Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
2015
ASRXXX10.1177/0003122415623286American Sociological ReviewDavenport
Lauren D. Davenporta
Abstract
Racial attachments are understood to be socially constructed and endogenous to gender,
socioeconomic, and religious identities. Yet we know surprisingly little about the effect of
such identities on the particular racial labels that individuals self-select. In this article, I
investigate how social identities shape the racial labels chosen by biracial individuals in the
United States, a rapidly growing population who have multiple labeling options. Examining
national surveys of more than 37,000 respondents of Latino-white, Asian-white, and black-
white parentage, I disentangle how gender, socioeconomic status, and religious identity
influence racial labeling decisions. Across biracial subgroups and net of all other influences,
economic affluence and Jewish identity predict whiter self-identification, whereas belonging
to a religion more commonly associated with racial minorities is associated with a minority
identification. Gender, however, is the single best predictor of identification, with biracial
women markedly more likely than biracial men to identify as multiracial. These findings help
us better understand the contextual nature of racial identification and the processes via which
social identities interact with racial meanings in the United States.
Keywords
identity, race/ethnicity, gender, religion, minority groups
and social norms such as hypodescent (Snipp assess the determinants of exclusive white
2003; Williams 2006). Group membership was identification, a racial label about which we
especially stringent for people of mixed Afri- currently understand relatively little, but that
can ancestry, who were typically identified as has major implications for the future U.S.
singularly black (Davis 2001). Changes to the racial structure (Cross 2002; Gans 2012).
U.S. Census in 2000, however, which permit More generally, I examine how biracial young
multiple-race classification, show that racial adults are choosing to assert their identifica-
labels are no longer a disjoint construct in U.S. tion in the twenty-first century, and the degree
politics and culture. to which hypodescent influences their choices.
How do central nonracial identities—spe- This research also contributes to our
cifically, gender, socioeconomic status, and understanding of identity construction among
religion—affect the choice of racial labels? I biracial Latinos, a group often excluded from
examine this question by focusing on the rap- multiracial identity studies. Because most
idly growing number of biracial Americans— surveys use a two-question approach in which
individuals whose parents are from two racial Hispanic origin is distinguished from race, it
categories.1 Biracials have a range of racial is often impossible to separate respondents of
labels from which to choose.2 Assessing the Latino/non-Latino parentage from respond-
labeling decisions of biracials allows us to ents who have two Latino parents and iden-
better understand how social class, gender, tify their ethnicity as Hispanic but their race
and religion inform personal understandings as white, black, Asian, or other. Because sur-
of race in the United States. Prior research vey question formats preclude these distinc-
that examines biracials’ labeling choices tions, multiracialism scholars commonly
emphasizes the importance of family, peers, refrain from analyzing Latinos in their stud-
and environmental context, but gives little ies. The exclusion of Latinos leaves a sub-
attention to the influence of nonracial social stantive void in our understanding of biracial
identities. This gap in the literature can be identification. This gap is significant for two
attributed to the fact that available data have reasons. First, 43 percent of intermarriage
not allowed an in-depth analysis of the effects pairings in the United States are between
of these factors until now. whites and Latinos; second, the rapid growth
Drawing on identity theory and other rate of the Latino population can be attrib-
research in sociology and social psychology, I uted, in part, to the rising number of children
argue that biracials negotiate their identifica- born to Latino-white couples (Wang 2012).
tions based on interpersonal encounters, The surveys I assess have a combined race
neighborhoods, and places of worship, classi- and Latino-origin question, allowing me to
fying themselves in relation to their peers and pinpoint individuals who are explicitly of
adopting the label deemed most acceptable in Latino/non-Latino parentage. Thus, the pre-
a given context. To examine the effects of sent work heeds Harris and Sim’s (2002) call
social identities on racial construction, I lever- for better understanding biracial Latino
age national surveys of more than 37,000 identity.
Asian-white, Latino-white, and black-white This article reports three core findings.
biracial college students. These surveys allow First, racial identification is gendered in sig-
me to include important variables lacking in nificant ways: all else being equal, biracial
previous studies, extending the literature in women are much more likely than biracial men
three ways. First, I separate the effect of par- to identify as multiracial. The gender disparity
ents’ marital status, family income, and reli- exists across biracial category combinations
gion on respondents’ self-labeling. Second, to but is greatest (2x) for black-white biracials—
ascertain how socioeconomic context shapes pointing to the rigidity of the black/white
identification, I examine the effect of neigh- boundary for African American men. Second,
borhood median income. Third, I empirically I demonstrate the importance of religion for
Davenport 59
enforce anti-discrimination laws in employ- heritage are more likely to label their children
ment, education, and housing (Fred and Clif- as racial minorities than are couples in which
ford 1996; Goldstein and Morning 2005; the minority spouse is female, non-U.S.-born,
Massey and Denton 1993). Racial identifica- or has some white heritage (Qian 2004). Hav-
tion is thus both an expression of subjective ing a biracial parent also decreases the likeli-
group connections and an act with very real hood of identifying as multiracial, relative to
political ramifications. To accurately ascer- having parents of two different single-races
tain the impact of race in society, we must (Bratter 2007).
first understand how such labels are chosen. In addition to the predictors of labels given
to biracial children, scholars have examined
the determinants of children’s self-labeling
Identity and Mixed-Race practices. Such work finds that family mem-
Heritage bers and peers are the main reference groups
According to identity theory, the self is a mul- shaping self-labeling practices (Bratter and
tidimensional construct shaped by social Heard 2009; Funderburg 1994; Root 1992,
interactions (Burke 1980; McCall and Sim- 1996). Belonging to a racially heterogeneous
mons 1966; Stryker 1968, 1980; Stryker and peer group is predictive of a non-white or
Serpe 1982). Individuals are performers in singular minority identification (Herman
particular roles, and the meanings associated 2004; Renn 2004). And when asked what race
with identities are learned from the reflected best describes them, black-white biracials are
appraisals of others (Burke 1981; Burke and more inclined than American Indian-white
Stets 2009). One’s commitment to specific biracials to name their minority background
identities develops out of interpersonal con- (Harris and Sim 2002). The order in which
tact and experiences, which can confirm, multiple races are listed (Campbell 2007),
reinforce, or alter these self-identities (Foote experiences with racial discrimination (Panter
1951). Indeed, extant research indicates that et al. 2009), phenotype (Khanna 2004; Rock-
biracial children engage in a sort of racial quemore and Brunsma 2008), regional and
acculturation, choosing racial labels that neighborhood racial surroundings (Harris and
reflect the norms and expectations of majority Sim 2002), and spouse’s race (Campbell
populations in their environment. People of 2007) are also consequential. Moreover, self-
interracial and interethnic ancestry often identification is contextual; being in the pres-
spend years grappling with their identities, ence of family members or peers influences
incorporating or rejecting labels based on the momentary self-identification of biracials
their interactions and the settings in which (Harris and Sim 2002; Twine 1996). Finally,
they are socialized (Alba 1992; Bailey 2008; biracials who come from more disadvantaged
DaCosta 2007). class backgrounds, as given by mother’s edu-
Over the past two decades, an emerging cation, are more likely to change their identi-
literature has examined processes of racial fication over time (Doyle and Kao 2007).
