Alba y Rumbaut, SF, 2005, A Distorted Nation

8/13/2019 Alba y Rumbaut, SF, 2005, A Distorted Nation

1/20


2/20

ADistortedNation:Perceptionsf Racial/EthnicroupSizesandAttitudesToward mmigrantsndOtherMinoritiesRichardAlba,University tAlbany,SUNYRubenG.Rumbaut,University fCalifornia,rvineKarenMarotz,UniversitytAlbany,SUNY

AbstractUsinga specialmodule MEUS)ofthe2000 General ocialSurvey,weinvestigatemericans'perceptionsfthe racialandethnic ompositionfthe UnitedStates.We how hat,because finnumeracy,t is critical ogaugeperceptionshroughelative,ather hanabsolute,roup izes.Even o, tappearshat,asof2000,roughly alfofAmericanselievedhatwhiteshadbecomenumericalminority;uchperceptionsere venmore ommon mongminority-groupembersthanamongwhites.Majority-groupespondents'perceptionsfthe relative izesofminoritiesaffect heirattitudes owardsmmigrants, lacks ndHispanics,with thosehaving he mostdistortederceptionsoldinghemostnegative ttitudes. lthough erceptionsfgroup izesnthe nationare linked o theperceived acial/ethnicompositionf the communitieswhererespondentseside,heeffectsf theformern attitudes re argelyndependentfthe atter.Ourfindingshighlightherequentlyverlookedalueofanoldbromidegainstprejudice:ducation.

Ahalf-centuryrom now, when yourown grandchildrenre incollege, herewillbe nomajorityace nAmerica.- PresidentBillClintonatthe 1998 Portland tateUniversityommencementAs Herbert lumer1958)amously bserved, acial rejudices connected o a senseofgroupposition.Thechanging acial ndethniccomposition f the UnitedStates,spurredargely ycontemporarymmigration,ouldseem to challengehe sense of group uperiorityf nativeAnglos, i.e., non-Hispanic hites, by alteringrapidly nd, in some cases, radicallyhecompositionsfschools,neighborhoods,orkplaces,hoppingmalls ndvotingbooths.Sinceimmigrationesumed na large cale n helate1960s, omeregions f the United tateshaveundergoneemarkableemographicransformations.nCalifornia,orexample,whiteswentfrom wo-thirdso less thanhalfof thepopulationetween1980and2000.Equallyreat hiftsareforecast orthe future;population rojectionsuggestthatthe numericalominance fAngloscouldend inthe nationas a wholebythe middleof the centuryNational esearchCouncil997). twillcertainlyndinmany itiesandmetropolitanegions ongbefore hat asindeedtalreadyas nsomemajor rban enters uchas LosAngeles,SanFrancisco, ouston,SanAntonio,Miami ndNewYork.Sociologicaliterature,xemplified yBlalock's1967)well-knownheoreticalnalysis, aslongconnected hangingacial/ethnicemographyith heperceptionfthreato themajorityThe wo enior uthorsecamengagedith hisopic uringheir ervicen heGSSBoardfOverseers,and hey re ratefulo heirfellowoardmembersor heopportunityoshapehe 000Multi-Ethnic.S.(MEUS)modulefthe urvey. hey lsoacknowledgehe inancialupportftheAndrewWMellonFoundation,hich nabledheMEUS ata o be collected.irect orrespondenceo Richard lba,DepartmentfSociology,niversitytAlbany,UNY, lbany,Y12222. -mail:[email protected].

Social Forces,Volume84, Number2, December 2005The Universityof NorthCarolinaPress


3/20

902 * SocialForcesVolume 4,Number *December 005and he institutionalizationf exclusionaryarrierso preservets socialprivilegesBobo1983;Williams947).Amonghose barriersrehostilityndother ormsofprejudiceirectedowardsdemographicallyxpandingminorities. incolnQuillian1995), orexample,has foundthatprejudice gainst mmigrantsnEuropeanountries aries naccordancewith he sizeoftheimmigrantopulation;ossett ndKiecolt1989)have ound heequivalentinkagen he UnitedStatesbetween he blackpercentage f thepopulationn an areaand he anti-blackttitudesof its whiteresidents.Yet between the macro-sociologicallaneof demographichift and the micro-levelphenomenonf individualrejudices registerednsurveysiesperception.Howdo individualswhose horizons relargely oundedbytheireverydayocialcontexts,whichmaybe highlysegregated,perceivehechanging emographyftheir ociety, tspotentialmpact nthem,and ts effecton theposition f thegroupsowhich heybelong? ome recent urvey esearchcomplicatesthe demography-+threat-*prejudiceinkage.It finds that manyAmericansmisperceivehe sizes of themajoracial ndethnicminorityroups, nflatingheirnumbers ellbeyondanydemographiceality; hether his s inanywaya change rom hepastcannotbeascertainedKaiser amily oundation001; Nadeau,Niemiand Levine 993;Sigelman ndNiemi2001).Onone hand, xaggerationf minority-groupizescouldbe argued o reflectaheightenedense of threat mong hemembers f themajorityroup Gallagher003).On heother,nsofar s thesemisperceptionsresharedbymembers fmajorityndminorityroups,itsuggeststhatothermechanisms,ncludingognitivenes,maybeatwork.Indeed,one difficulty iththe research o datelies in its treatment f a basiccognitivemechanism,numeracy, hich we willdefineas an abilityo comprehend nd manipulatenumericalnformationPaulos 988).Themisperceptionfgroup izeshasbeen nappropriatelylabeledas innumeracyNadeau,NiemiandLevine1993), hus confoundingwo distinctmechanisms: ne involvinghe perception f group ize;the other,he abilityo translateperceptionntonumericalerms.Weprefero reserve heterm innumeracyora limitationnthisabilityndregardtas analyticallyistinct romdistortionsntheperceptionf racial ndethnic roup izes.Aproblem ithpaststudies s that heyhaverelied nrespondentstimatesof absolutepopulationercentagesfminorityroups,whichappearo overstatehedegreeofdistortionnrespondenterceptionsf racial ndethnicdemography.Thepresentpaperreexamines he issue of group-sizeperceptionswith datafrom he2000 General ocialSurvey, hichaskedrespondentso estimate hepercentageizesofthemajor acial/ethnicopulationsnthe UnitedStates, includingwhites.Theinclusion f theestimatedsize of the majority roupallowsus to examinegroupsize in a relative ense,whichprobablyorresponds etter han he absolute ne with henotion f threat nBlumer'sand Blalock'srameworks. heGeneral ocialSurvey lsoprovides rangeof attitudinalataaboutrace,whichwas expanded nthe 2000survey o includeadditional uestionsaboutattitudes oward mmigrationndimmigrantroups.Consequently, e can address howgroup-size erceptions orrespondwith he attitudes hatrespondents old.Onepunch inefromour indingss thatPresident linton,n hequotationt thebeginningfthispaper,wasin manycases preachingo the choir.As of 2000,about halfof Americansbelieved hatwhites were already numericalminority;his beliefwas held even morebymembersofminorityroups hanbywhites hemselves.

