The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Multiracialism and Its Discontents: A Comparative Analysis of Asian-White and Black-White Multiracials
Abstract
This book addresses the contemporary complexities of race, racial identity, and the persistence of racism. Multiracialism is often heralded as a breakthrough in racial reconciliation; some even go so far as to posit that the U.S. will become so racially mixed that racism will diminish. However, this comparative analysis of multiracials who identify as part-Asian and part-White and those who identify as part-Black and part-White indicates vastly different experiences of what it means to be multiracial. The book also attends to a nuanced understanding of how racism and inequality operate when an intersectional approach of race, class, gender, and sexual orientation is taken into account. Ittakes a focused look at how multiracialism is shaped by racism, but ultimately reveals a broader statement about race in the U.S. today: that there is no post-racial state and any identity or movement that attempts to address racial inequality must contend with that reality.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“A group-specific approach is particularly important when examining parental racial socialization because Black girls and Black-White biracial girls are racialized differently within their communities and society (Strmic-Pawl, 2016;T€ orngren, 2019).”
From Ethnic‐Racial Socialization Among Mothers of Black and Black‐White Biracial Daughters During the Pubertal Transition (2022) · cites this paper as Strmic-Pawl, 2016
Citations
Cited by
Carter, R., & Flewellen, A. O. (2022) · Journal of Research on Adolescence · doi:10.1111/jora.12724 · Cited by 13
Metadata
- Authors
- Strmic-Pawl, H. V.
- Publisher
- Lexington Books
- Published
- 2016
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 0
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.