identification among biracials. Some research In spite of this growing line of research,
assesses determinants of the labels that par- many important questions regarding biracials’
ents impart onto their children, including the identification remain unanswered. Prior research
racial composition of a child’s school has given scant attention to the roles that gender,
(Brunsma 2005), parent’s level of educational social class, and religion play in shaping racial
attainment (Roth 2005), and proximity to the identification. This limitation can be attributed
immigrant experience (Xie and Goyette 1997). to the fact that the data commonly used to
Characteristics of the ethnic minority parent examine biracial Americans yield insufficient
are also important: among non-white/white sample sizes or do not include important
married couples, those in which the minority sociodemographic indicators. For example, in
spouse is male, U.S.-born, or has no white studying the U.S. biracial population, scholars
Davenport 61
often use the National Longitudinal Survey of race and is a vital component of adolescent and
Adolescent Health (also known as Add Health), early adulthood identity development (Erikson
due to its vast set of questions and multiple 1968; Sciarra and Gushue 2003). Religious
measures of racial identity (Doyle and Kao institutions also play an important role in the
2007; Fryer et al. 2012; Harris and Sim 2002; construction of identity among members of
Hitlin, Brown, and Elder 2006). Yet Add Health some racial and ethnic communities. Religion
includes only a few hundred biracial respond- and spirituality are dominant components of
ents, with studies lacking sufficient sample size self-identity for black college students in par-
to generate statistically significant and robust ticular (Sanchez and Carter 2005; Spencer,
results (Burke and Kao 2013). Fegley, and Harpalani 2003). Places of wor-
Census samples have also been used to study ship in the United States are strikingly racially
biracials’ identification (e.g., Qian 2004; Roth homogeneous; approximately half of U.S. con-
2005; Saenz et al. 1995; Xie and Goyette 1997). gregations are composed entirely of a single
These data boast thousands of observations as racial group (Dougherty and Huyser 2008),
well as neighborhood contextual variables, but and in 90 percent of congregations, 4-in-5
they do not explicitly inquire about parents’ race. members belong to the same race (Emerson
Researchers thus typically confine analyses to and Woo 2006).7 Given the strong intersection
households that include a child currently living between religion and race, I argue that the
with two interracially married adults, presumed racial homogeneity of certain religious denom-
to be the child’s biological parents. As Harris inations may foster a collective racial identity
and Sim (2002) note, such research cannot be among biracial group members.
generalized to single-parent households. This is
problematic because a nontrivial subset of bira-
cials have divorced or never-married parents. Gender
Qualitative studies are restricted to nonrandom Men and women encounter distinct chal-
samples, limiting the capacity to make infer- lenges affecting their approach to race and
ences about incidence or rates generalizable to ethnicity (Crenshaw 1989; hooks 1981; Portes
the population as a whole (Khanna 2004; Rock- and Rumbaut 2001), and research suggests
quemore and Brunsma 2008). that racial boundaries are less malleable for
men. Interviewers are more likely to classify
women as non-black than men, all else being
Construction of
equal (Penner and Saperstein 2013), particu-
Race Among Biracial larly if the women are well-educated (Telles
Americans 2004). Similarly, when observers label people
I focus on the effects of gender, socioeco- of biracial or racially ambiguous back-
nomic status (SES), and religion on racial grounds, women are less likely than men to
identification for several reasons. Gender and be perceived as racial minorities (Ho et al.
SES are status characteristics highly corre- 2011; Villarreal 2010).
lated with racial identity (Crenshaw 1989; Several explanations have been proposed
Saperstein and Penner 2012); together, these to account for these differences in classifica-
markers compose what Penner and Saperstein tion, one of which is the gendered nature of
(2013:321) call “the original trinity of inter- racism in the United States. Men of color are
sectionality.” Despite there being strong evi- substantially more likely than women of color
dence that gender and SES are central to report experiencing discrimination, wit-
components of racial identity, little research nessing displays of fear from whites, and
explores whether and how these traits shape being unfairly treated by the police because of
biracials’ identification. their race (Kennedy 1997; Weitzer and Tuch
Religion is less commonly studied along- 2002). Waters (1999) argues that such nega-
side racial identity. Yet it too interweaves with tive interactions help explain the construction
62 American Sociological Review 81(1)
of an African American identity among single racial minority group. Following the
second-generation West Indian boys but not model of identity construction via reflected
girls. Waters shows that due to the heightened appraisals from others, I thus expect that bira-
racism males face, West Indian boys are seen cial women will be more likely to identify as
as “simply black” by outsiders, prompting multiracial than comparable biracial men,
them to embrace a black identification.8 who will tend to adopt a singular minority
In addition to men’s and women’s differ- identification.
ing encounters with racism, physical attrac-
tiveness is a more important social resource
for women than for men, and skin tone is a Socioeconomic Status
crucial trait in the evaluation of attractiveness The social status and networks associated
(Hunter 2007; Wolf 1991). Studies show that with income and education also shape racial
East Asian cultures venerate Eurocentric fea- outlooks (Schwartzman 2007). Specifically,
tures as reflecting high status for women affluence may discourage biracial individuals
(Fraser 2003; Rafael 2000), and light-skinned from selecting a “darker” label (e.g., black or
black and Latino women are perceived as brown) in favor of a “lighter” one (e.g.,
more desirable than dark-skinned women brown or white). Economic affluence may
(Hunter 2004). For men, however, skin tone “whiten” identification by allowing individu-
has a mostly insignificant effect on attractive- als to display external markers of wealth—
ness ratings (Hill 2002) or no effect at all such as wearing designer clothes and owning
(Maddox and Gray 2002). Fair skin tone is the latest technology—leading others to label
also associated with greater self-esteem biracials as white or multiracial. Affluence
among black women but not among black can also facilitate contact with well-to-do
men (Thompson and Keith 2004). Indeed, white peers, via private schools or member-
Rockquemore (2002) shows that such skin ship in prestigious social clubs.
tone stratification, along with high rates of Residing in a more economically prosper-
intermarriage among high-status black men, ous neighborhood may similarly lighten iden-
make the experiences of black-white biracial tification by increasing social mobility and
women different from those of biracial men. permitting a transition into higher status social
Khanna (2011) finds that whereas black- circles, where others view biracials as white or
white biracial men are usually embraced by multiracial (Telles 2002, 2004). Well-off
their self-identified black male peers as “one whites may impose a “whiteness standard” on
of them,” biracial women can face hostility or their biracial peers, and the desire for group
rejection from self-identified black women. acceptance may compel these individuals to
Taken together, prior research indicates choose a lighter self-label (Schwartzman
that men and women in the United States are 2007). All else being equal, biracials from
racialized in systematically distinct ways. more affluent families and who live in wealth-
This work suggests that biracial women may ier areas will perceive greater commonality
have an easier time blurring and crossing with their white peers and be less apt to iden-
racial boundaries. Perceived as men of color, tify as singular racial minorities.
biracial males may be more susceptible to There is reason to believe that education
discrimination and stereotypes tied to crimi- will have a countervailing effect to that of
nality; as a result, others may tend to label income. For instance, better-educated parents
them exclusively as members of the racial may encourage their biracial children to adopt
minority category—denying their white herit- a non-white label, because education raises
age. In contrast, the value placed on Eurocen- awareness of racial discrimination and ine-
tric features may enable biracial women to be quality (Bailey and Telles 2006; Dawson
seen as an ambiguous racial Other who is not 1994). Education is also likely to stimulate
necessarily categorized as belonging to a outside-the-box racial thinking (Roth 2005),
Davenport 63
such that a minority or multiracial conscious- fact, separate black Baptist congregations
ness may resonate more strongly among were first formed to establish and maintain a
college-educated parents. These parents may distinctly spiritual racial community in the
be more inclined than less-educated parents wake of the Civil War. Black-white biracials
to pass a non-white self-identification on to who are Baptist may thus feel stronger racial
their children—one that is either reflective of rapport with African Americans and be more
their minority racial heritage or unconstrained inclined than nonreligious black-white bira-
by hypodescent. cials to identify as singularly black.