The GSS DataThe General ocialSurveys a nationallyepresentativeurveyof the non-institutionalized,English-speakingopulationf the United tates,conductedbiannually.or he2000 versionof thesurvey,he GSSBoard f Overseersdevelopeda moduleentitled Multi-Ethnicnited


4/20

Perceptionsf Racial/Ethnicroup izes 903States, orMEUS,whichwas intendedas a test of new questionson respondent ttitudestowardsimmigrationnd the racialandethnic minorities eveloping rom it. The MEUSmodulewas presentedo oneofthe two2000samples,or1,398respondents.1t ncludedbattery f open-endedquestionsaskingrespondentso estimatethe sizes of racial/ethnicgroups, ncluding hites.The nstructionso the interviewersmphasizedhatrespondentswere to be encouraged o givetheirbest guesses, withoutworrying bout mathematicalconsistency:

Just your best guess - what percentageof the United Statespopulations eachgroup?INSTRUCTIONS:ERCENTAGESONOTHAVE O ADDUP TO 100%AND THELISTED ROUPSMAYOVERLAP NCOURAGESTIMATESORALLGROUPS,BUTDISCOURAGEESPONDENTSEVISINGHEIRSTIMATES.]%a. Whitesb.Blacks/African-Americansc. Jewsd. Hispanics rLatinAmericanse. AsianAmericansf.AmericanndiansA similaret of questionswas posedabout thepeoplewho live nyourcommunity. naddition,he survey nquiredntoa number f immigration-ndrace-relatedttitudes.Ouranalysisdrawson these to investigatehe consequencesof group-sizeperceptions.Oneimportantomainof potential onsequences s immigration-related.ere, orexample,wewillanalyze n index onstituted ythreequestionsnMEUShatsolicited pinions bout heconsequencesof immigrationor U.S. ociety:

Whatdo you thinkwill happenas a resultof more immigrantscomingo thiscountry?seach ofthese results ery ikely,omewhatlikely, ottoo likely,r notlikely tall?A.Higherrimerates?B.Makinghecountrymoreopento new ideasandcultures?C.Peopleborn nthe U.S. osing heir obs?

Factor nalysisconfirms hatthe responsesto these three revealan underlyingingledimension, o we combine hem later na simpleadditive ndex.Inaddition,we examineattitudestowards immigrationestriction;he items involved, ike all we analyze,arepresented s anappendixable,whichalsopresents heirmeans.Inexaminingheconsequencesofgroup-size erceptionsorracial ttitudes,we drawonthelarge epertoiref race-relatedtems n he GSS.Someof these itemsarepartsofrotatingsets thatareaskedofpartialamplesand hus notofallMEUSespondents.For discussionof the rotation nd the ballot esignof the survey, ee Davis,Smithand Marsden 001:1525-7). llustrativef the kindsofattitudeswe analyzes:

Herearesome opinions therpeoplehave nconnectionwithBlack-whiterelations.Whichtatement n the cardcomes closest to howyouyourself,eel?


5/20

904 * SocialForcesVolume84,Number2 - December 005A. African mericanshouldn'tushthemselveswheretheyarenotwanted.[Responsesare:Agree strongly, gree slightly,disagreeslightly, isagree trongly]

TheProblem f InnumeracyInspectionof the estimates given by respondents reveals a significantproblemofinnumeracy,f numbers hat arehighly mplausibles perceptionsof groupsizes. Somerespondents,tappears, annot asily ranslateheirperceptionsntonumericalermsortheyhave very impreciseperceptions.Thus,there are respondentswho provide he sameestimate oreverygroupor estimateonegroup o be 100percent or0 percent).

