Perceptions of Racial Group Size in a Minority-majority Area

2016 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 479-496 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert M. Kunovich

Americans overestimate the size of minority groups and underestimate the size of the majority. Research on perceived racial group size, however, has focused on areas where non-Hispanic whites are dominant and has neglected to examine the impact of group conflict attitudes other than perceived threats. This study examines perceptions of group size in Harris County, Texas, in 2007, which became a minority-majority area by 2006. It also examines whether perceived racial discrimination influences perceived group size. Analyses demonstrate that people underestimate the size of the largest group, which in this case is the local Hispanic population. The sizes of the black and Asian populations, by contrast, are overestimated while estimates of the white population are accurate. Race and perceived discrimination play important roles in shaping perceptions of group size. Perceptions of group size are also based on the objective size of these groups, but are unrelated to recent changes in group size.

Urban Studies ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (11) ◽  
pp. 2431-2450 ◽  
Author(s):  
John F McDonald

This paper examines the housing market of metropolitan Chicago from 1970 to 2015, with particular attention on the three largest minority groups – African Americans, Hispanics and Asians. The Hispanic and Asian populations of the metropolitan area have grown rapidly, while the African-American population has actually declined since 2000. Metro Chicago has a much larger Hispanic population than is typical for major northern metro areas in the USA. Suburban growth coupled with population decline in the central city has produced large minority populations in the suburbs along with sharp declines in the traditional African-American areas of the central city. African-American areas of concentrated poverty remain. Sizable mostly white population growth has occurred in and near the downtown area as most of the nearby public housing has been demolished.


2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 757-769 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Moscatelli ◽  
Miles Hewstone ◽  
Monica Rubini

This study examines the impact of relative group size on linguistic ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation. Members of minority, majority, and equal-size groups freely described outcome allocations made by either ingroup or outgroup members. The abstraction and valence of the terms used were analyzed. Majority members expressed ingroup favoritism by describing the majority ingroup with positive terms at a higher level of abstraction than negative terms. They also provided more favorable descriptions of ingroup members than minority members did. Minority members expressed ingroup favoritism, but also outgroup derogation, by referring to the majority outgroup with negative terms at a higher level of abstraction than positive terms. These findings highlight the distinct consequences of minority and majority memberships on these two facets of intergroup discrimination.


2017 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 218-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yolande Pottie-Sherman ◽  
Rima Wilkes

Group threat theory understands prejudice as a manifestation of the threat, either actual or assumed, that minority groups pose to majority groups. This theory is often operationalized by analyzing the impact of group size on anti-immigrant prejudice. We test this hypothesis with a new dataset documenting 487 effects of group size on prejudice provided in 55 studies. More than half of these results show no relationship and the remainder shows both positive and negative relationships. Three explanations for this divergence are that there are (1) differences in the measurement of prejudice and immigrant group size across studies; (2) differences in the model through which size is hypothesized to lead to prejudice; and (3) differences in the geographic unit of analysis at which these relationships have been considered. Our analyses support the measurement explanation: results vary across studies because they reflect different measures of group size and prejudice.


2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maykel Verkuyten ◽  
Kumar Yogeeswaran

Abstract. Multiculturalism has been criticized and rejected by an increasing number of politicians, and social psychological research has shown that it can lead to outgroup stereotyping, essentialist thinking, and negative attitudes. Interculturalism has been proposed as an alternative diversity ideology, but there is almost no systematic empirical evidence about the impact of interculturalism on the acceptance of migrants and minority groups. Using data from a survey experiment conducted in the Netherlands, we examined the situational effect of promoting interculturalism on acceptance. The results show that for liberals, but not for conservatives, interculturalism leads to more positive attitudes toward immigrant-origin groups and increased willingness to engage in contact, relative to multiculturalism.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 215013272110183
Author(s):  
Azza Sarfraz ◽  
Zouina Sarfraz ◽  
Alanna Barrios ◽  
Kuchalambal Agadi ◽  
Sindhu Thevuthasan ◽  
...  

Background: Health disparities have become apparent since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. When observing racial discrimination in healthcare, self-reported incidences, and perceptions among minority groups in the United States suggest that, the most socioeconomically underrepresented groups will suffer disproportionately in COVID-19 due to synergistic mechanisms. This study reports racially-stratified data regarding the experiences and impacts of different groups availing the healthcare system to identify disparities in outcomes of minority and majority groups in the United States. Methods: Studies were identified utilizing PubMed, Embase, CINAHL Plus, and PsycINFO search engines without date and language restrictions. The following keywords were used: Healthcare, raci*, ethnic*, discriminant, hosti*, harass*, insur*, education, income, psychiat*, COVID-19, incidence, mortality, mechanical ventilation. Statistical analysis was conducted in Review Manager (RevMan V.5.4). Unadjusted Odds Ratios, P-values, and 95% confidence intervals were presented. Results: Discrimination in the United States is evident among racial groups regarding medical care portraying mental risk behaviors as having serious outcomes in the health of minority groups. The perceived health inequity had a low association to the majority group as compared to the minority group (OR = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.78; P = .007), and the association of mental health problems to the Caucasian-American majority group was low (OR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.45 to 0.58; P < .001). Conclusion: As the pandemic continues into its next stage, efforts should be taken to address the gaps in clinical training and education, and medical practice to avoid the recurring patterns of racial health disparities that become especially prominent in community health emergencies. A standardized tool to assess racial discrimination and inequity will potentially improve pandemic healthcare delivery.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Fernandez Turienzo ◽  
◽  
Mary Newburn ◽  
Agnes Agyepong ◽  
Rachael Buabeng ◽  
...  