Being Catholic may similarly reinforce a
minority racial self-identification among
Religion
Latino-white biracials, as Catholicism is a
Places of worship function as sites for the major component of Hispanic/Latino cultural
formation of social networks connecting indi- identity: 68 percent of Latino Americans are
viduals to others who share their ethnic back- Catholic, compared to only one-quarter of all
ground (Calhoun-Brown 1999). Congregations Americans (Pew Research Center 2007a,
provide a community where immigrants can 2007b). Likewise, identifying with a religion
meet, offer support from ethnic and racial more commonly practiced among Asian eth-
discrimination, and potentially develop friend- nic groups—specifically, Hinduism, Islam, or
ships with co-ethnics (Alba and Nee 2003; Buddhism—may strengthen a singular Asian
Foner and Alba 2008). For example, Chong identification for Asian-white biracials
(1998) finds that Korean ethnic Protestant (Kurien 2005; Ying and Lee 1999).
churches help transmit Korean culture and In a different way, the racial homogeneity
values to second-generation Korean Ameri- of the Jewish American community may pro-
cans. Participation in church programs can mote the adoption of a singular white label
also lead to stronger ethnic identification by among Jewish biracials. Judaism is a socially
increasing use of native languages (Bankston closed ethnoreligious group, in which mem-
and Zhou 1996). bership is strictly determined by birth or con-
For biracials in the United States, religious version and characterized by a common ethnic
identity has theological and racial dimen- ancestry (Gans 1979; Hartman and Kaufman
sions, providing a source of spiritual fulfill- 2006). Because 94 percent of American Jews
ment while also instilling and strengthening a identify as non-Hispanic white (Pew Research
sense of ethnic community. Biracials belong- Center 2013), Jewish biracials may be more
ing to ethnic religions—religions that are inclined than similarly non-religious biracials
racially homogeneous and accentuate a shared to identify as singularly white.
cultural heritage, history, or homeland—may
emphasize their religious culture by embrac-
ing the racial identification of their religious Additional Influences on Racial
peers. Accordingly, the religious faiths that Identification
should have the most influence on biracials’ Beyond these three primary sources of social
identification are Baptist for black-whites; identities, other familial, sociocultural, and
Catholicism for Latino-whites; Hinduism, environmental factors should shape biracials’
Islam, and Buddhism for Asian-whites; and identification. Parents’ race is central for chil-
Judaism for all biracial subgroups. dren’s ethnoracial self-identification. The
In the African American community, the labels given by parents to Asian-white and
black church—especially the Baptist church— Latino-white biracial children most often
has historically been instrumental in forging match children’s paternal race, because sur-
beliefs about black group identity, interests, name—a powerful symbolic indicator of eth-
and leadership (Harris-Lacewell 2006; Lin- nic heritage—is typically inherited from the
coln and Mamiya 1990; McDaniel 2008). In father (Qian 2004; Xie and Goyette 1997).9
64 American Sociological Review 81(1)
However, findings are mixed regarding the exposure (Khanna 2004; Saenz et al. 1995).
labels given to black-white biracials, for For Asian and Latino biracials, being a native
whom surname is less likely to disclose race English speaker may be indicative of social
(Brunsma 2005; Roth 2005). Notably, some distance from the immigrant experience, or
of the leading activists in the multiracial acculturation to U.S. society, and be predic-
movement of the 1980s and 1990s were white tive of a non-Asian or non-Latino racial label.
mothers upset that their biracial black chil-
dren were expected to “deny” their back-
ground (Williams 2006). Black-white biracial Data and Methods
children may be particularly encouraged to To assess the effects of these factors on racial
develop an identification inclusive of their identification, I examine data from the CIRP
mother’s race. The matrilineal line of influ- Freshman Surveys, which are conducted by
ence should similarly shape identification as the Higher Education Research Institute at
it relates to parents’ marital status. Because UCLA and completed every year by thou-
children with divorced or never-married par- sands of incoming college freshmen across the
ents tend to be raised primarily by their United States (Sax et al. 2003; Sax et al. 2001,
mother, biracial children whose parents sepa- 2002). The surveys are administered at hun-
rated may identify with their mother’s race at dreds of higher-learning institutions, including
greater rates than biracial children with mar- two- and four-year colleges; research univer-
ried parents. sities; public, private, and religious schools;
Societal attitudes toward race-mixing— single-sex schools; and historically black col-
which reflect the broader environment in leges and universities. The surveys encompass
which biracials develop their identities—may a wide range of topics, including questions
also be predictive of self-labeling. A concen- about students’ socioeconomic and ethnic
tration of racial minorities in one’s neighbor- backgrounds, educational history and career
hood increases the likelihood that parents will goals, social and behavioral interests, and val-
identify biracial children with a minority race ues and attitudes. The surveys are completed
(Qian 2004). In light of the strong relation- during registration, freshman orientation, or
ship between residential segregation, racial the first few weeks of classes, before students
discrimination, and racial unity (Gay 2004; have had much exposure to the college experi-
Tate 1993), living in an area with a higher ence. Full details on the Freshman Survey
proportion of minority residents should methodology and sample are available in the
increase biracials’ solidarity with their minor- online supplement (https://people.stanford
ity peers, encouraging the adoption of a sin- .edu/ldd/research).
gular minority identification. These surveys are arguably the best avail-
Region also captures racial dynamics. A able data source for studying the attitudes and
multiple-race label may be a less viable option behavior of the U.S. biracial population.
for biracials living in the South, given the Pooling data from the three years in which
region’s traditional resistance to interracial respondents were asked their parents’ race
marriage and strong adherence to the hypo- (2001, 2002, and 2003) yields more than
descent rule (Davis 2001). In contrast, the 37,000 Asian-white, black-white, and Latino-
racial diversity and high intermarriage rates of white biracials—a sample size unparalleled in
the Pacific West reflect an environment that studies of self-identification and public opin-
places a positive emphasis on multiracial- ion. I also append census sociodemographic
ism.10 Biracials in the Pacific West should thus measures for population density, racial com-
be more likely to use the multiracial label. position, and median household income at
Finally, ethnic identities are communi- respondents’ parents’ home zip-code level.
cated through language (Howard 2000), Like many other studies that examine the
which is a prominent measure of cultural identities of mixed-race adolescents, my
Davenport 65
analyses focus on college students (e.g., one’s subsequent attitudes and behaviors. For
Cheng and Lively 2009; Cooney and Radina example, most college freshmen have not had
2000; Doyle and Kao 2007; Harris and Sim significant experiences in the labor market,
2002; Hitlin et al. 2006; Khanna 2011; which might affect their racial self-
Rockquemore 2002; Rockquemore and
presentation. This research cannot speak to
Brunsma 2008). Given the youth of the bira- the extent to which identification is manipula-
cial population (Fryer et al. 2012), surveying ble due to instrumental or employment con-
respondents in their late teens and early twen- siderations. Finally, these data do not tap into
ties helps yield a larger sample size. respondents’ phenotypic features (e.g., skin
There are some drawbacks of focusing on tone, eye color, hair color/texture, and nose
college freshmen. In particular, these data do shape), which can influence how people of
not include the roughly 10 percent of students mixed-race are treated in society and can
who drop out of high school (National Center restrict their identification options (Khanna
for Education Statistics 2014), making the find- 2004; Rockquemore and Brunsma 2008).
ings not quite generalizable to the entire popu- Future work would do well to explore the
lation of 17- to 19-year-olds. That said, given relationship between these traits and racial
that about two-thirds of students who graduate identification outcomes.
