Tracking Generation Cohorts Against Evolving Standards Set ...
15
Tracking Generation Cohorts Against Evolving Standards Set by the Mainstream Julie Park Sociology and Asian American Studies University of Maryland
Transcript of Tracking Generation Cohorts Against Evolving Standards Set ...
Tracking Generation Cohorts Against Evolving Standards Set by the Mainstream
Julie Park Sociology and Asian American Studies University of Maryland
• Forthcoming in Demography • Co-authored with Dowell Myers • NICHD Project, “The Variable Tempo of
Dimensions of Immigrant Assimilation,” (5R01HD48910), Dowell Myers, PI
• Are the 2nd generation faring better than their immigrant parents?
For which outcomes?
For which immigrant groups?
Differences by gender?
• How are the mainstream standards changing as the 2nd generation enter into adulthood? Comparing rate of progress vs. closing the gap?
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
1980 2005
Mainstream
1st to 2nd Generation
Difference in 2005
Societal Change
Intergenerational Mobility
Difference in 1980
a) Identified 1st generation in 1980 decennial Public Use Microdata Samples (PUMS) hierarchical files by finding foreign-born parents living with 2nd generation children
--select parents of children age 0 to 16 (ages of 25-44)
b) Identified 2nd generation in 2003-2005-2007 Current Population Survey (CPS) by parent’s nativity
--select grown children now aged 25 to 41
c) Identified a native-born reference group in 1980 and in 2000 to proxy the “mainstream” (native-born white, non-Hispanics)
--select adults at comparable age
• High School Completion
• Bachelors Degree or Higher
• Upper White Collar Occupation ▫ (e.g. management and professionals)
• Above the Poverty Line ▫ (Higher than 100% of the poverty line)
• Homeownership ▫ (universe: householders and spouses)
(O) = Year + G + (Year * G) + Age + X where:
(O) = outcome variable of interest,
Year = observation year (1980 = 0 and 2000 = 1),
G = generation, namely the 1st generation in 1980 and 2nd generation in 2000
(Year*G) = intergenerational mobility measure from 1st to 2nd generation
Age = centered coded with age 35=0 and the effect of age is recorded as deviations from that, and
X = a vector of covariates (sex, marital status, education, area contextual factors, or other).
• Rate of societal change
• Immigrant parents compared to the native-born “mainstream” in 1980
• 2nd generation children compared to the native-born “mainstream” in 2005
• 2nd generation children compared to their immigrant parents
College Completion Upper White Collar Occupation
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
NB Whites, NH
Latino AsianPI WhiteNH BlackNH
Women 1st to 2nd generation
Men 1st to 2nd generation
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
NB Whites, NH
Latino AsianPI WhiteNH BlackNH
Women 1st to 2nd generation
Men 1st to 2nd generation
• we find evidence of greater intergenerational progress for the new second-generation than is commonly reported in the literature
• the use of multiple outcome indicators reveals that not all aspects of second-generation socioeconomic status rose at the same rate
• women experienced substantially more intergenerational mobility than their male counterparts
• Gendered paths in intergenerational mobility (e.g. 2nd generation daughters compared to immigrant mothers)
• Specific ethnic groups, especially immigrants who come to the U.S. with low human capital and socioeconomic status (e.g. Mexicans, Vietnamese, or Haitians)
• Measuring intergenerational mobility in specific geographical locations (e.g. New York, Texas, or California)
For more information, email [email protected]
