aboriginal populations in settler states such as Canada. Since these increases cannot be explained by demographic factors alone, authors have proposed that, as the situation of Aboriginal people has been under increasing public scrutiny, it has become more socially acceptable to report that one is Aboriginal. This may be an explanation for increases between censuses that are conducted five or ten years apart, but is such an explanation plausible when comparing answers provided within six months of one another? This article explores the factors associated with short-term fluidity in Aboriginal identification. In order to do so, it uses Canadian data collected twice from among the same members of the defined
“population of Aboriginal identity” over a six-month period, in 2006 and in 2011–2012. Close to a third of all Canadians who “identified” as Aboriginals in the Census long form or in the National Household Survey (NHS) changed their answers when asked the same question in the Aboriginal Peoples Survey (APS). Fluidity in identification depends on methodological factors such as mode of administration and question wording. It also depends on individual and contextual factors. Socioeconomic status and residence in an urban area or in specific regions of Canada are the main factors that differentiate the three groups analyzed here—the Fluid Indian/Métis, the New Métis and the New Indians—from the group that has a stable identification. In light of this finding, we think that statistics produced on Aboriginal peoples in Canada from the standard sources should be treated with some caution. Using the APS identification numbers, for example, instead of those of the Census/NHS would likely reduce the estimated differences between “non-Aboriginals” and “Aboriginals,” at least in terms of education.
... This question (in Appendix A) was asked in each census since 1980 and is also in the ACS. I code most ancestry responses as suggestive of a particular racial heritage (see Appendix C), following Goldstein and Morning (2000Morning ( , 2002) and Gullickson and Morning (2011). As listed in Appendix C, I use vague ancestry responses (such as "Asian") given for children to, for example, code a black-Chinese child as "black with Chinese ancestry." ...
Socially constructed race groups have boundaries that define their membership. I study temporal trends and group-specific patterns in race and ancestry responses provided for children of interracial marriages. Common responses indicate contemporary definitions of race groups (and perhaps emerging groups); uncommon responses reveal socially defined limits of race group membership. I leverage dense, nonpublic, Census Bureau data from 1960 to 2010 to do this and include a more diverse set of families, a longer time span, and more accurate estimates than prior research. I find that the location of race group boundaries varies over time and across 11 distinct family types. Since mixed-heritage responses became possible in 1980, they have been common in most groups. Part Asians have almost always been reported as multiracial or mixed ancestry. A number of (non-Asian) mixed-heritage children are described as monoracial on the census form, particularly children with American Indian heritage. Over time, part whites are decreasingly reported as monoracially white (white race with no nonwhite ancestry). Black heritage is reported for part blacks, but monoracial black responses became nonmodal by 1980. Part Pacific Islanders show similarities to part Asians and part American Indians. Given the predominance of multiracial and mixed-ancestry Asian responses since 1980, Asian multiracial may be an emerging socially recognized race category. Black multiracial shows a similar pattern. Monoracial responses (especially common among white–American Indians and black–American Indians) create important but hard-to-measure complexity in groups’ compositions.