high school enroll in college immediately after
their senior year (National Center for Educa-
tion Statistics 2014; Norris 2014), the findings Variable Descriptions
are still generalizable to a good portion of the Dependent variable. The outcome of inter-
relevant age group. The participation of com- est is respondent self-identification. This vari-
munity college freshmen in these surveys helps able is constructed from three racial labels:
ensure a socioeconomically diverse sample. In singularly white, singularly minority (i.e.,
addition, unlike many other census-based stud- either Asian, Latino, or black, depending on
ies (e.g., Roth 2005; Xie and Goyette 1997), the race of the non-white parent), or multira-
these surveys include children with unmarried cial.11 These analyses exclude an additional 2
parents, increasing the representation of stu- percent of each biracial subgroup who iden-
dents coming from less advantaged back- tify with any other race or races, as well as
grounds (McLeod and Kessler 1990). respondents who identify at least one parent
A few other caveats are worth mentioning. with multiple races.12 Only respondents who
Racial labels are one aspect of racial identity, report one parent as white and the other par-
and these surveys access respondents’ self- ent as either Asian, Latino, or black are
reporting of their race/ethnicity at a single included in the analysis.
point in time, preventing me from speaking to
the stability of identification across contexts. Primary independent variables. The
Although these college freshmen have noth- key predictors are gender, religion, and socio-
ing at stake when filling out their surveys, economic status. An indicator variable for gen-
some might be influenced by the college der is coded one for women and zero for men.
application process, in which students see Religious affiliation is coded into six catego-
their racial identification as part of the admis- ries reflecting the largest and most racially
sions game (Panter et al. 2009). During col- homogeneous religious categories in the
lege, young adults are “finding themselves” United States: Baptist, Catholic, other Chris-
and navigating a new racial environment; for tian (including Eastern Orthodox, Episcopal,
some, figuring out “who they are” racially LDS, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian,
may be especially salient at this time. Quaker, Seventh Day Adventist, Unitarian, and
In addition, the shared social meanings of United Church of Christ), Jewish, some other
identity, and the degree of importance that an religion (including Hinduism, Buddhism, and
individual places on that identity, may shape Islam), and no religion (the reference).
66 American Sociological Review 81(1)
I use three indices of socioeconomic sta- and 1-in-20 black-whites. Such stark varia-
tus. Family income is self-reported in four tion suggests that the boundaries of whiteness
categories: less than $30,000 (the reference); are more permeable for Latino-white biracials
$30,000 to $59,999; $60,000 to $99,999; and and more rigid for biracials with an Asian or
$100,000 or more. Median neighborhood black parent. That black-white biracials are
income is a continuous zip-code level varia- the least likely to adopt a singular white iden-
ble taken from Census 2000 figures. Parents’ tification is to be expected, given the legacy
education is coded categorically for both of hypodescent, historical norms against
white and minority parents in four categories: “passing” as white, and the greater tendency
high school or less (the reference), some col- for black-white biracials to be categorized as
lege or associate’s degree, bachelor’s degree, non-white by others (Ho et al. 2011).
and some graduate work/degree. Nevertheless, most Asian-white and black-
white biracials select a multiracial label—
Additional independent variables. I black-white biracials overwhelmingly so, at
also adjust for other covariates related to fam- 71 percent. Black-white biracials are also the
ily and sociocultural environment. Parents’ least likely to identify exclusively with their
marital status is a binary variable indexing minority race, a finding that indicates the one-
whether parents are married (not married is drop rule does not define their identifica-
the reference). To gauge whether respondents tion.14 Still, the rule continues to constrain
are more likely to identify with the race of a black-white biracials’ identification deci-
single mother, I created an interaction term sions, as evidenced by the fact that 95 percent
between parents’ marital status and parents’ identify as non-white. However, black-white
race. Native English speaker is an indicator biracials are not necessarily seeking to dis-
variable (non-native English speaker is the tance themselves from their minority herit-
reference). Region is a categorical variable age: most identify as both white and black—
coded as Pacific, Midwest, Mountains/Plains, and by implication, as neither white nor
Northeast, and South (the reference). Percent black.
minority race—the population of each bira- Table 1 breaks down identification by
cial subgroup’s minority race (e.g., percent mother’s and father’s race, demonstrating that
Asian for Asian-white biracials)—is meas- Asian-white and black-white biracials are
ured at the respondent’s home zip-code level more likely to identify with their mother’s
and categorized into quartiles. I also include race. Panel A shows that relative to Asian-
year of survey and zip-code population den- white biracials who have an Asian mother,
sity in the regression models.13 those with a white mother are 3.1 percent
more likely to identify as white and less likely
to identify as Asian.15 Panel B shows that
Results having a white mother has a slightly different
Parents’ Race and Self-Identification effect for black-white biracials.16 Relative to
I begin by examining identification patterns black-white biracials with a black mother,
across biracial categories (see Figure 1). Sev- those with a white mother are 6 percent less
eral findings here are worth noting. First, likely to identify as black and 6.7 percent
regardless of category, biracial respondents more likely to identify as multiracial.
are more likely to identify as a minority rather Latino-white biracials are more likely to
than as white. Latino-white biracials are the identity with the race of their father (see
most likely to do so, with 45 percent identify- Panel C of Table 1). Relative to Latino-white
ing as Latino only. Latino-whites are also the biracials with a white father, respondents with
most likely to adopt an only-white label: a Latino father are 7.1 percent more likely to
approximately 1-in-5 Latino-whites self-label identify as Latino, 3 percent less likely to iden-
as white, compared to 1-in-10 Asian-whites tify as white, and 4.1 percent less likely to
Davenport 67
A: Asian-White Biracials
(continued)
70 American Sociological Review 81(1)
Note: N = 8,731. Standard errors are in parentheses. Multinomial logistic regressions also account for
zip-code population density and year surveyed.
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001 (two-tailed tests).
(continued)
Davenport 71
Note: N = 16,719. Standard errors are in parentheses. Multinomial logistic regressions also account for
zip-code population density and year surveyed.
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001 (two-tailed tests).
have 39 percent higher odds of identifying as are native English speakers are considerably
multiracial than as Latino. Having a higher more likely to identify as white or multiracial—
family income, however, increases the likeli- compared to their peers who are not native
hood of identifying as white. English speakers—over two times more likely.
With respect to religion, after accounting for Region of residence affects the racial iden-
other factors, Catholic Latino-white biracials tification patterns of Latino-white biracials.
are more prone to identify exclusively as Latino In general, after accounting for other factors,
than are their non-affiliated counterparts. In residing outside the South increases the odds
contrast, being Jewish or Baptist is predictive of of multiracial identification, living in the
a higher likelihood of identifying as white. As Northeast has a whitening effect, and people
with Asian-whites, Latino-white biracials who who live in the Mountains/Plains and
72 American Sociological Review 81(1)
(continued)
74 American Sociological Review 81(1)
Note: N = 4,084. Standard errors are in parentheses. Multinomial logistic regressions also account for
zip-code population density and year surveyed.
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p <.001 (two-tailed tests).
Biracial Subgroup
Note: Column W = greater likelihood of selecting a white label, and Column M = greater likelihood
of selecting a multiracial label, relative to a minority label. + reflects a significantly positive effect on
identification; – reflects a significantly negative effect on identification, at a 95 percent confidence level.
Shaded cells denote variables that have similar effects for at least two of the three biracial subgroups.
