Making the Most of Multiple Measures: Disentangling the Effects of Different Dimensions of Race in Survey Research
Abstract
The majority of social science research uses a single measure of race when investigating racial inequality. However, a growing body of work demonstrates that race shapes the life chances of individuals in multiple ways, related not only to how people self-identify but also to how others perceive them. As multiple measures of race are increasingly collected and used in survey research, it becomes important to consider the best methods of leveraging such data. We present four analytical approaches for incorporating two different dimensions of race in the same study and illustrate their use with data from the U.S. National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health. The approaches range from tests of specific hypotheses to the most exploratory description of how different measures of race relate to social inequality. Although each approach has its strengths and weaknesses, by accounting for the multidimensionality of race, they all allow for more nuanced patterns of advantage and disadvantage than standard single-measure methods.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Racial category and measurement choices can affect outcomes being measured in survey research.
“a growing body of survey research has highlighted the impact that racial category and measurement choices can have on outcomes being measured [102-104].”
From Towards a critical race methodology in algorithmic fairness (2020) · cites this paper as [104]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 37 · Cited by 60
- Authors
- Saperstein, A., Kizer, J. M., & Penner, A. M.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- University of California, Irvine (US)
- Corresponding author
- Saperstein, Aliya
- Venue
- American Behavioral Scientist
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-10-30
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 519-537
- ISSN
- 0002-7642 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3381
- OpenAlex
- W2265723414
- Cited by
- 60
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 12.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Behavioral Scientist (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
- Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
- Keywords
- racial inequality, self-identification, perceived race, racial classification, social inequality, adolescent to adult health, survey data analysis
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