Sie sind auf Seite 1von 20

Social Forces, University of North Carolina Press

A Distorted Nation: Perceptions of Racial/Ethnic Group Sizes and Attitudes toward Immigrants and Other Minorities Author(s): Richard Alba, Rubn G. Rumbaut, Karen Marotz Reviewed work(s): Source: Social Forces, Vol. 84, No. 2 (Dec., 2005), pp. 901-919 Published by: Oxford University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3598484 . Accessed: 10/02/2012 10:20
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Oxford University Press and Social Forces, University of North Carolina Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Forces.

http://www.jstor.org

Nation: A Distorted SizesandAttitudes of Racial/Ethnic Group Perceptions Minorities andOther Toward Tmmigrants
SUNY Richard Alba,University atAlbany, Irvine RubenG. Rumbaut,University of California, SUNY KarenMarotz,University atAlbany,

Abstract SocialSurvey, Americans' module(MEUS)of the2000 General we investigate Usinga special Weshowthat,because States. of the United of of theracialand ethniccomposition perceptions rather thanabsolute, it is critical togauge relative, groupsizes. innumeracy, through perceptions believed thatwhites hadbecome a Evenso,it appears that,as of2000,roughly halfofAmericans such were even more common members numerical minority; perceptions amongminority-group sizesof minorities thanamongwhites. Majority-group of therelative respondents'perceptions and Hispanics, with thosehavingthe most towards blacks affecttheirattitudes immigrants, themostnegative distorted sizesin attitudes. perceptions holding Although perceptions ofgroup the nation are linkedto the perceived racial/ethnic the communities where of composition the on attitudes are the latter. Our reside, independent respondents oftheformer effects largely of the overlooked valueofan oldbromide education. frequently againstprejudice: findings highlight "Ahalf-century from now, when your own grandchildren are in there will be no race in America." college, majority - President BillClinton at the 1998Portland StateUniversity commencement Blumer racial is connected to a sense of group As Herbert observed, (1958) famously prejudice racial andethniccomposition of the United Thechanging States,spurred position. largely by the sense of groupsuperiority of native wouldseem to challenge contemporary immigration, the whites, by alteringrapidly and, in some cases, radically Anglos, i.e., non-Hispanic malls andvotingbooths.Since of schools,neighborhoods, workplaces, shopping compositions on a large scaleinthe late1960s,some regions of the United Stateshave resumed immigration InCalifornia, forexample, remarkable transformations. whiteswent demographic undergone between1980and2000.Equally fromtwo-thirds to less thanhalfof the population greatshifts numerical that the dominance of areforecastforthe future;population projections suggest Research (National Angloscouldend in the nationas a whole by the middleof the century that- as end inmanycitiesandmetropolitan Council 1997).Itwillcertainly regionslongbefore SanFrancisco, urban centerssuchas LosAngeles, indeeditalready hasinsome major Houston, Miami andNewYork. SanAntonio, theoretical has well-known literature, (1967) analysis, exemplified by Blalock's Sociological of threat to the majority withthe perception racial/ethnic demography changing longconnected their service ontheGSS Board became withthis The twosenior authors ofOverseers, topic during engaged the 2000 Multi-Ethnic U.S. the to to board members are andthey shape for opportunity grateful theirfellow Andrew Mellon the the W also module the financial survey. (MEUS) of acknowledge support They of Direct to Richard enabled theMEUS datato be collected. which Alba, Foundation, correspondence E-mail: NY12222. SUNY, r.alba@albany.edu. Department ofSociology, University atAlbany, Albany,
C The Universityof NorthCarolinaPress Social Forces, Volume84, Number2, December 2005

902

SocialForcesVolume84,Number2 * December 2005

of exclusionary andthe institutionalization barriers to preserve its socialprivileges (Bobo1983; of prejudice Williams those barriers are and other forms directed towards 1947). Among hostility minorities. Lincoln Quillian (1995),for example,has foundthat demographically expanding withthe size of the in European countries variesinaccordance prejudice againstimmigrants inthe United Fossett andKiecolt havefound the equivalent (1989) population; linkage immigrant of the population inan areaandthe anti-black attitudes Statesbetweenthe blackpercentage of itswhiteresidents. shift and the micro-level Yet between the macro-sociological plane of demographic of individual as registered insurveys Howdo individuals liesperception. phenomenon prejudice socialcontexts,whichmaybe highly whose horizons are largely boundedby theireveryday on them, the changing of theirsociety,its potential impact demography segregated,perceive research of the groups Some recent anditseffecton the position to whichtheybelong? survey It finds that Americans the complicates many demography-+threat-*prejudice linkage. their the sizesof the major racial andethnicminority numbers well misperceive groups, inflating whether thisis inanywaya changefromthe pastcannotbe beyondanydemographic reality; and Niemiand Levine ascertained Foundation 1993;Sigelman 2001; Nadeau, (Kaiser Family of minority-group sizes couldbe arguedto reflecta Niemi2001).Onone hand,exaggeration of the majority sense of threat 2003).Onthe group (Gallagher amongthe members heightened andminority areshared of majority insofar as these misperceptions other, bymembers groups, itsuggeststhatothermechanisms, ones, maybe at work. including cognitive of a basic cognitive withthe research to date lies in its treatment Indeed,one difficulty and manipulate whichwe willdefine as an ability to comprehend mechanism,numeracy, numerical information Themisperception of group sizes hasbeeninappropriately (Paulos 1988). two distinct labeledas "innumeracy" (Nadeau,Niemiand Levine1993),thus confounding the ability to translate a mechanisms: one involving the perception of groupsize; the other, fora limitation in terms.We prefer to reserve the term"innumeracy" intonumerical perception and regard distinct fromdistortions inthe perception of racial thisability it as analytically and ethnic sizes.A problem withpaststudiesis thattheyhaverelied on respondent estimates group the degreeof of absolute of minority whichappear to overstate population percentages groups, inrespondent distortion of racial and ethnic perceptions demography. with datafromthe the issue of group-sizeperceptions The presentpaperreexamines whichaskedrespondents 2000General SocialSurvey, to estimatethe percentage sizes of the in the UnitedStates, including of the whites. The inclusion racial/ethnic populations major estimatedsize of the majority us allows to size in a examine relative sense, group group whichprobably better thanthe absolute one withthe notion of threat inBlumer's corresponds andBlalock's frameworks. TheGeneral SocialSurvey also provides a rangeof attitudinal data aboutrace,whichwas expandedin the 2000 surveyto includeadditional questionsabout and immigrant attitudestowardimmigration we can address how groups.Consequently, withthe attitudes thatrespondents hold.Onepunchline group-size perceptions correspond fromourfindings is thatPresident inthe quotation of thispaper, at the beginning was Clinton, in manycases preaching to the choir.As of 2000, about halfof Americans believedthat whites were already a numerical this beliefwas heldeven more by membersof minority; minority groupsthanbywhitesthemselves. The GSS Data TheGeneral SocialSurveyis a nationally representative surveyof the non-institutionalized, of the United For the 2000version States,conducted English-speaking population biannually. of the survey, the GSSBoard of Overseers "Multi-Ethnic United developeda moduleentitled