76 American Sociological Review 81(1)
achievement among Asian Americans, cou- interact. In addition, religion fosters cultural
pled with their minority group status, may solidarity by underscoring membership in
explain this result. As Zhou (2004) argues, historically oppressed minority groups (Alba
Asian Americans associate “white” with 2006). This intersection of religion and race
mainstream success and privilege, and thus also explains why biracial Jews are dispropor-
turn to whites as a model for status attain- tionately likely to call themselves white. The
ment. But although Asian Americans are socio- influence of religion on racial identification
economically similar to whites, the model may be due to physical proximity and a high
minority stereotype distinguishes them as a level of sustained interpersonal contact with
racial other—increasing the salience of the members of a particular race, as well as the
disadvantages tied to being non-white. emotional bond that stems from sharing the
However, intermarriage with whites can same spiritual beliefs with co-ethnics.
enable very well-educated Asians to become Places of worship in the United States are
integrated into the white mainstream. This in highly segregated by race. This suggests that
turn may weaken the “otherness” associated the positive effects of religious affiliation on
with being Asian. Accordingly, while a white minority identification may be driven as
identification is out of reach for most Asian much by feelings of exclusion as by affection
Americans, it is accessible to those who have for co-ethnics. Racially homogeneous reli-
a white parent. Because their high-status gions may be less welcoming of non-co-
Asian parent has achieved the socioeconomic ethnics, especially members of the white
success associated with whiteness, Asian- majority. Research shows that different-race
white biracials may be more likely to be cul- members of ethnic congregations often feel
turally identified as white or multiracial, like outsiders. This may increase their likeli-
rather than Asian. These biracials may also hood of exiting, whereas people who are part
perceive greater cultural commonality with of the majority ethnic group may remain loyal
their white peers than their Asian peers, which for a longer period (Scheitle and Dougherty
could lead to their selecting a “lighter” racial 2010). Accordingly, different-race biracials in
label.24 Asian-white biracials might also be ethnic congregations may face greater social
aware of the “Asian penalty” that admissions rejection, which could cause them to exit their
officers exact on Asian college applicants, place of worship or religion altogether. Con-
because of their overrepresentation at elite versely, biracials who are embraced by their
schools (Espenshade and Radford 2009). This religious peers as part of the dominant ethnic
could lead them to hide their Asianness, at least or racial group may have a particularly strong
when identifying their race on college forms. ethnic identification.
choose a multiracial label, whereas those living Shapiro 2006), and the significant influence
in the Midwest are more likely to adopt a non- of racial identification on behavior and atti-
white or multiracial identification (relative to tudes is well-established (e.g., Hutchings and
those living in the South). In addition, as the Valentino 2004; Kinder and Sanders 1996;
proportion of same minority race in the neigh- McClain et al. 2009). Disentangling the pre-
borhood increases, Latino-white and black- dictors of racial identification allows us to
white biracials are less likely to identify as understand the sociopolitical ramifications of
white, indicating that living around more peo- race in a more incisive way.
ple of one’s minority heritage fosters greater Furthermore, examining the political posi-
solidarity with that group. Yet increased contact tions of those who straddle racial cleavages,
with one’s minority race does not necessarily such as biracials, can improve our under-
translate to a singular identification with that standing of the role of racial divides in poli-
group, as evidenced by the fact that Asian- tics. The increasing number of multiracial
white and Latino-white biracials living in identifiers raises important questions about
minority neighborhoods are more inclined to the future of racial group solidarity in U.S.
select a multiracial label over a singular minor- politics (Williams 2006). However, does it
ity one. make a difference whether people call them-
Finally, Asian-white and Latino-white selves white, minority, or multiracial? How
biracials whose native language is English are do these labels translate into voting behavior,
significantly more likely, all else being equal, racial attitudes, and policy opinions? Social
to adopt a whiter racial label than are biracials identity theory (SIT) suggests that people ori-
whose native language is not English, thus ent their cognition and behavior toward the
illustrating how a shared linguistic back- social category to which they belong (Tajfel
ground can reinforce shared racial identity. 1981; Tajfel and Turner 1979). For instance,
research shows that individuals who identify
with members of a given social category per-
Sociopolitical Significance of Racial
ceive a strong loyalty and greater dedication
Identification
to other group members (Ellemers, Spears,
According to identity theory, the self is com- and Doosje 1997; Hogg and Hardie 1992).
posed of multiple identities, and the meaning This suggests that biracials should share the
and influence of a particular identity depends political attitudes of the racial category with
on its relation to other identities (Burke which they most strongly identify, and indeed,
1980). These identities vary in salience; more research in political science has found empiri-
prominent identities, at the top of one’s hier- cal support for this conjecture (Davenport
archy of available identities, are more likely forthcoming). In light of the well-established
to be referenced than are lower-ranked identi- relationship between racial identity and polit-
ties (McCall and Simmons 1966; Stryker ical behavior, additional work is needed on
1968). Race is but one of several identities an the political ramifications of multiracial iden-
individual can draw on at a given point in tification, especially as it pertains to minority
time. Other social identities, including those group solidarity and voting.
tied to gender and sexual orientation, and role
identities tied to occupation, can be pivotal to
one’s overall outlook. Conclusions
Racial identification has always been fun- Traditionally, biracial Americans of part-white
damental to the structuring of U.S. society parentage have identified culturally and politi-
and politics (Du Bois [1903] 1989; Myrdal cally with their minority race (Nobles 2000;
1944). As such, it is a core social identity for U.S. Bureau of the Census 1930; White 1948).
Americans. Racial inequality is a deep and Some demographers (e.g., Farley 2002) postu-
enduring element of U.S. culture (Alexander late that the 2000 Census change will not lead
2012; Massey and Denton 1993; Oliver and to a substantive increase in multiracial
78 American Sociological Review 81(1)
identification, but the reality is that millions of States. The whitening effect of income on
Americans now identify this way on census racial identification implies that the long-
forms (Jones and Bullock 2012). standing black/white divide may be giving
Although the multiple-race population is way to a more complex hierarchy linking
small proportionally—3 percent of Americans racial categorization and social class. This
marked two or more races in 2014—this hierarchy may be sustained if affluent bira-
amounts to a 41 percent increase since 2000, a cials begin to distance themselves from more
sharp rate of growth when compared to the disadvantaged minority groups by opting out
single-race population (13 percent) and most of their minority identification in favor of a
other major groups (U.S. Bureau of the Cen- singularly white racial label.
sus 2015). And this overall rate masks striking What are the consequences of such identifi-
increases within racial subgroups. Notably, cation patterns? Scholars of ethnic politics
the percentage of respondents who identified have shown that seeing one’s fate as linked to
as Asian-white more than doubled over this that of other co-ethnics, and identifying with
period. In 2000, black-white was just the one’s ethnic culture, is critical to Latino, Asian,
fourth-most frequently selected multiple-race and black political unity (Dawson 1994; Junn
label; 14 years later it had become the most and Masuoka 2008; Schildkraut 2012). It is not
popular, tripling in size to 2.5 million. Such a just the presence of particular racial and ethnic
high level of black-white identification is labels, but the meanings attached to them, that
remarkable, given decades of legislation but- produce political consequences. Just as racial
tressed by the rule of hypodescent. labels have expanded over time, the political
Overall, an estimated 1-in-5 Americans meanings associated with race will continue to
will be of mixed-race by 2050 (Lee and Bean evolve. As the biracial population grows in the
2004). The findings reported in this article coming decades, it is important for scholars to
show that the majority of Asian-white and continue to assess the relationship between
black-white biracials, and a large percentage subjective racial group identification and polit-
of Latino-white biracials, now opt to call ical behavior.
themselves multiracial. Given that multiracial
labels are increasingly accepted and intermar-
riage rates continue to rise (Wang 2012), it Acknowledgments
I thank Will Bullock, Chris Achen, Tony Carey, Corey
seems that these racial identification patterns
Fields, Paul Frymer, Martin Gilens, Rachel Gillum Jack-
reflect not an age effect, but instead a more son, Justin Grimmer, James Fearon, Vincent Hutchings,
lasting and transformative cohort effect. Tomàs Jiménez, Zoltan Hajnal, David Laitin, Taeku Lee,
The surveys used here capture one segment Lauren Prather, Deborah Schildkraut, Gary Segura, and
of the U.S. population—teenagers entering the ASR editors and anonymous reviewers for their help-
ful comments. Previous versions of this article were
college—but the sample is large, heterogene-
presented at the 2013 APSA meetings, 2014 MPSA meet-
ous, and comprehensive. This enables a rigor- ings, the Center for the Study of American Politics at
ous empirical assessment of the effects of Yale, and the UC-Berkeley Colloquium on Race, Ethnic-
religious affiliation and income on biracials’ ity, and Immigration.
self-identification. Results show that for Asian-
white, Latino-white, and black-white biracials,
identification is predictably structured by socio- Data and Code Files
economic status, religion, and, most signifi- I am grateful to the Cooperative Institutional Research
cantly, gender. These findings shed light on the Program (CIRP) at the Higher Education Research Insti-
extent to which the boundaries of racial group tute (HERI) at UCLA for providing Freshman Survey
data access. The analysis dataset for this article is hosted
membership—once rigidly defined—are now by HERI and can be requested here: http://www.heri
more blurred. .ucla.edu/gainaccess.php. Online appendices and analy-
All told, the evidence indicates that a new sis files are available at https://people.stanford.edu/ldd/
color line may be materializing in the United research.