Aconsistentproblemhroughouthe estimatesis a lackof precision; espondentsare,afterall,notusually emographers. hey end to giveestimates hatare divisible y5 whentheyare not divisibleby 10. In act,some 60 percentof the estimates aremultiples f 10.Further,espondentseem to bewaryof underestimatingroups' izes;and hus halfof theestimatesof minority-groupizeare20 percentor more.Thus, herearepatternsnthewayrespondents xpressthemselvesinnumbers hatwouldappear o inflateminority roupsizes,especiallyor he smaller roups uch as AsiansandAmericanndians. igure ,whichpresentsthe estimates for the AsianAmericanpopulation, eveals 1)the dominanceofestimates hatareprimarily ultiples f 10andsecondarilymultiplesf 5;and(2) heoverallinflation f the estimates.TheAsianpercentage f the population as countedat notquite4 percent n the 2000 Census,buttwo-thirds f the GSSrespondents stimated t to be atleast10percent.Figure1. Distributionof PerceivedAsianPercentagen the U.S.Population,GSS2000

201816-14-

03a()()0c-0o3Qr-ES

4-

o

12 -10

86420 FT1 -; T0 T - . rT ?r4 FIl flIr I IFt T i'iF --- FF-fiti tt.r'.' -f tr irI i0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

Perceived ercentage

I I I

I


6/20

PerceptionsfRacial/Ethnic roupSizes* 905

Theramificationsf thesetendenciesaremadeclearwhen one addsup he estimates orthegroupsof the so-called thno-racialentagonHollinger995),he fivemutuallyxclusivecategoriesthat shouldincludevirtually veryone n the U.S.populationwhites,blacks,Hispanics,AsiansandAmericanndians);he percentagesaddupto nearly 50percentonaverage orGSSrespondents.Thisbriefoverview f numeracyand nnumeracy)ssues leads to threeconclusions:1)the estimatesof some respondents rehighlymplausibles reports f theirperceptions fsociologicalreality; 2) the absolute sizes of the estimates of minority-groupize areuntrustworthynd need to be related to some other magnitude,most plausibly,herespondent's stimateof the size of the majority opulation;3)andthe estimatesof thesmallestminorities, sians,Americans ndians ndJews, tend to be moreerror-pronehanthe others.Forhe lasttwo reasons,ouranalysiswill ocus on the relative izes of the blackand Hispanicpopulations ompared o non-Hispanic hites- thatis, of the two largestminorities, hotogether omprised bout25 percentof the totalU.S.populationnthe 2000Census,comparedo the majorityopulation, hichcomprised 0 percent.

The Endangered White MajorityAlthough espondentsended o overstateminority-groupize,theydidnotdothe sameforwhites.Indeed, s Figure shows,they ended nsteado underestimatehe whitepercentageofthepopulation.he2000 Census howedwhites o be almost70 percent f U.S.residents.(Weassumethat, ormostrespondents,whites o not ncludeHispanics;frespondentsreusing he term ntheliteralense demographersouldgive t, hus ncluding hiteHispanics,then hedegreeofmisperceptionf themajorityroup'sizeobviously orsens.) f,asa roughmeasureof an accurate stimate,we accept any nthe 60- to 80-percent ange, henslightlymore hanhalfofthesamplehas agood graspof the whiteproportion. hile smallgroup frespondentsverestimates hites' ize,asubstantialroup nearly0percent frespondents- thinks hatwhitesmakeupasignificantlymaller art fthepopulationhan heydo inreality.Thus,the tendency o overstateminority-groupize combinedwith that to understatewhites'populationroportionoes indeed uggest hatmany espondentsxaggeratehe sizesof minority roups.In act,these two tendenciescombined uggest furtherhat,for somerespondents, hites'majoritytatus s inquestion.This ssueisaddressed nTable .2Nearly 0 percentof the respondentsdepictwhites as a minoritynan absolutesense,estimating heirpopulation ercentage o be less than 50. An even greaternumberofrespondents ssignswhitesa populationhareofat least50percent, utneverthelessresentsthemas a minorityelativeo blacks,Hispanicsra combinationf the two.Thus,6 percentbelieve hatone of these two minorityroups usually lacks is at leastas largeas whites;an additional3 percentbelieve hat the two minority roups ogetheroutnumberwhites.Obviously,his ast raction ould ncreaseurtherfwe addedAsians ndAmericanndiansntothemix.Thus,a conclusionhatroughlyalfofAmericansolongerperceivewhites o be themajorityeemsfair.To some extent, this incorrectperceptionis a result of minorityrespondentsoverestimatinghesize oftheir wngroups.Table shows howrespondents elongingothethree largest racial/ethnic opulationsperceive,on average,the compositionof thepopulation.There retoo few AsianandAmericanndianespondentsnthe GSSsample oincludeheir stimateshere.)Forwhites'percentage f thepopulation, lacks ndHispanicsgive slightly, ut notsignificantly,oweraverageestimates hanwhites do. Blacksappearogiveslightly igher stimatesof theirownpercentage f thepopulation,hileHispanicsmoresubstantiallyverestimate heir raction.For imilar esults,see KaiserFamilyFoundation


7/20

906 * SocialForcesVolume84,Number2 *December 005

Figure2.Distributionof PerceivedWhitePercentagen the U.S.Population,GSS20002018-16-14-

cl)

c-(V)0DO

o~o-

12In

86420 T r :t rfv 1nrll?lurnrrmnnnl

-I I I I

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

Perceived ercentageTable1:ThePerceptionof Whites as aMinority

%of usableN estimatesTotal:(Respondentshogiveat leastoneestimate orwhites,blacks,Hispanics)Respondentswithnon-usable stimates:At eastone estimates missingAt eastone estimate s 100%At eastone estimates 0%

Estimatesorall ivegroups rethesameRespondentswith usableestimates:Whites< 50%

Whites- 50%Whites HispanicsWhites< blacksWhites blacks+ Hispanics

1,320

864418168

1,2342281,00621

52279

100.018.581.51.74.222.6

Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000.