of Racial/Ethnic Sizes* 903 Group Perceptions whichwas intendedas a test of new questionson respondent attitudes States,"or MEUS, and the racialand ethnic minorities towardsimmigration developingfrom it. The MEUS modulewas presented to one of the two 2000 samples,or 1,398respondents.1 Itincluded a of open-endedquestionsaskingrespondents to estimatethe sizes of racial/ethnic battery whites.Theinstructions to the interviewers thatrespondents groups,including emphasized were to be encouragedto give theirbest guesses, withoutworrying about mathematical consistency: Just your best guess - what percentageof the UnitedStates is eachgroup? PERCENTAGES DONOT [INSTRUCTIONS: population HAVE TO ADD UP TO 100% AND THELISTED GROUPS MAY OVERLAP ENCOURAGE ESTIMATES FOR ALL GROUPS,BUT DISCOURAGE RESPONDENTS REVISING THEIR ESTIMATES.]
%

a. Whites b. Blacks/African-Americans c. Jews d. Hispanics or Latin Americans e. AsianAmericans f. American Indians A similar set of questionswas posed about"thepeoplewho liveinyourcommunity." In the surveyinquired intoa number of immigrationand race-related attitudes.Our addition, One analysisdrawson these to investigatethe consequences of group-size perceptions. domainof potential Here,forexample,we important consequencesis immigration-related. willanalyze an indexconstituted thatsolicited aboutthe bythreequestionsinMEUS opinions of for U.S. consequences immigration society: What do you thinkwill happenas a result of more immigrants Iseachof these results somewhat comingto thiscountry? verylikely, nottoo likely, or notlikely at all? likely, A. Higher crimerates? B. Making the country moreopento new ideasandcultures? C. Peopleborninthe U.S.losingtheirjobs? Factor analysisconfirmsthatthe responses to these three revealan underlying single we examine dimension,so we combinethem laterin a simpleadditiveindex.Inaddition, attitudestowards immigration the items involved,like all we analyze,are restriction; as an appendix table,whichalso presentstheirmeans. presented Inexamining the consequencesof group-size forracial we drawon attitudes, perceptions the largerepertoire of race-related itemsinthe GSS.Some of these itemsarepartsof rotating sets thatareaskedof partial a discussion (For samplesandthusnotof allMEUS respondents. of the rotation andthe "ballot" see Davis,Smithand Marsden 2001: design of the survey, Illustrative of the kindsof attitudes we analyze is: 1525-7). Herearesome opinions other withBlackpeople havein connection whiterelations. Which statement on the cardcomes closestto how feel? youyourself,

904 * SocialForces Volume84,Number2 - December 2005

A. African shouldn't Americans pushthemselveswheretheyarenot wanted. [Responsesare: Agree strongly, agree slightly,disagree disagree slightly, strongly]

TheProblem of Innumeracy
Inspectionof the estimates given by respondents reveals a significantproblem of of numbersthat are highlyimplausible as perceptionsof groupsizes. Some innumeracy, intonumerical itappears, cannoteasilytranslate theirperceptions termsorthey respondents, have very impreciseperceptions.Thus, there are respondentswho providethe same estimateforeverygrouporestimateone groupto be 100 percent(or0 percent). A consistentproblem the estimatesis a lackof precision; respondentsare, throughout afterall,not usually by 5 when Theytendto give estimatesthataredivisible demographers. of 10. by 10. Infact, some 60 percentof the estimatesare multiples they are not divisible seem to be waryof underestimating Further, groups'sizes; andthus halfof the respondents inthe way estimatesof minority-group size are20 percentor more.Thus,thereare patterns in would to inflate themselves numbers that minority group appear respondentsexpress Indians. forthe smaller 1, which sizes, especially Figure groupssuch as AsiansandAmerican reveals(1) the dominanceof population, presents the estimates for the AsianAmerican of 5; and(2)the overall of 10 andsecondarily estimatesthatareprimarily multiples multiples was countedat not quite of the population inflation of the estimates.TheAsianpercentage 4 percentinthe 2000 Census,buttwo-thirds of the GSSrespondentsestimatedit to be at least 10 percent.
in the U.S.Population,GSS2000 Asian Percentage Figure1. Distribution of Perceived