Davenport 79
15. Bratter and Heard (2009) similarly find that Asian- Allen, G. E., Patton O. Garriott, Carla J. Reyes, and Cath-
white biracials are more likely to self-identify with erine Hsieh. 2013. “Racial Identity, Phenotype, and
their mother’s race. Self-Esteem among Biracial Polynesian/White Indi-
16. Because the boundaries of whiteness are less acces- viduals.” Family Relations 62(1):82–91.
sible to Americans of black heritage, we should not Bailey, Stanley R. 2008. “Unmixing for Race Making in
expect a large percentage of biracials to identify as Brazil.” American Journal of Sociology 114(3):577–
singularly white. 614.
17. I also ran bivariate analyses that include each of the Bailey, Stanley R., and Edward E. Telles. 2006. “Multi-
independent variables. These findings, presented in racial Versus Collective Black Categories: Examining
the online supplement, suggest several interesting Census Classification Debates in Brazil.” Ethnicities
predictive relationships. But because some of these 6(1):74–101.
bivariate findings may be intercorrelated, I refrain Bankston, Carl L., and Min Zhou. 1996. “The Ethnic
from discussing them at length here. Instead, I Church, Ethnic Identification, and the Social Adjust-
concentrate on the multivariate regression results, ment of Vietnamese Adolescents.” Review of Reli-
which will determine whether these effects persist gious Research 38(1):18–37.
when accounting for systematic differences across Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo. 2006. Racism without Racists:
covariates among respondents. Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial
18. The minority group is the excluded category, due to Inequality in the United States. Lanham, MD: Row-
the history of hypodescent in the United States. man & Littlefield Publishers.
19. This methodological approach follows that of other Bratter, Jenifer. 2007. “Will ‘Multiracial’ Survive to
researchers of multiracial identification (e.g., Qian the Next Generation? The Racial Classification of
2004; Roth 2005). Children of Multiracial Parents.” Social Forces
20. Even when not stated, findings discussed in this 86(2):821–49.
section should be interpreted as relative to identify- Bratter, Jenifer, and Holly E. Heard. 2009. “Mothers,
ing as Asian. Fathers, or Both? Parental Gender and Parent-Child
21. Even when not stated, findings discussed in this Interactions in the Racial Classification of Adoles-
section should be interpreted as relative to identify- cents.” Sociological Forum 24(3):658–88.
ing as Latino. Brubaker, Rogers. 2009. “Ethnicity, Race, and National-
22. Even when not stated, findings discussed in this ism.” Annual Review of Sociology 35:21–42.
section should be interpreted as relative to identify- Brunsma, David L. 2005. “Interracial Families and the
ing as black. Racial Identification of Mixed-Race Children: Evi-
23. Although prior work finds that children generally dence from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study.”
identify more with their same-gendered parent than Social Forces 84(2):1131–57.
their opposite-gendered parent (Starrels 1994), find- Burke, Peter J. 1980. “The Self: Measurement Require-
ings here cannot be attributed to respondents simply ments from an Interactionist Perspective.” Social
being more likely to incorporate the race of their same- Psychology Quarterly 43(1):18–29.
gendered parent. When the interaction term female x Burke, Peter J., and Donald C. Reitzes. 1981. “The Link
minority mother is added to the model, the correspond- between Identity and Role Performance.” Social Psy-
ing coefficients are not significant and overall results chology Quarterly 44(2):83–92.
do not change for Asian-whites and black-whites. Burke, Peter J., and Jan E. Stets. 2009. Identity Theory.
24. This finding supports some prior research showing New York: Oxford University Press.
that the likelihood of identifying as Asian declines Burke, Ruth, and Grace Kao. 2013. “Bearing the Burden
as socioeconomic status rises (Khanna 2004). of Whiteness: The Implications of Racial Self-Identi-
fication for Multiracial Adolescents’ School Belong-
ing and Academic Achievement.” Ethnic and Racial
References Studies 36(5):747–73.
Alba, Richard D. 1992. Ethnic Identity: The Transforma- Calhoun-Brown, Allison. 1999. “The Image of God:
tion of White America. New Haven, CT: Yale Univer- Black Theology and Racial Empowerment in the
sity Press. African American Community.” Review of Religious
Alba, Richard D. 2006. “On the Sociological Signifi- Research 30(3):197–212.
cance of the American Jewish Experience: Boundary Campbell, Mary E. 2007. “Thinking Outside the (Black)
Blurring, Assimilation, and Pluralism.” Sociology of Box: Measuring Black and Multiracial Identification
Religion 67(4):347–58. on Surveys.” Social Science Research 36(3):921–44.
Alba, Richard D., and Victor Nee. 2003. Remaking the Amer- Campbell, Mary E., and Christabel L. Rogalin. 2006.
ican Mainstream: Assimilation and Contemporary Immi- “Categorical Imperatives: The Interaction of Latino
gration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. and Racial Identification.” Social Science Quarterly
Alexander, Michelle. 2012. The New Jim Crow: Mass 87(5):1030–52.
Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New Cheng, Simon, and Kathryn J. Lively. 2009. “Multira-
York: The New Press. cial Self-Identification and Adolescent Outcomes: A
Davenport 81
Social Psychological Approach to the Marginal Man Farley, Reynolds. 2002. “Racial Identities in 2000: The
Theory.” Social Forces 88(1):61–98. Response to the Multiple-Race Response Option.”
Chong, Kelly H. 1998. “What It Means to Be Chris- Pp. 33–61 in The New Race Question: How the Cen-
tian: The Role of Religion in the Construction of sus Counts Multiracial Individuals, edited by J. Perl-
Ethnic Identity and Boundary among Second-Gen- mann and M. C. Waters. New York: Russell Sage.
eration Korean Americans.” Sociology of Religion Foner, Nancy, and Richard Alba. 2008. “Immigrant Reli-
59(3):259–86. gion in the US and Western Europe: Bridge or Bar-
Clark, Kenneth B., and Mamie K. Clark. 1939. “Segrega- rier to Inclusion?” International Migration Review
tion as a Factor in the Racial Identification of Negro 42(2):360–92.
Pre-School Children: A Preliminary Report.” Journal Foote, Nelson N. 1951. “Identification as the Basis for
of Experimental Education 8(2):161–63. a Theory of Motivation.” American Sociological
Cooney, Teresa M., and M. Elise Radina. 2000. “Adjust- Review 16(1):14–21.
ment Problems in Adolescence: Are Multiracial Chil- Francis, Andrew M., and Maria Tannuri-Pianto. 2013.
dren at Risk?” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry “Endogenous Race in Brazil: Affirmative Action and
70(4):433–44. the Construction of Racial Identity among Young
Crenshaw, Kimberlé. 1989. “Demarginalizing the Inter- Adults.” Economic Development and Cultural
section of Race and Sex.” University of Chicago Change 61(4):731–53.