I

Tl


8/20

Perceptionsf Racial/Ethnic roupSizes* 9072001: 4.) Membersof all three groups overestimate he Asian and AmericanIndianpercentages,butHispanicsppearo do so to a slightly reater xtent.Table2:MeanGroup-sizeEstimatesbyRace/Ethnicity f Respondents

% American%White %Black Hispanic %Asian Indian NEstimated y:

Whites 58.8 29.1 22.3 15.7 12.2 945Blacks 56.4 37.8 27.1 20.3 16.0 158Hispanics 56.6 34.8 39.3 26.8 20.3 94

Fstatistic 2.27 15.57** 31.81**' 19.31** 10.28***df (3/1230) (3/1230) (3/1230) (3/1204) (3/1196)Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000.***p < .001

Thesepatterns aisequestionsaboutbackgroundactors, uchas education,hatmightaccount orthem.As ananswer,Table presents he coefficients roman OLSregressionanalysisof the influences on distortedperceptionsof racial/ethnicroup sizes. Theindependent ariablesnclude,most notably,ducational ttainment,ndalsogender,ageandracial/ethnicrigin.Becausewe expect perceptionso varyaccordingo the degreeofeveryday xposure o minoritiesndimmigrants, e alsocontrol or residenceoutsideof ametropolitanrea implyingimited xposure o immigrants)3ndnativitysinceforeignbirthlikelyorrelateswithresidencenareaswithmanyother mmigrants).Table :RegressionnalysisfLoggedRatio f Blacks ndHispanicsoWhites

Variable: Unstandardizedoefficient pEducationyears) -.048 ***Age(years) -.003**Male -.295 *Ruralesidence .081Foreign irth -.090Hispanic .358 ***Black .239 *Asian .052

Constant .710Adj.R2 .151N 1,225Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000.***p < .001


9/20

908 * SocialForcesVolume84,Number2 * December 005

Misperceptionf groupsizes has been operationalizedere as the loggedratioof thesum of the estimatesof blackandHispanic ercentagesof the national opulationo thatof whites. This ormulation f the dependentvariablepreserves wo desirable eatures:misperceptions a matterof degreeand can be greaterorlesser;it is a matterof relativegroup size, especially since the absolute values of the estimates do not appeartrustworthy. ogginghe ratiokeeps extremevalues fromexercisingundue nfluenceonthe regression.A coefficientina modelfora logged variable an be interpreted s theapproximateproportional hange in the dependent variablecorresponding o a unitchangeinthe independent ariable,Education, ge andgenderplaykeyrolesinthe model. Educationhas a pronouncedeffect, witheach increaseof a yearin school reducing he ratioof perceived minority-groupsize to that of whites by5 percent.Genderhasa sizableeffect,also;menperceiverelativeminority-groupize as 30 percentlowerthando women.Age is notas strongafactoras these two, but olderrespondentsdo havemore realisticperceptions.Evenwith these effects taken ntoaccount,blacksandHispanics remorelikelyhanwhites to have distortedperceptionsof the nation'sdemography.According o theircoefficients,Hispanicsreportratiosof minority-to-whiteize that are 36 percenthigherthan whites do, while blacks reportratios that are 24 percent higher.However, woexpectationsdo not hold up: the residentsof ruralareas,who presumablyhave lessexposureto racialand ethnicdiversity, re no morelikely hanothers to havedistortedperceptionsof racialandethnicgroupsizes; and the perceptionsof the foreignbornarenotsignificantly ifferent romthose of the nativeborn.4Thismeasurementof this lasteffect maybe biasedbythe exclusionof non-Englishpeakers rom he GSS universe.

The Impact of Residential Contexts on Perceptions of NationalDemographyAnindividual'sveryday ocial context is a likely ource of his orherperceptionsof thesizes of differentgroups,and earlierresearchhas supportedthe hypothesisthat theracial/ethnic emography f the residential reaexerts a substantial nfluenceon theseperceptions(Nadeau,Niemiand Levine1993). However,on theoreticalgrounds,therelationshiphas been argued in two ways: on one hand, some researchers havesuggested thatthe perceptionsof relativegroupsizes inthe societyas a whole are theresultsof faultygeneralizationsromeveryday xperience,andthis is whatNadeau,NiemiandLevine1993) nfactfound;onthe other, tcan be argued hatexaggerated stimatesof groupsizes result rom ackof intergroupontactsand thusan absence of the realismintroducedby experience(Gallagher 003). Eitherway, one could attributedistortedperceptionsof the nation's acial nd ethniccomposition o the high evelsof residentialsegregation nthe UnitedStates(Logan 001).In heGSS,we find hat he most usablemeasuresof localcontext temfroma seriesofquestions,parallelinghose on national roup izes thatcall orperceptions f the sizes ofdifferentroups n yourommunity. 5ncomparisono perceptionsfgroupsat thenationallevel,perceptionsfgroupsntheneighborhoodppearo be muchbettergrounded,nd heestimates havefargreaternumerical lausibility.sTable reveals, he averageperceivedsize of whites is 67 percent.This s obviouslynotmuch belowthe percentageone wouldexpecton the basisofwhites'percentage f the population. ikewise,t 20 and 14percent,theestimatesof blacks' ndHispanics'izes aremorerealistichan s the casefor henationalestimates.As a consequence, hesum oftheestimates or he fivepopulationsnthe ethno-racial entagon verages112percent, lose to the idealof 100percent.6


10/20

Perceptionsf Racial/Ethnic roupSizes * 909

Table4: MeanGroup-sizeEstimates orCommunityand Nation

%n % nRace/ethnicity: community nationWhites 66.5 1,223) 58.4 1,234)Blacks 19.7 1,205) 30.8 1,234)Hispanics 14.4 1,184) 24.2 1,234)Asians 7.2(1,173) 17.2 1,208)Americanndians 4.6(1,155) 13.4 1,200)

Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000.Note:Ns in parentheses.