20 18 161403 a() c
() 0 c0 o3 Qr4-

12 -

10
8 6 4 2 0 l FT1
-;

ES

T0

? . r rIl T - FT w r4

To

flIr

IFt T

- FF i'iF1---fiti

tt.r'.''-f'tr irI"i

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Perceived Percentage

of Racial/Ethnic GroupSizes * 905 Perceptions

of these tendenciesaremadeclearwhenone adds upthe estimatesfor Theramifications exclusive ethno-racial the groupsof the so-called 1995),the fivemutually (Hollinger pentagon (whites, blacks, everyonein the U.S. population categories that should includevirtually 150 percenton the percentagesadd upto nearly AsiansandAmerican Indians); Hispanics, for GSS respondents. average of numeracy Thisbriefoverview issues leadsto threeconclusions: (andinnumeracy) (1) are highly as reports of theirperceptions of the estimatesof some respondents implausible size are sociological reality;(2) the absolute sizes of the estimates of minority-group the and need to be relatedto some other magnitude,most plausibly, untrustworthy and of the of the estimates of the size the estimate (3) majority population; respondent's than Indians andJews, tend to be moreerror-prone smallestminorities, Asians,Americans willfocus on the relative sizes of the black the others.Forthe lasttwo reasons,ouranalysis whites - that is, of the two largest and Hispanicpopulations comparedto non-Hispanic about25 percentof the totalU.S.population inthe 2000 who togethercomprised minorities, to the which 70 Census,compared comprised percent. population, majority The "Endangered" White Majority tendedto overstateminority-group size, they didnotdo the same for Although respondents 2 shows,theytendedinstead to underestimate whites.Indeed, as Figure the whitepercentage of U.S.residents. of the population. The2000 Censusshowedwhitesto be almost70 percent if respondents are "whites" do notinclude (Weassumethat,formost respondents, Hispanics; sense demographers wouldgiveit,thusincluding whiteHispanics, usingthe terminthe literal of the majority thenthe degreeof misperception size obviously worsens.) If,as a rough group's we in the 60to measureof an accurate estimate, acceptany 80-percent range,thenslightly While of morethanhalfof the samplehas a good graspof the whiteproportion. a smallgroup - nearly 40 percent of respondents overestimates whites'size,a substantial respondents group - thinks of the population thatwhitesmakeupa significantly smaller thantheydo inreality. part size combinedwith that to understate Thus,the tendencyto overstateminority-group does indeed the sizes whites'population respondents proportion suggestthatmany exaggerate In these two tendencies combined further for some of minority that, fact, groups. suggest whites'majority Thisissue is addressed inTable statusis inquestion. 1.2 respondents, in an absolutesense, 20 percentof the respondents depictwhites as a minority Nearly percentageto be less than 50. An even greaternumberof estimatingtheir population shareof at least50 percent, butnevertheless presents respondents assignswhitesa population of the two. Thus,6 percent to blacks,Hispanics ora combination relative them as a minority - is at leastas largeas whites; blacks believethatone of these two minority groups- usually whites. 23 percentbelievethatthe two minority an additional groupstogetheroutnumber andAmerican into further ifwe addedAsians Indians wouldincrease thislastfraction Obviously, no longer whitesto be the thatroughly halfof Americans the mix.Thus,a conclusion perceive seems fair. majority To some extent, this incorrect perception is a result of minorityrespondents to the own groups. Table 2 shows howrespondents the size of their belonging overestimating three largest racial/ethnic populationsperceive, on average, the composition of the inthe GSSsampleto Indian aretoo few AsianandAmerican (There respondents population. andHispanics of the population, Blacks theirestimateshere.)For whites'percentage include to butnot significantly, loweraverageestimatesthanwhitesdo. Blacksappear give slightly, more of the population, whileHispanics estimatesof theirown percentage higher giveslightly overestimate theirfraction. Foundation results,see Kaiser (Forsimilar Family substantially

906

SocialForces Volume84,Number2 * December 2005

White Percentage in the U.S.Population,GSS2000 Figure2. Distribution of Perceived

20 18-

1614cl)

12 -I
cIn I\ (V) 0D O
o~
o-

8 6

4 2
0
Tl T r At : 1nrll?lurnrrmnnnl 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

rfv

Perceived Percentage
Table1:The Perceptionof Whites as a Minority

N Total: whogiveat leastone estimate forwhites, (Respondents blacks, Hispanics) Respondentswithnon-usableestimates: Atleastone estimate is missing Atleastone estimate is 100% Atleastone estimate is 0% forallfivegroups arethesame Estimates Respondentswithusableestimates: < 50% Whites Whites - 50% ~ Hispanics Whites Whites< blacks - blacks + Hispanics Whites
Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000.

%of usable estimates

1,320 86 44 18 16 8 1,234 228 1,006 21 52 279 100.0 18.5 81.5 1.7 4.2 22.6

of Racial/Ethnic Perceptions GroupSizes * 907

2001: 4.) Members of all three groups overestimatethe Asian and AmericanIndian butHispanics to do so to a slightly extent. percentages, appear greater
Table2: Mean Group-sizeEstimatesby Race/Ethnicity of Respondents

%White Estimated by: Whites Blacks Hispanics F statistic df *** p < .001 58.8 56.4 56.6 2.27 (3/ 1230)

%Black

% Hispanic %Asian

American Indian

29.1 37.8 34.8 15.57** (3/1230)

22.3 27.1 39.3

15.7 20.3 26.8

12.2 16.0 20.3

945 158 94

31.81**' 19.31** 10.28*** (3/1230) (3/ 1204) (3/1196)

Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000.