Legal Forum 140:139–67. Fraser, Suzanne. 2003. Cosmetic Surgery, Gender and
Cross, William E. 2002. “Interrogating ‘In-Between- Culture. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
ness’: A Review of Beyond Black: Biracial Identity in Fred, Phillips-Patrick J., and Rossi V. Clifford. 1996.
America.” Contemporary Psychology: APA Review of “Statistical Evidence of Mortgage Redlining? A
Books 49(2):205–207. Cautionary Tale.” Journal of Real Estate Research
DaCosta, Kimberly McClain. 2007. Making Multiracials: 11(1):13–23.
State, Family, and Market in the Redrawing of the Fryer Jr., Roland G., Lisa Kahn, Steven D. Levitt, and
Color Line. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Jorg L. Spenkuch. 2012. “The Plight of Mixed Race
Davenport, Lauren D. Forthcoming. “Beyond Black and Adolescents.” Review of Economics and Statistics
White: Biracial Attitudes in Contemporary U.S. Poli- 94(3):621–34.
tics.” American Political Science Review. Funderburg, Lise. 1994. Black, White, Other: Biracial
Davis, F. James. 2001. Who Is Black: One Nation’s Defi- Americans Talk about Race and Identity. New York:
nition. University Park: Pennsylvania State Univer- Harper Perennial.
sity Press. Gans, Herbert J. 1979. “Symbolic Ethnicity: The Future
Dawson, Michael C. 1994. Behind the Mule: Race and of Ethnic Groups and Cultures in America.” Ethnic
Class in African-American Politics. Princeton, NJ: and Racial Studies 2(1):1–20.
Princeton University Press. Gans, Herbert J. 2012. “Whitening and the Chang-
Dougherty, Kevin D., and Kimberly R. Huyser. 2008. ing American Racial Hierarchy.” Du Bois Review
“Racially Diverse Congregations: Organizational Iden- 9(2):267–79.
tity and the Accommodation of Differences.” Journal Gay, Claudine. 2004. “Putting Race in Context: Iden-
for the Scientific Study of Religion 47(1):23–44. tifying the Environmental Determinants of Black
Doyle, Jamie Mihoko, and Grace Kao. 2007. “Are Racial Racial Attitudes.” American Political Science Review
Identities of Multiracials Stable? Changing Self-Iden- 98(4):547–62.
tification among Single and Multiple Race Individu- Gay, Claudine, and Katherine Tate. 1998. “Doubly
als.” Social Psychology Quarterly 70(4):405–423. Bound: The Impact of Gender and Race on the
Du Bois, W.E.B. [1903] 1989. The Souls of Black Folk. Politics of Black Women.” Political Psychology
New York: Bantam. 19(1):169–84.
Ellemers, Naomi, Russell Spears, and Bertjan Doosje. Goldstein, Joshua R., and Ann J. Morning. 2005. “Back
1997. “Sticking Together or Falling Apart: In-Group in the Box: The Dilemma of Using Multiple-Race
Identification as a Psychological Determinant of Data for Single-Race Laws.” Pp. 119–36 in The New
Group Commitment versus Individual Mobil- Race Question: How the Census Counts Multiracial
ity.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Individuals, edited by J. Perlmann and M. C. Waters.
72(3):617–26. New York: Russell Sage.
Emerson, Michael O., and Rodney M. Woo. 2006. Peo- Haney López, Ian. 2006. White by Law: The Legal Con-
ple of the Dream: Multiracial Congregations in the struction of Race. New York: NYU Press.
United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Harris, David R., and Jeremiah Joseph Sim. 2002. “Who
Press. Is Multiracial? Assessing the Complexity of Lived
Erikson, Erik H. 1968. Identity: Youth and Crisis. New Race.” American Sociological Review 67(4):614–27.
York: WW Norton & Company. Harris-Lacewell, Melissa V. 2006. Barbershops, Bibles,
Espenshade, Thomas J., and Alexandria Walton Radford. and BET: Everyday Talk and Black Political Thought.
2009. No Longer Separate, Not Yet Equal: Race and Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Class in Elite College Admission and Campus Life. Hartman, Harriet, and Debra Kaufman. 2006. “Decen-
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. tering the Study of Jewish Identity: Opening the
82 American Sociological Review 81(1)
Norris, Floyd. 2014. “Fewer U.S. Graduates Opt for Col- Root, Maria P. P. 1996. The Multiracial Experience:
lege After High School.” New York Times, April 25, Racial Borders as the New Frontier. London, UK:
p. B3 (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/26/business/ Sage Publications.
fewer-us-high-school-graduates-opt-for-college Roth, Wendy D. 2005. “The End of the One-Drop Rule?
.html). Labeling of Multiracial Children in Black Intermar-
Oliver, Melvin L., and Thomas M. Shapiro. 2006. Black riages.” Sociological Forum 20(1):35–67.
Wealth, White Wealth: A New Perspective on Racial Saenz, Rogelio, Sean-Shong Hwang, Benigno E.
Inequality. New York: Taylor & Francis. Aguirre, and Robert N. Anderson. 1995. “Persis-
Omi, Michael, and Howard Winant. 1994. Racial For- tence and Change in Asian Identity among Children
mation in the United States: From the 1960s to the of Intermarried Couples.” Sociological Perspectives
1990s. New York: Routledge. 38(2):175–94.
Panter, A. T., Charles E. Daye, Walter R. Allen, Linda F. Sanchez, Delida, and Robert T. Carter. 2005. “Exploring
Wightman, and Meera E. Deo. 2009. “It Matters How the Relationship between Racial Identity and Reli-
and When You Ask: Self-Reported Race/Ethnicity of gious Orientation among African American College
Incoming Law Students.” Cultural Diversity and Eth- Students.” Journal of College Student Development
nic Minority Psychology 15(1):51–66. 46(3):280–95.
Penner, Andrew M., and Aliya Saperstein. 2013. “Engen- Saperstein, Aliya, and Andrew M. Penner. 2012. “Racial
dering Racial Perceptions: An Intersectional Analysis Fluidity and Inequality in the United States.” Ameri-
of How Social Status Shapes Race.” Gender & Soci- can Journal of Sociology 118(3):676–727.
ety 27(3):319–44. Sax, Linda, Alexander W. Astin, Jennifer A. Lindholm,
Perlmann, Joel, and Mary C. Waters, eds. 2005. The New William S. Korn, Victor B. Saenz, and Kathryn M.
Race Question: How the Census Counts Multiracial Mahoney. 2003. The American Freshmen: National
Individuals. New York: Russell Sage. Norms for Fall 2003. Los Angeles: Higher Education
Pew Research Center. 2007a. “Changing Faiths: Latinos Research Institute, UCLA.
and the Transformation of American Religion.” The Sax, Linda, Jennifer A. Lindholm, Alexander W. Astin,
Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. Washington, William S. Korn, and Kathryn M. Mahoney. 2001.
DC: Pew Research Center. The American Freshmen: National Norms for Fall
Pew Research Center. 2007b. “Religious Composition 2001. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Insti-
of the U.S.” The Pew Forum on Religion and Public tute, UCLA.
Life. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Sax, Linda, Jennifer A. Lindholm, Alexander W. Astin,
Pew Research Center. 2013. “A Portrait of Jewish Ameri- William S. Korn, and Kathryn M. Mahoney. 2002.
cans.” Pew Religion and Life Project. Washington, The American Freshmen: National Norms for Fall
DC: Pew Research Center. 2002. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Insti-
Portes, Alejandro, and Ruben G. Rumbaut. 2001. Lega- tute, UCLA.
cies: The Story of the Immigrant Second Generation. Scheitle, Christopher P., and Kevin D. Dougherty.