Thedemographicompositionof theirneighborhoods,s respondents ee it, is quitepowerfullyelated o the perceptionshey have of groups nthe national opulation.SeeTable .)More pecifically,hese influences tem fromperceptions f minority-groupizesratherhanperceptions f the whitepopulation.he attermaybe redundant erebecause,giventhe apparently reaterrealismof the neighborhood erceptions,whites'proportionamong residents is, at least in an approximateense, impliedby the minority-groupproportions.nanyevent,adding he estimatedneighborhood ercentagesof blacksandHispanicso theequation redictingheloggedratio f minorityo majorityizesinthe nationsubstantiallyaises heexplainedariance.Table 5: Regression Analysis of LoggedRatio of Blacksand Hispanics to Whites, includingPerceptionof CommunityDemographyVariable: Unstandardizedoefficient p

Educationyears) -.042 ***Age(years) -.002 *Male -.264Rural esidence .164 **Foreign irth -.096Hispanic .145 *Black .061Asian -.015Est.%Blackncommunity .005Est.%Hispanicncommunity .008 ***

Constant .388Adj.R2 .236N 1,170Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000.*p


11/20

910 * SocialForcesVolume84,Number2 * December 005Theaddition f the perceivedneighborhood emographicontextto the equationhasrelativelyittlempact nthe coefficients f some predictors,utcauses others o shift.Thus,

theeffectsof age, education ndgenderremainargely s theywereinthe earlierquation.Livingna ruralreanowhasasignificantffect,a positive neindicatinghatruralesidentsremore ikelyo inflateminority-groupizes thanareurbanites. ut helargest hangesoccur nthe coefficients or heHispanic-originndblackdummy ariables.Whileheywerelargeandpositiventheearlierquation, owtheyaresmalland, nthe case of blacks,nsignificant. ecan conclude hatthe moresevere misperceptionsf groupsizes by blackand Hispanicrespondentswerelargely ue to their esidentialontexts.Becauseof residentialegregation,their ommunitiesave ar ewerwhiteresidents nd armoreminority-groupnes thando theneighborhoodsn which whites reside (Masseyand Denton1993; Logan2001).Withneighborhoodontextcontrolled, hitesandmembersof minorityroupsare aboutequallylikelyo holddistorted erceptionsftheracial/ethnicompositionfthe nation.The Consequences of Perceived Group Sizes for AttitudesSofar,heanalysis astreated he distorted erceptionsfgroup izesas error,howingorexample hattheir ikelihoods stronglynfluencedbyeducation.Thequestionnowto beaddressedis whetherthese misperceptionsmakeanysociologicaldifference:are theyechoed,forexample,nthe attitudeshatrespondents oldaboutracial ndethnicdiversity,as onewouldexpectfrom he theoreticaleasoning f Blalock ndBlumer,itedearlier?Weadhere o this reasoningby limitinghe analysis o membersof the racial/ethnicmajoritygroup,.e.,non-Hispanichites,who arepresumablyhreatened yincreasingminority-groupsizeinwaysthatmembersof the minorityroupsare not.7There re wo objects orwhichwe examine ttitudes:mmigrantsnd mmigration,ndAfricanAmericans.We continue o express he perception f group izes as a loggedratio,preferringhis ormulationo otherpossibilitiese.g.,astheperceivedbsolute izesof blacksandHispanics)ntheoreticalrounds.Thus, heloggedratiopreserveshe notion f relativegroupsize as the keyto the perceptionof threat.Inaddition,ourtesting of the mainalternativehows that overall he loggedratioperforms t leastas well inexplainingheattitudinalariables.8Table presentshe effects of the loggedratio n aseriesof immigration-ndrace-relatedattitudes.Theseeffects are ineverycase net of a series of othercontrols e.g.,education,age, gender);andthe items haveineach case beenordered o that a positivecoefficientindicates n effect ina less liberal irection, urexpectationorthe loggedratioof groupsizes. Inregressions hatpredictattitudes owards mmigrationndimmigrants, e haveexcluded he foreignborn inaddition o Hispanics ndnonwhites),becausetheyarethefocus of thesurveyquestions.These analysesdemonstrate hat perceptionsof groupsizes bearfairlysystematicrelationshipso what majority-groupespondentsthinkabout immigration nd racialminorities, lthough he effects are of moderatestrengthat best. Amongthe strongesteffectsare hose bearing nattitudes owards mmigration.he mmigrationndex, s notedearlier,ombines hree temsconcernedwith heperceivedonsequencesof immigrationfornationalunity,unemployment nd crime).As measuredby the standardizedegressioncoefficient,heeffectof perceived elativeroup izes has as muchexplanatoryower hereas it does anywhere.Nevertheless,heunstandardizedoefficients modestcomparedwiththatofeducation.An ncrease f 1 in heloggedratio ranslatesntoa2.7-foldncreasen heratio fgroup izes,obviously very arge hange,but tsimpact ntheindex sequal o thatof onlytwo years'increase neducation.)Thecoefficients ndicate hat the respondents'