raisequestionsaboutbackground thatmight These patterns factors,such as education, 3 presentsthe coefficientsfroman OLSregression accountforthem.As an answer,Table group sizes. The analysis of the influences on distorted perceptionsof racial/ethnic educational and variables most also gender,age attainment, include, independent notably, to varyaccording to the degree of and racial/ethnic origin.Becausewe expect perceptions and immigrants, for residenceoutsideof a we also control everyday exposureto minorities area(implying limited and nativity (sinceforeignbirth exposureto immigrants)3 metropolitan correlates withresidenceinareaswithmanyotherimmigrants). likely andHispanics of Logged Ratio of Blacks to Whites Table 3:Regression Analysis Variable: Education (years) Age (years) Male Rural residence birth Foreign Hispanic Black Asian Constant Adj.R2 N
Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000. *** < .001 p

Unstandardized coefficient -.048 -.003** -.295 .081 -.090 .358 .239 .052 .710 .151 1,225

p *** *

*** *

908 * SocialForces 2005 Volume84,Number2 * December

here as the logged ratioof the of groupsizes has been operationalized Misperception to that sum of the estimatesof blackand Hispanic population percentagesof the national of the dependentvariablepreservestwo desirablefeatures: of whites. Thisformulation is a matterof degree and can be greateror lesser; it is a matterof relative misperception group size, especially since the absolute values of the estimates do not appear trustworthy. Loggingthe ratiokeeps extremevalues fromexercisingundueinfluenceon the regression.A coefficient in a model for a logged variablecan be interpreted as the approximateproportional change in the dependent variablecorrespondingto a unit variable, change in the independent has a pronounced Education, age and gender playkey roles in the model. Education effect, with each increase of a year in school reducingthe ratioof perceivedminoritygroupsize to thatof whites by 5 percent.Genderhas a sizableeffect, also; men perceive relativeminority-group size as 30 percent lowerthan do women. Age is not as strong a factoras these two, but olderrespondentsdo have morerealisticperceptions. Evenwiththese effects takenintoaccount,blacksand Hispanics are more likely than whites to have distorted perceptions of the nation'sdemography. Accordingto their size that are 36 percent higher coefficients, Hispanicsreportratiosof minority-to-white than whites do, while blacks reportratios that are 24 percent higher.However,two expectations do not hold up: the residents of ruralareas, who presumablyhave less are no more likelythan others to have distorted exposureto racialand ethnic diversity, perceptionsof racialand ethnicgroupsizes; and the perceptionsof the foreignbornare not significantly differentfromthose of the nativeborn.4 This measurementof this last effect maybe biased by the exclusionof non-English speakersfromthe GSSuniverse. The Impact of Residential Contexts on Perceptions of National Demography An individual's everydaysocial context is a likelysource of his or her perceptionsof the sizes of differentgroups, and earlierresearch has supportedthe hypothesis that the of the residential area exerts a substantialinfluenceon these racial/ethnic demography perceptions (Nadeau, Niemi and Levine 1993). However,on theoreticalgrounds, the relationshiphas been argued in two ways: on one hand, some researchers have suggested that the perceptionsof relativegroupsizes in the society as a whole are the resultsof faultygeneralizations fromeveryday experience,andthis is what Nadeau,Niemi and Levine (1993)infact found;on the other,it can be arguedthatexaggeratedestimates of groupsizes resultfromlackof intergroup contactsandthus an absence of the realism introducedby experience (Gallagher 2003). Eitherway, one could attributedistorted and ethniccompositionto the highlevels of residential perceptionsof the nation'sracial 2001). segregationinthe UnitedStates (Logan Inthe GSS,we findthatthe most usablemeasuresof localcontextstem froma series of those on national of the sizes of questions,paralleling groupsizes thatcallfor perceptions different In to of groupsin"your community."5comparison perceptions groupsat the national of groupsinthe neighborhood to be muchbettergrounded, andthe level,perceptions appear estimates havefargreaternumerical As Table 4 reveals,the averageperceived plausibility. size of whites is 67 percent.Thisis obviouslynot muchbelow the percentageone would of the population. at 20 and 14 percent, Likewise, expecton the basisof whites'percentage the estimatesof blacks' andHispanics' sizes aremorerealistic thanis the case forthe national estimates.As a consequence,the sum of the estimatesforthe fivepopulations inthe ethnoracial close to the idealof 100 percent.6 averages112 percent, pentagon

of Racial/Ethnic Perceptions GroupSizes * 909 Table4: MeanGroup-sizeEstimatesfor Communityand Nation

Race/ethnicity:
Whites Blacks Hispanics Asians American Indians
Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000. Note:Ns in parentheses.

in % community
66.5(1,223) 19.7(1,205) 14.4(1,184) 7.2(1,173) 4.6(1,155)

% in nation
58.4(1,234) 30.8(1,234) 24.2(1,234) 17.2(1,208) 13.4(1,200)

as respondentssee it, is quite The demographic compositionof theirneighborhoods, relatedto the perceptions they haveof groupsin the national (See powerfully population. Table these influencesstem fromperceptions of minority-group sizes 5.) Morespecifically, Thelattermaybe redundant rather thanperceptions of the whitepopulation. herebecause, whites' proportion greaterrealismof the neighborhood giventhe apparently perceptions, sense, impliedby the minority-group among residents is, at least in an approximate Inany event, addingthe estimatedneighborhood proportions. percentagesof blacksand to the equation the loggedratio to majority of minority sizes inthe nation Hispanics predicting raises the variance. explained substantially
Table 5: Regression Analysis of Logged Ratio of Blacks and Hispanics to Whites, including Perceptionof CommunityDemography

Variable: Education (years) Age(years) Male Rural residence birth Foreign Hispanic Black Asian incommunity Est.%Black incommunity Est.%Hispanic Constant Adj.R2 N
Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000. *p<.05 **p<.01 ***p<.001