Berkeley: University of California Press. 2010. “Race, Diversity, and Membership Duration
Qian, Zhenchao. 2004. “Options: Racial/Ethnic Identifi- in Religious Congregations.” Sociological Inquiry
cation of Children of Intermarried Couples.” Social 80(3):405–423.
Science Quarterly 85(3):746–66. Schildkraut, Deborah J. 2012. “Which Birds of a Feather
Rafael, Vicente L. 2000. White Love and Other Events Flock Together? Assessing Attitudes about Descrip-
in Filipino History. Durham, NC: Duke University tive Representation among Latinos and Asian Ameri-
Press. cans.” American Politics Research 41(4):699–729.
Reid, Pamela Trotman, and Lillian Comas-Diaz. 1990. Schwartzman, Luisa Farah. 2007. “Does Money Whiten?
“Gender and Ethnicity: Perspectives on Dual Status.” Intergenerational Changes in Racial Classification in
Sex Roles 22(7–8):397–408. Brazil.” American Sociological Review 72(6):940–
Renn, Kristen A. 2004. Mixed Race Students in College: 63.
The Ecology of Race, Identity, and Community on Sciarra, Daniel T., and George V. Gushue. 2003. “White
Campus. Albany: State University of New York Press. Racial Identity Development and Religious Ori-
Roberts, Sam, and Peter Baker. 2010. “Asked to Declare entation.” Journal of Counseling & Development
His Race, Obama Checks ‘Black.’” New York Times, 81(4):473–82.
April 2, p. A9. Settles, Isis H. 2006. “Use of an Intersectional Frame-
Rockquemore, Kerry A. 2002. “Negotiating the Color work to Understand Black Women’s Racial and Gen-
Line: The Gendered Process of Racial Identity Con- der Identities.” Sex Roles 54(9–10):589–601.
struction among Black/White Biracial Women.” Gen- Shelby, Tommie. 2005. We Who Are Dark: The Philo-
der & Society 16(4):485–503. sophical Foundations of Black Solidarity. Cam-
Rockquemore, Kerry, and David L. Brunsma. 2008. bridge, MA: Harvard Belknap Press.
Beyond Black: Biracial Identity in America, 2nd ed. Snipp, C. Matthew. 2003. “Racial Measurement in
Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. the American Census: Past Practices and Implica-
Root, Maria P. P. 1992. Racially Mixed People in tions for the Future.” Annual Review of Sociology
America. London, UK: Sage Publications. 29:563–88.
84 American Sociological Review 81(1)
Spencer, Margaret B., Suzanne G. Fegley, and Vinay U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2015. “Race: 2014.”
Harpalani. 2003. “A Theoretical and Empirical American FactFinder. Census Summary File 1(SF1)
Examination of Identity as Coping: Linking Coping 100-Percent Data, Washington, DC.
Resources to the Self Processes of African American Villarreal, Andrés. 2010. “Stratification by Skin Color
Youth.” Applied Developmental Science 7(3):181–88. in Contemporary Mexico.” American Sociological
Spencer, Rainier. 2004. “Assessing Multiracial Identity Review 75(5):652–78.
Theory and Politics: The Challenge of Hypodescent.” Wang, Wendy. 2012. “The Rise of Intermarriage.” Wash-
Ethnicities 4(3):357–79. ington, DC: Pew Research Center.
Starrels, Marjorie E. 1994. “Gender Differences in Wardle, Francis. 1992. “Supporting Biracial Children
Parent-Child Relations.” Journal of Family Issues in the School Setting.” Education and Treatment of
15(1):148–65. Children 15(2):163–72.
Stryker, Sheldon. 1968. “Identity Salience and Role Per- Waters, Mary C. 1990. Ethnic Options: Choosing Iden-
formance: The Relevance of Symbolic Interaction tities in America. Berkeley: University of California
Theory for Family Research.” Journal of Marriage Press.
and the Family 4(4):558–64. Waters, Mary C. 1999. Black Identities: West Indian
Stryker, Sheldon. 1980. Symbolic Interactionism: A Immigrant Dreams and American Realities. Cam-
Social Structural Version. Palo Alto, CA: Benjamin- bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Cummings Publishing Company. Waters, Mary C. 2000. “Immigration, Intermarriage,
Stryker, Sheldon, and Richard T. Serpe. 1982. “Commit- and the Challenges of Measuring Racial/Ethnic
ment, Identity Salience, and Role Behavior: Theory Identities.” American Journal of Public Health
and Research Example.” Pp. 199–218 in Personality, 90(11):1735–37.
Roles, and Social Behavior, edited by W. Ickes and Weitzer, Ronald, and Steven A. Tuch. 2002. “Perceptions
E. S. Knowles. New York: Springer. of Racial Profiling: Race, Class, and Personal Experi-
Tajfel, Henri. 1981. Human Groups and Social Catego- ence.” Criminology 40(2):435–56.
ries: Studies in Social Psychology. New York: Cam- White, Walter. 1948. A Man Called White: The Autobiog-
bridge University Press. raphy of Walter White. New York: Viking.
Tajfel, Henri, and John C. Turner. 1979. “An Integrative Williams, Kim M. 2006. Mark One or More: Civil Rights
Theory of Intergroup Conflict.” Pp. 33–47 in Social in Multiracial America. Ann Arbor: University of
Psychology of Intergroup Relations, edited by W. Michigan Press.
Austin and S. Worchel. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Wilson, William Julius. 1980. The Declining Significance
Tate, Katherine. 1993. From Protest to Politics: The New of Race. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Black Voters in American Elections. Cambridge, MA: Wolf, Naomi. 1991. The Beauty Myth: How Images of
Harvard University Press. Beauty Are Used Against Women. New York: William
Telles, Edward E. 2002. “Racial Ambiguity among the Morrow & Company.
Brazilian Population.” Ethnic and Racial Studies Xie, Yu, and Kimberly Goyette. 1997. “The Racial Iden-
25(3):415–41. tification of Biracial Children with One Asian Par-
Telles, Edward E. 2004. Race in Another America: The ent: Evidence from the 1990 Census.” Social Forces
Significance of Skin Color in Brazil. Princeton, NJ: 76(2):547–70.
Princeton University Press. Ying, Yu-Wen, and Peter A. Lee. 1999. “The Develop-
Thompson, Maxine S., and Verna M. Keith. 2004. ment of Ethnic Identity in Asian-American Adoles-
“Copper Brown and Blue Black: Colorism and Self cents: Status and Outcome.” American Journal of
Evaluation.” Pp. 45–64 in Skin Deep: How Race and Orthopsychiatry 69(2):194–208.
Complexion Matter in the “Color-Blind” Era, edited Zhou, Min. 2004. “Are Asian Americans Becoming
by C. Herring and V. M. Keith. Urbana, IL: Univer- ‘White’?” Contexts 3(1):29–37.
sity of Illinois Press.
Twine, France Winddance. 1996. “Brown Skinned White Lauren D. Davenport is Assistant Professor of Political
Girls: Class, Culture and the Construction of White Iden- Science at Stanford University and a faculty affiliate at
tity in Suburban Communities.” Gender, Place and Cul- the Center for Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnic-
ture: A Journal of Feminist Geography 3(2):205–224. ity. Her research focuses on public opinion and political
U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1930. “Census History behavior in the United States. She is currently working
through the Decades–1930 (Population).” U.S. Cen- on a book that explores the identities and political atti-
sus Bureau Index of Questions, Washington, DC. tudes of the American multiracial population.