Mixed Race Studies

In the Eye of the Beholder: Observed Race and Observer Characteristics

PSC Research Report
Population Studies Center at the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michgan
Report No. 02-522
August 2002
36 pages

David R. Harris, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Human Services Policy
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Deputy Provost and Vice Provost for Social Sciences
Cornell University

Over the past decade there has been intense debate about racial categories, but surprisingly little discussion of racial categorization. Specifically, there has been little attention devoted to if, and how, characteristics of observers affect observed race. This is troubling because racial classification data are the foundation upon which scholarly studies of race, and policy initiatives to fight discrimination. In this paper I present findings from a web-based survey that was designed to address gaps in our understanding of racial categorization. As part of the Study of Observed Race, 1,672 college freshmen were presented with photographs of individuals, and asked to identify each person’s race. Results indicate that observers’ race, sex, and familiarity with racial groups each influence how they classify by race, and that there are important interactions between observers’ characteristics. I close by discussing the implications of my findings for the 2000 census.

On April 1, 2000, the U.S. Census Bureau did something that was both revolutionary and controversial. Rather than ask individuals to identify with a single racial group, the 2000 Census allowed people to identify with as many as six racial groups. Even casual observers of American racial classification realized that this was revolutionary, as it directly challenged the precedent that individuals identify with one, and only one, racial group. What was less obvious was just how controversial this change in racial classification procedures would be. When the race counts were released in early 2001, few were sure how to interpret these new data. Many wondered what it meant that people had identified with multiple racial groups? For others, there were very real concerns about how to use the data. Should those who identified with more than one racial group be reassigned to a single-race group? If so, how?

In order to make sense of the new census race data, it is imperative that one first understand that these data implicitly assume that the race people select for themselves, or that is selected for them by someone in their household, is the same race that would have been selected by any other observer in any other context. Previous work has challenged this assumption by arguing that self-identified race can vary by context (Harris and Sim 2002), and that self-identified and observer-identified race need not agree (Hahn, Mulinare, and Teutsch 1992; Harris and Sim 2000). In this paper I pursue a further challenge to the assumption of fixed racial classifications by examining if, and how, observed race varies by observer characteristics. If it is true that an individual’s race can be adequately described through self-reports, then observed race should not vary by observer. If observed race does vary by observer, and especially if it does so systematically, then there may be further reasons to question the census race counts.

This work is important for at least three reasons. First, it provides basic information about processes of racial classification. Second, the new census race question is part of a major change in how the federal government measures race. By 2003, all federal race data will be collected using the “one or more races” approach (Office of Management and Budget 1997). Furthermore, because organizations outside the federal government are also likely to adopt this new racial classification scheme, work that affects our understanding of the new census race data will have a broad impact. Third, because a central impetus for collecting race data is to enforce civil rights laws (Office of Management and Budget 1997), and much discrimination is based on observed race (e.g., racial profiling), it is imperative that we understand if, and how, race varies by observer. Failing to do so will limit our ability to effectively enforce civil rights laws…

Read the entire report here.

Chinese America and the Multiracial Family

Chinese American Forum
Special Edition (June 2004)
pages 15-19

Amy Klazkin

This week my husband and I sold our second car. We live in the city, and we don’t need two, so we listed the car on an internet forum and got lots of responses. The first and most enthusiastic was from a young woman named Meilin Gee. She said she would come over at 2:00 on Sunday to see the car and give it a test drive. Without even thinking about it, we had constructed a mental picture of what someone named Meilin Gee would look like, when, at two sharp, the doorbell rang. We opened the door and saw a young, attractive, intelligent, and friendly African American woman: Meilin Gee. She doesn’t look it, but her dad’s Chinese.

