Cited by 12Migration, Refugees, and IntegrationRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchRace, History, and American Society

Assimilated or The Boundary of Whiteness Expanded? A Boundary Model of Group Belonging

Open access
Karimi, Aryan, Wilkes, Rima·2023·The British Journal of Sociology

Abstract

In 19th century U.S., European ethnics were considered dark-skinned and working-class. By the 1950s, they were re-categorized as White Americans. Assimilation theory suggests that Europeans' intergroup interactions such as socioeconomic attainments and intermarriage with Anglo-Saxon Whites led to their assimilation and racial re-categorization. The theory anticipates that class mobility translates into re-categorization into Whiteness such that non-Europeans' upward mobility will also propel them into Whiteness. Despite non-Europeans' successful intergroup interactions, their assimilation and belonging is still up for debate. If both Europeans and non-Europeans have participated in similar rates of intergroup interactions, which other factor has determined their differential assimilation outcomes? In response, we conceptualize a boundary model for understanding group belonging. To do so, we distinguish between symbolic and phenotype or somatic race. The former provides and attaches meanings to soma. This boundary model comprises the combined effects of individuals' intergroup interactions and majority groups' symbolic racial boundary expansion-contraction. Assimilation outcome occurs only when majority groups' boundary expands to recognize intergroup interactions as meaningful and to include newcomers as racial group insiders. We revisit the case of European ethnics to show that the symbolic boundary of Whiteness expanded to re-categorize them as assimilated Whites. Accordingly, we formulate four hypotheses about the possibilities of re-categorizing groups in and out of a master category such as Whiteness.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1468-4446.12994

Cites

89 of 89 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

15 of the 104 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Karimi, A., & Wilkes, R.
Affiliations
University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
Karimi, Aryan
Venue
The British Journal of Sociology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2023-01-13
Volume
74
Issue
2
Pages
189-204
ISSN
  • 0007-1315 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-4446
OpenAlex
W4316041926
Cited by
12
References
104
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2
FWCI
5.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Sociology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Migration, Refugees, and Integration
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Race, History, and American Society
Keywords
whiteness, assimilation theory, boundary model, group belonging, intergroup interaction, social mobility, intermarriage, majority groups
MeSH terms
White, Humans, Racial Groups

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review