12/20


perceptions f immigrationecome moreunfavorables theirperceptions fgroup izes tiltaway romwhites'majoritytatus.Accordingly,ttitudestoward continued mmigrationre shaped by perceptionsofcontemporaryemographyThe argerhatnon-Hispanichitesperceiveminorityroups ohavegrownin numbersrelative o themselves,the morethey desire to see immigrationrestrictionsmposed. See LETINnTable6.) Moreover,he perception f threat mplicitndistortedperceptionsof groupsizes corresponds o a hierarchyn the majorityroup'spreferencesor mmigrants.heeffectof loggedratio n thedesire or mmigrationestrictionis greatestfor LatinAmericanmmigrantsLETINHISP)nd least forthose fromEurope(LETINEUR),ith mmigrantsromAsia nbetween LETINASN).The impacton attitudes owardsracialminoritiess more scatteredthan is true withrespectto immigration.The tems presented nTable6 areselected froma sizablearrayavailablenthe GSS.)One leitmotifnthe itemswhereeffectsappear oncerns he potentialforminorityntrusionnthe socialworldsofpersonsethnicallyike herespondents. hus, heloggedratio s associatedwithresponsesto the statement, African-Americanshouldn'tpushthemselveswhere hey'renot wanted. The moredistorted heirperceptions f groupsizes, the morelikelywhite respondentsareto agree withthe statement andto do sostrongly. hesame holds oragreementhat heyarehurtbyaffirmativection. Whatoyouthink he chances arethese daysthata whitepersonwon'tget a joborpromotion hileanequally- rless-qualified lackpersongets one instead? ) heonlyset of stereotypes hatappearsto be affected by misperceptionsof groupsizes concerns minority iolence.Respondentswho perceiveminorities s dominantnthe national opulationendalso tobelieve hatblacksandHispanicsremoreviolent hanaverage.Since he perceptions f group izes at the nationalevelarea function fthecommunitycontexts nwhichrespondents resituated,or at least of respondents' erceptionsf thesecontexts,it mightbe hypothesizedhat the effects we havejust identified re ultimatelyrootedineveryday ontexts rather han distortedperceptions.Thathypothesis,howeverlogical, s not borne out bythe evidence.InTable7, we present he main indings romanalysesinwhichthe community ontexts as perceivedby respondents operationalizedagainas twovariables:ercentblack ndpercentHispanic)nd he loggedratio f perceivedgroup izeson the national lanearebothpresent. t sthe latter hatdominates.Infact, inabout halfof the cases, the community ontextdoes not appear o playasignificantole nattitudeormation;his remainsrueeveniftheperceptionf nationalroupsizes,i.e.,the loggedratio,s removedrom hemodels.Inanyevent, nmostofthe models,the loggedratio emainsignificant henthecommunityontextvariables re ncluded, ndinthese cases, thecoefficient f thevariables generallyffectedonlyslightly,f at all.Oneis entitledo conclude hatcommunityontextaffectsthe attitudesnquestiononlyindirectly.hat s, theireverydayocialenvironmentsffect hewaythatmanyrespondentsperceivehedemographicmagnitudesfgroups n he nation s awhole.Theseperceptions,inturn,which requentlynvolveairlyxtremedistortionsf the national emography,ffecttheirattitudesowardsmmigrationnd raceandethnicity.

ConclusionThisresearchdemonstrateshatmanyAmericans avehighlydistortedperceptions f theracialand ethnic compositionof the UnitedStates; and that these distortionsare ofconsequenceforthe attitudes hey holdtowards mmigrationndimmigrant roupsandtowardsotherminorities.heextentof thedistortions revealedbyourrough pproximationthat ntheyear2000,abouthalfof Americans elievedhatwhiteswerealready minorityn


13/20

Table6:Effectsof PerceivedRelativeGroupSizes and EducationonAttitudesLoggedratio Education

Dependent ariables: b beta p b beta pIMMIGRATION-RELATEDTTITUDES:

Index fimmigrationttitudesIncrease rdecrease mmigration?LETIN)Latin mericanmmigration?LETINHISP)Asianmmigration?LETINASN)Europeanmmigration?LETINEUR)

RACEIETHNICITY-RELATEDTTITUDES:Blacks houldn'tush RACPUSH)Blacksend o be violentVIOLBLKS)Hispanicsend obe violentVIOLHSPS)Whites urt yaffirm.ctionDISCAFF)

.493 .139 *** -.252 -.312 ***

.152 .095 ** -.077 -.213 ***

.167 .104 ** -.076 -.211 ***

.129 .082 * -.090 -.251 ***

.090 .059 t -.064 -.186 ***

r' AAfXa **4fA n' ,) ***.LzU .1 10U. -.LU --..167 .086 * -.030 -.069 *.193 .107 ** -.016 -.041.104 .094 * -.024 -.094 *

Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000.Notes:Therelativegroupsize variable s the loggedratioof blacksand Hispanicsto whites.The coefficientsrethatcontainotherindependentvariables;heseinclude,as appropriate: ge, gender,ruralresidence,foreignbiIndian.tp


14/20

Table7:Comparisonof theEffectsof PerceivedGroupSizesin Community andNationCommunity roupsizes %

%black p Hispanic pb bIMMIGRATION-RELATEDTTITUDES:

Index fimmigrationttitudes .000 .007Increase rdecrease mmigration?LETIN) .002 .001LatinAmericanmmigration?LETINHISP) -.001 .001Asianmmigration?LETINASN) .001 .002Europeanmmigration?LETINEUR) .001 .000

RACEI THNICITY-RELATEDTTITUDES:Blackshouldn'tush RACPUSH) .008 * -.007 *Blacksend o beviolentVIOLBLKS) .004 -.002Hispanicsend obe violentVIOLHSPS) .000 .004Whites urt yaffirm.ction DISCAFF) .003 .001

Source:GeneralSocialSurvey,2000.Note:Thecoefficientsreportedare takenfromregressionequationsthatcontainother independentvariablesgender,ruralresidence, oreignbirth,black,Hispanic,Asian andAmericanIndian.+p< .10 *p


15/20

914 * SocialForcesVolume84,Number2 ?December 005the totalpopulation.hisbeliefwas heldeven morebymembersof minorityroups hanbywhites hemselves.