Unstandardized coefficient -.042 -.002 -.264 .164 -.096 .145 .061 -.015 .005 .008 .388 .236 1,170

p *** * ** *

***

910

SocialForces Volume84,Number2 * December 2005

The addition of the perceivedneighborhood contextto the equationhas demographic on little the coefficients of some but relatively impact predictors, causes othersto shift.Thus, the effects of age, education andgenderremain as theywere inthe earlier equation. largely ina rural areanowhasa significant one indicating thatrural are residents effect,a positive Living to inflate sizes thanareurbanites. morelikely Butthe largest changesoccurin minority-group the coefficients forthe Hispanic-origin andblack variables. While dummy theywere largeand in in of We the now are small the case earlier and, blacks, positive equation, they insignificant. of groupsizes by blackand Hispanic can concludethat the more severe misperceptions were largely dueto theirresidential contexts.Becauseof residential respondents segregation, andfarmoreminority-group ones thando the havefarfewerwhiteresidents their communities in which whites reside (Massey and Denton 1993; Logan2001). With neighborhoods context whitesand membersof minority controlled, groupsareaboutequally neighborhood of the of to hold distorted the nation. racial/ethnic composition perceptions likely The Consequences of Perceived Group Sizes for Attitudes hastreated of groupsizes as "error," So far, the analysis the distorted perceptions showingfor is stronglyinfluenced examplethattheirlikelihood by education.The questionnow to be make any sociologicaldifference:are they addressed is whetherthese misperceptions thatrespondents holdaboutracial andethnicdiversity, echoed,forexample,inthe attitudes We of Blalock and Blumer, citedearlier? as one wouldexpectfromthe theoretical reasoning the analysisto membersof the racial/ethnic adhereto this reasoningby limiting majority threatened i.e., non-Hispanic whites,who arepresumably by increasing minority-group group, size inwaysthatmembersof the minority groupsarenot.7 aretwo "objects" forwhichwe examine There attitudes: andimmigration, and immigrants We continueto expressthe perception of groupsizes as a logged ratio, Americans. African thisformulation to otherpossibilities sizes of blacks absolute preferring (e.g.,as the perceived on theoretical ratio the of relative andHispanics) the notion Thus, grounds. logged preserves group size as the key to the perceptionof threat. In addition,our testing of the main shows that overall the logged ratioperforms at least as well in explaining the alternative attitudinal variables.8 6 presents on a seriesof immigrationandrace-related Table the effectsof the loggedratio attitudes.These effects are in everycase net of a series of othercontrols(e.g., education, age, gender);and the items havein each case been orderedso thata positivecoefficient ourexpectation an effect ina less "liberal" indicates forthe logged ratioof group direction, and immigrants, we have sizes. Inregressionsthat predictattitudestowardsimmigration to Hispanics and nonwhites), because they are the excludedthe foreignborn(inaddition focus of the surveyquestions. These analyses demonstratethat perceptionsof group sizes bear fairlysystematic to what majority-group and racial relationships respondentsthink about immigration minorities, althoughthe effects are of moderatestrengthat best. Amongthe strongest on attitudes Theimmigration effects arethose bearing towardsimmigration. as noted index, combinesthreeitemsconcerned withthe perceived earlier, (for consequencesof immigration nationalunity,unemployment and crime).As measuredby the standardized regression the effect of perceived relative coefficient, powerthere groupsizes has as muchexplanatory the unstandardized as it does anywhere. is modestcompared with coefficient Nevertheless, thatof education. of 1 inthe loggedratio inthe translates intoa 2.7-fold increase (Anincrease ratio of groupsizes, obviously a verylargechange,butits impact on the indexis equalto that of onlytwo years' increasein education.) The coefficientsindicatethat the respondents'

of Racial/Ethnic Perceptions GroupSizes * 911

of immigration become moreunfavorable as theirperceptions of groupsizes tilt perceptions from whites' status. away majority attitudestoward continuedimmigration are shaped by perceptionsof Accordingly, Thelarger thatnon-Hispanic whites perceiveminority contemporary demography groupsto have grown in numbersrelative to themselves, the more they desire to see immigration inTable6.) Moreover, restrictions the perception of threatimplicit in imposed.(See LETIN distortedperceptionsof groupsizes correspondsto a hierarchy in the majority group's forimmigrants. Theeffectof loggedratio on the desireforimmigration restriction preferences is greatest for Latin Americanimmigrants and least for those from Europe (LETINHISP) withimmigrants fromAsiain between(LETINASN). (LETINEUR), The impacton attitudestowardsracialminorities is more scatteredthan is true with (Theitems presentedin Table6 are selected froma sizablearray respectto immigration. inthe GSS.) inthe itemswhereeffects appear One leitmotif available concernsthe potential inthe socialworldsof personsethnically forminority likethe respondents. intrusion Thus,the shouldn't logged ratiois associatedwith responses to the statement,"African-Americans The moredistorted theirperceptions of group pushthemselveswherethey'renotwanted." sizes, the more likelywhite respondentsare to agree with the statement and to do so Thesame holdsforagreement action. do you thattheyarehurt ("What strongly. byaffirmative think the chancesarethese daysthata whitepersonwon'tget a jobor promotion whilean or less-qualified blackpersongets one instead?") Theonlyset of stereotypesthat equallyviolence. appears to be affected by misperceptionsof group sizes concerns minority in the national who perceiveminorities as dominant tend also to population Respondents aremoreviolent thanaverage. believethatblacksandHispanics of the community of groupsizes at the national levelarea function Sincethe perceptions of these aresituated,orat leastof respondents' contextsinwhichrespondents perceptions are ultimately that the effects we havejust identified contexts, it mightbe hypothesized than distortedperceptions. Thathypothesis,however rootedin everydaycontexts rather logical,is not borneout by the evidence. InTable7, we presentthe mainfindingsfrom contexts as perceivedby respondents(operationalized analyses in whichthe community andthe loggedratio of perceived andpercentHispanic) as variables: black two percent again thatdominates. planearebothpresent.Itis the latter groupsizes on the national Infact, in about halfof the cases, the community context does not appearto playa of national thisremains roleinattitude trueeven ifthe perception formation; group significant is removed fromthe models.Inanyevent,in mostof the models, sizes, i.e.,the loggedratio, whenthe community and remains areincluded, the loggedratio contextvariables significant if at all. inthese cases, the coefficient of the variable is generally affectedonlyslightly, in questiononly to concludethatcommunity contextaffectsthe attitudes One is entitled affectthe way thatmanyrespondents Thatis, theireveryday socialenvironments indirectly. of groupsinthe nation the demographic as a whole.Theseperceptions, perceive magnitudes affect of the national inturn, whichfrequently involve extreme distortions demography, fairly and raceandethnicity. theirattitudes towardsimmigration