AbstractThe response to the coronavirus outbreak and how the disease and its societal consequences pose risks to already vulnerable groups such those who are socioeconomically disadvantaged and ethnic minority groups. Researchers and community groups analysed how the COVID-19 crisis has exacerbated persisting vulnerabilities, socio-economic and structural disadvantage and discrimination faced by many communities of social disadvantage and ethnic diversity, and discussed future strategies on how best to engage and involve local groups in research to improve outcomes for childbearing women experiencing mental illness and those living in areas of social disadvantage and ethnic diversity. Discussions centred around: access, engagement and quality of care; racism, discrimination and trust; the need for engagement with community stakeholders; and the impact of wider social and economic inequalities. Addressing biomedical factors alone is not sufficient, and integrative and holistic long-term public health strategies that address societal and structural racism and overall disadvantage in society are urgently needed to improve health disparities and can only be implemented in partnership with local communities.


2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Audrey Gagnon

AbstractForty per cent of Europeans refuse to have Roma as their neighbours, while 80 per cent of these do not even have direct contact with them. Using these statistics as a point of departure, this study analyzes how attitudes toward Roma are constructed. It proposes to investigate this process in two similar environments but where local integration policies directed toward Roma differ, resulting in disparate forms of intergroup contact. The analysis is premised on two theoretical assumptions: that the integration of migrants is a local public policy issue and that intergroup contact frames attitudes between majority and minority groups. From semi-structured interviews in the French municipalities of La Courneuve and Ivry-sur-Seine, four theories are empirically tested: the contact theory, the halo effect, the impact of local immigrant integration policies and media influence. This study demonstrates that the implementation of municipal policies in favour of Roma integration can improve their living conditions and thus deconstruct prejudices attributable to their precarious situation. In addition, it illustrates how the media activate, maintain or solidify the way Roma are perceived.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex F. Martin ◽  
Sarah Denford ◽  
Nicola Love ◽  
Derren Ready ◽  
Isabel Oliver ◽  
...  

Abstract Background In December 2020, Public Health England with NHS Test and Trace initiated a pilot study in which close contacts of people with confirmed COVID-19 were given the option to carryout lateral flow device antigen tests at home, as an alternative to self-isolation for 10–14 days. In this study, we evaluated engagement with daily testing, and assessed levels of adherence to the rules relating to behaviour following positive or negative test results. Methods We conducted a service evaluation of the pilot study, examining survey responses from a subset of those who responded to an evaluation questionnaire. We used an online cross-sectional survey offered to adult contacts of confirmed COVID-19 cases who consented to daily testing. We used a comparison group of contacts who were not offered testing and instead self-isolated. Results Acceptability of daily testing was lower among survey respondents who were not offered the option of testing and among people from ethnic minority groups. Overall, 52% of respondents reported being more likely to share details of people that they had been in contact with following a positive test result, if they knew that their contacts would be offered the option of daily testing. Only 2% reported that they would be less likely to provide details of their contacts. On the days that they were trying to self-isolate, 19% of participants reported that they left the house, with no significant group differences. Following a negative test, 13% of respondents reported that they increased their contacts, but most (58%) reported having fewer risky contacts. Conclusions Our data suggest that daily testing is potentially acceptable, may facilitate sharing contact details of close contacts among those who test positive for COVID-19, and promote adherence to self-isolation. A better understanding is needed of how to make this option more acceptable for all households. The impact of receiving a negative test on behaviour remains a risk that needs to be monitored and mitigated by appropriate messaging. Future research should examine attitudes and behaviour in a context where infection levels are lower, testing is more familiar, and restrictions on activity have been reduced.


2001 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Johnson

Students of race and politics in the U.S. have long asserted a relationship between the racial composition and public policies of states. A related but distinct line of research demonstrates a strong connection between white attitudes about the perceived recipients of social welfare spending—blacks and members of other minority groups—and support for these programs. This article bridges these lines of scholarship by asking how racial diversity shapes aggregate attitudes about minorities in the American states and how these opinions in turn influence welfare spending. Using public opinion data from the General Social Survey ( 1974–96), I find that diversity has a direct influence on welfare policy in the states, as well as an indirect influence through shaping majority-group racial attitudes. Diversity and racial attitudes are found to have these effects even when controlling for factors traditionally used to explain variation in state spending levels, such as party competition, lower class mobilization, ideology, and state capacity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document