As otherresearch as alsofound, hemisperceptionsboutgroup izesarerelatedo theeverydayocialenvironmentsnwhichrespondentsive: he more heyencountermembersof racial ndethnicminoritiesntheircommunities,he largerheyperceivehese groups obe on the national lane.This indingdoes notimply, owever,hat heattitudinalffectsofgroup-size erceptionsreattributableo communityontexts.Our nalyses howthat,evenwith the compositionsof these contexts controlled,misperceptionshave significantinfluences nattitudesormembersofthe majorityroup.Wehave mproved ponpastresearchbyuncovering confounding etweennumeracy,or numericalbility,ndperceptions f racial ndethnicgroup izes. Thisoccurswhenthemeasureof perception f group ize is formulatedntermsof absolute,ratherhanrelative,numbers.Future esearch houldprobablyncludean independentmeasureof numericalabilityo disentanglehe two phenomena. naddition, urtestingof the linkagebetweengroup-sizeperceptionsandattitudeshas been moresystematic han inthe past,andinparticulare haveshown forthe firsttimea substantial onnection o attitudes owardsimmigrantsnd mmigration.iven hehuge mpact f immigrationnthedemographyf thenation,hisconnectionmaycarryarge mplicationsorattitudinalivisionsnthefuture.Itappearso us that hisresearcheads o anadditional,uitepracticalonclusion.For slongas social scientists haveinvestigatedorms of prejudice, hey have recommendededucational rogramso counteractt(Allport954).Bynow, he persistenceof prejudicenthe faceofdecadesofeducationalfforthasledto ajaundicediewofthe benefits.However,inthiscase, misperceptionsruly ppearo haveconsequences hatcouldbe addressedbybetter nformation.Social scientists themselves may have to take some of the blame for thesemisperceptions.n heirown zeal o prepareAmericansor he racial ndethnicchanges hatare likely n the next decades, they haveemphasizedor allowedothers to emphasize,scenarios temming rompopulation rojectionsor2050.Thesescenarios,moreover,endto reifyhe broadest acial nd ethniccategoriese.g., white nd'Asian ),husoverlookingtheirhistoricallyontingentnature ndthe likelihoodhat heywillchangeas the underlyingdemographyf the United tatesdoes.Aconsequenceof theemphasisonprojections halfcenturynto he futuresthateven somegenerally ell-informedmericansppear onfusedabout henation's emography,s isapparentnthispassagewrittenn1998by he historianGarryWills:Theexplosion f ethnicdiversityuaranteeshataffirmativectionofsome sortwillbe neededso thateveryone eelsa stake na countrythatis literally hanging complexioneveryday.whites will be aminority y earlynthe nextcentury.Wills 998.67,ouremphasis)

UnlikeWills,manyAmericansppearo feel less welcomingowards ffirmativectionasa result of misperceivingwhites' continuingmajoritytatus. Theirattitudes are bettersummarizedyRonUnz,heSiliconValley ntrepreneurhospearheaded roposition27inCalifornia,Englishor the Children, hich drasticallyimitedbilingual ducation.InCaliforniandthe EndofWhiteAmerica 1999),Unz awtwo possibleethnic utures,bothshaped by thepoliticaleality f a shrinking hiteminority:he assimilationismf a newAmericanmelting pot (representedby his Proposition 27), or thecomingof whitenationalismrepresentedncipiently yProposition87,the 1994anti-immigrantSaveOurState initiative,which passed with 59 percentof the statewidevote, but was ruledunconstitutionalythe courts).Bothvisionsarefocused ona world nwhich Americansf


16/20

PerceptionsfRacial/Ethnic roupSizes? 915

European ncestry all increasinglynto minoritytatus during he first half of the newcentury. lumer1958)mighthaveseen bothas reactions o a feltchallengeo a historicallyevolved ense of groupposition.Perhaps,withless emphasison a hypothetical emography 5 yearsinthe futureandbasedon fixedracial/ethniclassifications,nd moreoncontemporaryemographyndthechanges to be anticipatedn the nearterm,the widespreadmisperceptionsand theirattitudinalonsequencescouldbegin o be addressed.Whilebigotryannotbe eliminatedyeducation lone, heperceptualistortionf thenation,whichexacerbates rejudice,maybereducedwith such corrective enses. Sucha correctionwould be a contribution,owevermodest,to the creation f conditionsunderwhich he sense of groupposition ecedes andracial rejudiceeclines.

Notes1. Sincethe GSShas becomea biannualurvey,tcollectstwo fullsampleseach timeit isfielded.2. As alreadynoted,some respondentsgive whatcan onlybe viewed as meaninglessestimatesofgroup izes.Wehavedroppedrom heanalysishoserespondentswho:(1)fail o givea complete et of estimates orwhites,blacksandHispanics;2)estimateanyof these threegroupsas 0 or 100percent fthepopulation;r(3)estimatewhites,blacks,Hispanics, siansandAmericanndians s all hesamesize(typicallyithpercentages f50 percentorgreaterneachcase).These exclusionsresult n a modest deletionof 86respondentsrom heanalysis,halfof whomcouldnot be includednanyeventbecausetheyaremissingan estimate orat least oneofthekey hreegroups.3. Weexperimented ith iner patialdistinctions,uch as between argecentral itiesandtheir uburbs,but heyfailed o prove tatisticallymeaningful. ikewise,egionalariationprovednegligible.n he end,we settled or hesimplestof geographicalistinctions.4. Some othervariables otreported erealso failed o produce ignificantindings.Thus,we tested the amount of televisionwatching respondentsreported o examinethehypothesishat he misperceptionsrise rom he mass media Gallagher,003).5. The geographicaldentifiers urrently vailable n the GSS,contained n its primarysamplingunit PSU) odes, generally re at the metropolitan-regionevel. Ouranalysisappears o show thatthe metropolitanegion s too coarse a geographyo haveanyexplanatoryearing nperceptions fgroup izes.Thats,using heidentificationsfthePSUssupplied o us by TomSmith, he director f the GSS,we tested the abilityofmetropolitan-levelharacteristicso predict espondent erceptions;hese tests yieldeduniformlynsignificantesults.6. One reviewer uggests that the greaternumericalonsistencyof the community-levelestimatescouldbe due to animprovementnrespondents' bilityo answer he group-sizequestions, ince inthe GSS, he questionsaboutcommunity emographyollowedthose aboutthe nationalpopulation.We haveno wayto address whetheror notthisinterpretations true.7. Membersof minority roupsmayalso feel threatenedby changingdemography. or


17/20

916 * SocialForcesVolume84,Number2 * December 005

example, some AfricanAmericans may perceive an economic threat in the growingnumbers of Hispanic immigrants (Waldingerand Lichter2003). However, there is noreason to expect that impactto be capturedbythe same logged ratiowe use in the caseof whites. Forthe sake of simplicity,we have settled on establishing the validityof ourformulationof relativegroupsize in the case of the majority roup.