Conclusion
of the havehighly distortedperceptions thatmanyAmericans Thisresearchdemonstrates racialand ethnic compositionof the UnitedStates; and that these distortionsare of and immigrant groupsand consequence for the attitudesthey holdtowardsimmigration is revealed Theextentof the distortion towardsotherminorities. byourrough approximation in a minority thatwhiteswere already believed thatinthe year2000,abouthalfof Americans

Table6: Effectsof PerceivedRelativeGroupSizes and Educationon Attitudes

variables: Dependent IMMIGRATION-RELATED ATTITUDES: Index of immigration attitudes Increase ordecreaseimmigration? (LETIN) Latin American immigration? (LETINHISP) Asianimmigration? (LETINASN) European (LETINEUR) immigration? RACEIETHNICITY-RELATED ATTITUDES: Blacks shouldn't push(RACPUSH) tendto be violent Blacks (VIOLBLKS) tendto be violent Hispanics (VIOLHSPS) Whites hurt action byaffirm. (DISCAFF)

Logged ratio b beta

Education p b beta p

.493 .152 .167 .129 .090

.139 .095 .104 .082 .059

*** ** ** * t

-.252 -.077 -.076 -.090 -.064

-.312 -.213 -.211 -.251 -.186

*** *** *** *** ***

.LzU

r'

Xa 10 .U. .1

AAf A4fA

**n'

,)

IU

-.L -. -

***

.167 .193 .104

.086 .107 .094

* ** *

-.030 -.016 -.024

-.069 -.041 -.094

* *

Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000. Notes:The relativegroup size variableis the logged ratio of blacksand Hispanicsto whites. The coefficientsrep these include, as appropriate: that containother independentvariables; age, gender, ruralresidence, foreign bir Indian. *p<.05 **p<.01 ***p<.001 tp<.10

Table7: Comparisonof the Effectsof PerceivedGroup Sizes in Community and Nation

Community groupsizes
%

%black b ATTITUDES: IMMIGRATION-RELATED attitudes of immigration Index ordecreaseimmigration? Increase (LETIN) American Latin (LETINHISP) immigration? Asianimmigration? (LETINASN) (LETINEUR) immigration? European ATTITUDES: ETHNICITY-RELATED RACEI shouldn't Blacks push(RACPUSH) tendto be violent Blacks (VIOLBLKS) tendto be violent (VIOLHSPS) Hispanics action(DISCAFF) hurt Whites byaffirm. .008 .004 .000 .003 .000 .002 -.001 .001 .001

Hispanic b .007 .001 .001 .002 .000

-.007 -.002 .004 .001

Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000. Note:The coefficientsreportedare taken from regressionequations that contain other independent variables;t gender,ruralresidence,foreignbirth, black, Hispanic, Asian and AmericanIndian. +p < .10 *p<.05 **p<.01 ***p<.001

914 * SocialForces Volume84,Number2 ? December 2005

the totalpopulation. Thisbeliefwas heldeven moreby membersof minority groupsthanby whitesthemselves. As otherresearch has alsofound,the misperceptions aboutgroupsizes arerelated to the inwhichrespondents live:the moretheyencounter members socialenvironments everyday andethnicminorities intheircommunities, of racial these groupsto the larger they perceive be on the national This not that the does attitudinal effects of however, plane. finding imply, areattributable to community contexts.Our perceptions analysesshowthat,even group-size with the compositions of these contexts controlled,misperceptionshave significant on attitudes formembersof the majority influences group. We haveimproved a confounding betweennumeracy, uponpast research by uncovering of and or numerical and racial ethnic ability, perceptions groupsizes. Thisoccurswhen the measureof perception of groupsize is formulated intermsof absolute,rather thanrelative, numbers.Future includean independent measureof numerical researchshould probably to disentangle the two phenomena.Inaddition, ourtesting of the linkagebetween ability group-sizeperceptionsand attitudeshas been more systematicthan in the past, and in we have shown for the firsttime a substantial connectionto attitudestowards particular on the demography and Given the of of the immigrants immigration. hugeimpact immigration forattitudinal inthe future. thisconnection divisions nation, maycarry largeimplications Itappears to us thatthis research leadsto an additional, conclusion. For as quitepractical forms of prejudice, long as social scientists have investigated they have recommended educational to counteract it (Allport in 1954).Bynow,the persistenceof prejudice programs the face of decadesof educational efforthas ledto a jaundiced viewof the benefits.However, inthis case, misperceptions to haveconsequencesthatcouldbe addressedby truly appear betterinformation. Social scientists themselves may have to take some of the blame for these Intheirown zealto prepare Americans forthe racial andethnicchangesthat misperceptions. are likelyin the next decades, they have emphasizedor allowed others to emphasize, scenariosstemmingfrompopulation for2050.These scenarios,moreover, tend projections to reify the broadest racial andethniccategories(e.g., "white" and 'Asian"), thus overlooking theirhistorically nature andthe likelihood thattheywillchangeas the underlying contingent of the United Statesdoes. A consequenceof the emphasison projections a half demography is thatevensome generally intothe future well-informed Americans confused century appear aboutthe nation's as is apparent inthispassagewritten in 1998bythe historian demography, Wills: Garry Theexplosion of ethnicdiversity thataffirmative actionof guarantees some sortwillbe needed so thateveryonefeels a stakein a country that is literally changingcomplexioneveryday.whites will be a 1998.67, ouremphasis) (Wills minority by earlyinthe nextcentury. Unlike to feel less welcoming towards affirmative actionas Wills, manyAmericans appear a result of misperceiving whites' continuingmajority status. Theirattitudesare better summarized who spearheaded 227 in by RonUnz,the Silicon Valley entrepreneur Proposition for the Children," which drastically limited bilingualeducation. In California, "English andthe Endof WhiteAmerica" "California (1999),Unzsaw two possibleethnicfutures,both of a shrinking white minority:" the assimilationism of a "new shapedby "thepolitical reality Americanmelting pot" (representedby his Proposition 227), or "the coming of white nationalism" "SaveOur 187,the 1994anti-immigrant (represented incipiently by Proposition State" initiative, which passed with 59 percent of the statewide vote, but was ruled unconstitutional of by the courts).Bothvisionsarefocused on a worldinwhich"Americans