This is the changing face of America. Where I live, we use the Hawaiian term hapa for mixed-race people. When I walk down the street with my Chinese daughter, who does not look even a tiny bit like me, people in San Francisco usually assume that my husband is Asian and she is hapa. She attends the Chinese American International School, where a third of the kids are hapa. Contrary to the stereotype that only Chinese American women marry whites, about half of the biracial kids at her school have white moms and Chinese dads. Some mixed-race kids look Caucasian, others look Asian, others look mixed. But what all the children learned way back in preschool is that kids and parents don’t have to match visually. And that’s been a wonderful thing for my daughter, because it normalizes multiracial families and creates an environment of acceptance for difference within a family as well as within a community…

Read the entire article here.

Making Sense of New Census Classifications for Race

UCLA School of Public Health Magazine
June 2007
page 31

STARTING WITH THE 2000 CENSUS, the federal government revised how it collects data on race and ethnicity—respondents were allowed to identify themselves as a member of more than one category (which 7 million opted to do), whereas in prior censuses they were forced to choose one. The revision was made in recognition of the nation’s growing number of interracial couples, who in turn are producing children whose diverse lineage defies a single classification. But the change also creates potential nightmares for researchers and policymakers who rely on the data from these and other surveys to understand racial and ethnic disparities in health: When you consider all of the possible combinations, including “other,” there are now 63 multiple-race categories along with the six single-race categories.

Tommi Gaines, a UCLA School of Public Health doctoral student in biostatistics [Currently biostatistician at the University of California, San Diego School of Medicine], is tackling the challenges arising from the new collection method. “There have been goals that have been set around understanding why differences exist between races and how we can develop policies to try to eliminate or reduce these differences,” Gaines notes. “If there are disparities found between multiracial populations and a single-race category, how do we accurately reflect what’s going on with the multiracial populations, which capture a broad range of people? It becomes harder to tease out the potential problems that are causing these health differences.”…

…“As long as there continue to be differences between races in regard to health conditions, we need to continue to collect and find ways to make sense of the data so that we better understand why these disparities exist.”

Read the entire article here.

Classification of Race and Ethnicity: Implications for Public Health

Annual Review of Public Health
Volume 24 (May 2003)
pages 83-110
DOI: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.24.100901.140927

Vickie M. Mays, Professor of Psychology and Professor of Health Services
University of California, Los Angeles

Ninez A. Ponce, Associate Professor of Public Heath
University of California, Los Angeles

Donna L. Washington, M.D.
Department of Medicine, Veterans Affairs
Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System

Susan D. Cochran, Professor of Epidemiology
University of California, Los Angeles

Emerging methods in the measurement of race and ethnicity have important implications for the field of public health. Traditionally, information on race and/or ethnicity has been integral to our understanding of the health issues affecting the U.S. population. We review some of the complexities created by new classification approaches made possible by the inclusion of multiple-race assessment in the U.S. Census and large health surveys. We discuss the importance of these classification decisions in understanding racial/ethnic health and health care access disparities. The trend toward increasing racial and ethnic diversity in the United States will put further pressure on the public health industry to develop consistent and useful approaches to racial/ethnic classifications.

Read or purchase the article here.

Ties on the fringes of identity

Social Science Research
Volume 33, Issue 4 (December 2004)
Pages 702-723
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2003.10.002

Carolyn A. Liebler, Assistant Professor of Sociology
University of Minnesota

I use data on part-American Indian children in the 1990 Census 5% PUMS to assess my hypotheses that thick racial ties within the family constrain racial identification, and that structural aspects of the community (group size, inequality, and racial heterogeneity) affect racial identification when racial ties are thin within the family. American Indians present an interesting case study because their high levels of intermarriage and complex patterns of assimilation/identity retention for generations provide a varied group of people who could potentially identify their race as American Indian. Several hypotheses are supported by the data, signifying that racial identification among people with mixed-heritage is affected by the social world beyond individual psychology and racial ties within the family.

Article Outline

1. Introduction
2. Identity and thickness of ties
3. Hypotheses
4. Data and sample selection
5. Dependent variables
6. Focal independent variables
7. Control variables
8. Drawbacks to using census data to study identity
9. Results
10. Discussion
11. Conclusion
Appendix A. Descriptive statistics for entire sample
References

Read or purchase the article here.