8. The alternative o the relativemeasure is arrivedat by droppingthe estimate of the whitepercentage. Since the resultingmeasure is no longera ratio,there is no need to take itslog: hence, it becomes, quite simply,the sum of the percentage estimates of blacks andHispanics.For he attitudinalmeasures that we analyze,this measure performsmuch thesame way as the logged ratio.

ReferencesAllport, ordon. 954.TheNature fPrejudice.ddisonWesley.Blalock, ubert. 967.TowardTheoryfMinority-Groupelations. apricorn.Blumer, erbert.958. Race rejudices a SenseofGroup osition. acific ociological eview :3-7.Bobo,Lawrence.983. Whites'Oppositiono Busing:SymbolicRacismor RealisticGroupConflict?JournalfPersonalityndSocialPsychology5: 1196-1210.Davis,James,TomSmithand PeterMarsden. 001. General ocialSurveys,1972-2000.CumulativeCodebook. ational pinion esearchCenter.Fossett,Mark,ndJillKiecolt. 989. TheRelativeizeofMinorityopulationsndWhiteRacial ttitudes.SocialScienceQuarterly0: 820-35.Gallagher,harles.003. Miscountingace:Explaining hites'Misperceptionsf RacialGroup ize.Sociologicalerspectives6:381-96.Hollinger,avid. 995.Postethnicmerica. eyondMulticulturalism.asicBooksKaiseramilyoundation.001. Race ndEthnicityn2001:Attitudes,erceptions,ndExperiences. he

Washingtonost/Kaiseramilyoundation/Harvardniversity.Logan, ohn.2001. Ethnic iversityGrows,NeighborhoodntegrationagsBehind. ewisMumfordCenter, niversitytAlbany,UNY:ttp://mumford.albany.edu/census/report.html.Massey,Douglas,ndNancyDenton. 993.Americanpartheid.arvardniversityress.Nadeau,Richard,ichardiemi, ndJeffreyLevine. 993. InnumeracyboutMinorityopulations.ublicOpinionQuarterly7: 332-47.NationalResearchCouncil. 997.TheNewAmericans.Economic,Demographic,nd FiscalEffectsofImmigration.ationalcademy ress.Paulos,ohnAllen. 988. nnumeracy:athematicallliteracyandtsConsequences. ill&Wang.Quillian,incoln. 995. Prejudices a Responseo PerceivedGroup hreat: opulationompositionndAnti-ImmigrantndRacial rejudicenEurope. merican ociological eview60(August):86-611.Sigelman, ee,and Richard iemi. 001. InnumeracyboutMinorityopulations:frican mericansndWhitesCompared. ublicOpinionQuarterly5: 86-94.


18/20


Unz,Ron.1999. Californiand heEndof WhiteAmerica. ommentary08(November):7-28.Waldinger,oger, nd MichaelLichter.003. Howthe OtherHalfWorks:mmigrationndthe SocialOrganizationfLabor. niversityf Californiaress.Williams, obin. 947.TheReductionfIntergroupensions. SurveyfResearchnProblems fEthnic,Racial,ndReligiousGroup elations.ocialScienceResearchCouncil.Wills,Garry.998. WashingtonsNotWhere t'sAt. TheNewYorkimesMagazineJanuary5).


19/20

918 * SocialForcesVolume84,Number *December 005

Appendix:Variables and Means

Variable Metric Mean NEstimatesfnationalroupizes:%White%Black%Hispanic%Asian%AmericanndianEstimatesfcommunityroup izes:%White%Black%Hispanic%Asian%AmericanndianSocio-demographicariables:Education YearsAge YearsSex 0=female1=maleRuralesidencecountyavingo owns f10,000 0=otherormore) 1=ruralForeignirth 0=bom nU.S.1=foreignomRace/ethnicityHispanic) 0=other1=HispanicRace/ethnicityblack) 0=other1= blackRace/ethnicityAsian) 0 =other1=AsianAttitudinalariables:Immigrationndex: 1-12

Whatoyou hink ill appensaresultfmoreimmigrantsomingo hisountry?Makingtharderokeephecountrynited? 1=Not tall ikely4= Veryikely*Higherrimeates? 1=Not tall ikely4 =Veryikely*Peopleomn heU.S.osingheirobs? 1=Not tall ikely4= Veryikely**Doou hinkhenumberf mmigrantsromoreign 1=Increasedlotcountriesho repermittedocome o heUnited 5=decreasedlotStateso ivehould e ncreasedlot,ncreasedlittle,eft he ameasit snow, ecreasedlittle,rdecreasedlot?

58.4 1,23430.8 1,23424.2 1,23417.2 1,20813.4 1,20066.5 1,22319.7 1,20514.4 1,1847.2 1,1734.6 1,15513.5 1,23144.7 1,228.45 1,234

.10 1,234

.08 1,234

.08 1,234

.13 1,234

.02 1,234

6.4 1,159

2.7 1,1983.0 1,1862.7 1,2043.6 1,184


20/20

Documents

Alba y Rumbaut, SF, 2005, A Distorted Nation