of Racial/Ethnic GroupSizes ? 915 Perceptions

status duringthe first half of the new into minority European ancestryfall increasingly to a felt challenge to a historically Blumer (1958)mighthaveseen bothas reactions century." evolvedsense of groupposition. 45 years in the futureand with less emphasison a hypothetical Perhaps, demography and moreon contemporary andthe based on fixedracial/ethnic classifications, demography changes to be anticipatedin the near term, the widespreadmisperceptionsand their Whilebigotry cannotbe eliminated attitudinal by consequencescouldbeginto be addressed. whichexacerbates of the nation, education distortion alone,the perceptual maybe prejudice, would be a contribution, however reducedwith such corrective lenses. Such a correction of conditions whichthe sense of grouppositionrecedes and under modest,to the creation racial declines. prejudice Notes 1. Sincethe GSShas become a biannual it collectstwo fullsampleseach time it is survey, fielded. 2. As alreadynoted, some respondentsgive what can only be viewed as meaningless estimatesof groupsizes. We havedropped fromthe analysis those respondents who:(1) failto givea completeset of estimatesforwhites,blacksandHispanics; (2)estimateany of these threegroupsas 0 or 100percent of the population; or(3)estimatewhites,blacks, AsiansandAmerican Indians as allthe same size (typically of withpercentages Hispanics, 50 percentor greaterin each case). These exclusionsresultin a modest deletionof 86 fromthe analysis, halfof whomcouldnot be included inanyeventbecause respondents are of an estimate for at least one three the they missing key groups. 3. We experimented withfinerspatial such as betweenlargecentral citiesand distinctions, theirsuburbs, buttheyfailedto provestatistically variation Likewise, meaningful. regional Inthe end,we settledforthe simplestof geographical distinctions. proved negligible. 4. Some othervariables not reported herealso failedto producesignificant Thus, findings. we tested the amountof televisionwatchingrespondentsreportedto examinethe thatthe misperceptions arisefromthe mass media(Gallagher, 2003). hypothesis 5. The geographicalidentifiers availablein the GSS, containedin its primary currently are unit level.Ouranalysis codes, (PSU) sampling generally at the metropolitan-region appearsto show that the metropolitan regionis too coarse a geographyto have any of groupsizes.Thatis, usingthe identifications on perceptions of the explanatory bearing of the GSS,we tested the abilityof PSUs suppliedto us by TomSmith,the director to predict characteristics these tests yielded metropolitan-level respondent perceptions; results. uniformly insignificant 6. One reviewer suggests thatthe greaternumerical consistencyof the community-level in respondents' estimatescouldbe due to an improvement to answerthe groupability size questions,since inthe GSS,the questionsaboutcommunity followed demography those aboutthe national We have no way to addresswhetheror not this population. is true. interpretation 7. Membersof minority For groups may also feel threatenedby changingdemography.

916 * SocialForces Volume84,Number2 * December 2005 example, some African Americans may perceive an economic threat in the growing numbers of Hispanic immigrants (Waldingerand Lichter 2003). However, there is no reason to expect that impact to be captured by the same logged ratiowe use in the case of whites. Forthe sake of simplicity,we have settled on establishing the validityof our formulationof relativegroup size in the case of the majority group. 8. The alternativeto the relativemeasure is arrivedat by droppingthe estimate of the white percentage. Since the resulting measure is no longer a ratio,there is no need to take its log: hence, it becomes, quite simply,the sum of the percentage estimates of blacks and measures that we analyze,this measure performs much the Hispanics. Forthe attitudinal same way as the logged ratio.

References
Nature of Prejudice. Gordon. 1954.The Addison Allport, Wesley. Hubert. 1967.Toward a Theory of Minority-Group Relations. Blalock, Capricorn. Herbert. 1958."Race as a Sense of Group Pacific Review Position." 1:3-7. Blumer, Sociological Prejudice 1983."Whites' to Busing:Symbolic Racismor Realistic Conflict?" Bobo,Lawrence. Group Opposition of Personality 45: 1196-1210. Journal andSocial Psychology 2001. General SocialSurveys,1972-2000.Cumulative Davis,James, TomSmithand PeterMarsden. Codebook. Research Center. National Opinion 1989."The Sizeof Minority andWhite Racial Attitudes." andJillKiecolt. Relative Mark, Fossett, Populations 70: 820-35. Social ScienceQuarterly 2003. "Miscounting Whites'Misperceptions Charles. Race:Explaining of Racial Size." Group Gallagher, 46: 381-96. Sociological Perspectives David. 1995.Postethnic BasicBooks America. Multiculturalism. Hollinger, Beyond Kaiser 2001."Race andEthnicity in2001:Attitudes, Foundation. andExperiences." The Perceptions, Family Post/Kaiser Foundation/Harvard Washington Family University. LewisMumford John.2001. "Ethnic Grows,Neighborhood Integration Logan, Diversity LagsBehind." atAlbany, SUNY: Center, University http://mumford.albany.edu/census/report.html. andNancy Denton. 1993. Press. American Harvard Massey, Apartheid. Douglas, University Richard andJeffrey Levine. 1993."Innumeracy aboutMinority Public Nadeau, Richard, Niemi, Populations." 57:332-47. Opinion Quarterly National Research Council. and FiscalEffectsof 1997. TheNew Americans. Economic, Demographic, National Press. Immigration. Academy JohnAllen. &Wang. 1988.Innumeracy: Mathematical ItsConsequences. Hill Paulos, Illiteracyand Lincoln. 1995."Prejudice as a Responseto Perceived and Threat: Quillian, Group Population Composition andRacial in Europe." American Review60 (August): 586Prejudice Sociological Anti-Immigrant 611. Niemi. 2001."Innumeracy aboutMinority African Americans and Lee,andRichard Sigelman, Populations: Whites Public 65: 86-94. Compared." Opinion Quarterly

of Racial/Ethnic GroupSizes * 917 Perceptions 17-28. America." 108(November): andthe Endof White Unz,Ron.1999."California Commentary and Michael 2003. How the OtherHalfWorks: and the Social Lichter. Immigration Roger, Waldinger, of Labor. of California Press. University Organization Robin. 1947.The of Intergroup A Survey of Research on Problems Reduction of Ethnic, Williams, Tensions. andReligious Social ScienceResearch Relations. Council. Racial, Group Is NotWhere It'sAt." The New York Times 1998."Washington Wills, 25). Magazine (January Garry.

918 * SocialForces Volume84,Number2 * December 2005 Appendix:Variablesand Means

Variable

Metric

Mean 58.4 30.8 24.2 17.2 13.4 66.5 19.7 14.4 7.2 4.6

N 1,234 1,234 1,234 1,208 1,200 1,223 1,205 1,184 1,173 1,155 1,231 1,228 1,234 1,234 1,234 1,234 1,234 1,234

ofnational sizes: Estimates group White % %Black


%Hispanic %Asian Indian %American Estimates of community sizes: group %White

% Black
%Hispanic %Asian Indian %American variables: Socio-demographic Education Age Sex of10,000 Rural residence notowns having (county ormore) birth Foreign Race/ethnicity (Hispanic) Race/ethnicity (black) Race/ethnicity (Asian)

Years Years 0 =female 1 = male 0 =other 1= rural 0 = bom inU.S. 1 =foreign bom 0 =other 1 = Hispanic 0 =other 1= black 0 =other 1 =Asian 1-12

13.5 44.7 .45 .10 .08 .08 .13 .02

Attitudinal Variables: index: Immigration


"What will doyouthink as a result ofmore happen

6.4

1,159

tothis country?" immigrants coming

atalllikely 1 = Not ** 4= Very likely rates?" atalllikely 1 = Not crime "Higher ** 4 =Very likely intheU.S. their atalllikely bom 1 = Not "People losing jobs?" 4= Very likely** "Do thenumber ofimmigrants from a lot youthink foreign 1 = Increased countries who arepermitted tocome totheUnited 5 = decreased a lot tolive States should beincreased a lot, a increased left thesameas itisnow, decreased a little, or little, a lot?" decreased itharder tokeep thecountry united?" "Making

2.7 3.0 2.7 3.6

1,198 1,186 1,204 1,184

Sizes* 919 of Racial/Ethnic Perceptions Group

Latin thenumber ofimmigrants from "What about ofthe countries America is,Spanish-speaking (that a it a be increased increased -should lot, Americas)

a lot 1 = increased 5 =decreased a lot

3.6

1,180

the same a little, or left asitisnow, decreased little,

a lot?" decreased from Asia?" thenumber ofimmigrants "What about thenumber ofimmigrants "What about from Europe?" *"Blacks/African shouldn't Americans push themselves where not they're wanted." ortend not "Do blacks tend tobeviolence to prone toviolence?" beprone "Do Americans tend tobeviolence Hispanic prone ortend not to be prone toviolence?" *'What thechances arethesedays doyouthink that a white won't a person get joborpromotion anequally orlessqualified while black person gets oneinstead?"

a lot 1 = increased 5 = decreased a lot a lot 1 = increased a lot 5 =decreased 1 = Disagree strongly 4 =Agree strongly** 1= notviolence 7 = violenceprone ** prone 1 = not violence prone 7 =violence-prone** 1 = not very likely ** 3 =very likely

3.6 3.4 2.2 4.5 4.3 1.9

1,171 1,176 674

1,192 1,154 779

Social 2000. Source: General Survey Notes: * indicates of theirballotposition, itemsthat,because wereaskedonlyof a partof the MEUSsample. ** indicates reversal of direction of item,so thatpositivecoefficients fortheloggedgroupsizevariable in a less"liberal" effects as hypothesized. indicate direction,

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen