Date post: | 24-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | esmond-berry |
View: | 213 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Lecture Map
• Homophily• Qian’s Structural Model of Homogamy– Racial Homogamy
• Blau’s Macrostructural Theory of Intergroup Relations– Multivariate Homogamy
Homophily
• Homophily is the observed tendency for people who are socially connected to have similar characteristics
• Data from the GSS shows that confidants (including but not limited to spouses) are more likely to share the same education level, racial category, religion and age
• They are equally likely to be of the same gender (because the sample includes spouses)
Social Distance
• The average similarity (in terms of race, gender, age and religion) of the members of a social networks can tell a researcher how socially close those groups are– If Catholics and Protestants are never in the same
networks, they are socially far apart • Homogamy is a special case of homophily that
refers to marriage– Marriage between similar people is more likely than
between different people
Why Study Homogamy?
• At the individual level cross-group marriage is a litmus test for social acceptance across groups
• At the macro-level it has important implications for society’s “openness”– A rigid or closed society would be one in which
only in-group marriages took place
A Closed Society where Social Relations are Determined by a Nominal Characteristic
A Closed Society where Social Relations are Determined by a Ranked Characteristic
An Open Society: Knowing A Person’s Nominal Characteristics and Ranked Characteristics Tell you Nothing about Social Relations
How can we explain it?
1. Structural models 2. Individual preference models
Today we’re focusing on structural models, Tuesday we’ll approach the problem from the other side
Peter Blau
• Born to Jewish parents in Austria in 1918• Captured, tortured and released by Nazis in 1938• Obtained a study permit and headed to USA via
France• Studied at Elmhurst College, Illinois • Joined the army and acted as a German
interrogator• Obtained American citizenship• Revolutionized Sociology (3 times)
-'You can not marry an Eskimo when no Eskimo is around'
Qian’s Structuralism (Derived from Peter Blau’s original 1977 Macrostructural Theory)
1. Subject matter Macro theory
Cross-group marriages are more likely where:a. The pool of potential in-group mates is smallb. Individuals in the group have similar education to those in other groupsc. There is little geographic segregation
2. Assumptions about social actionHuman behavior is predictable
People have the ability to act but it is highly constrained
3. Methodology Deductive theory of social systems
4. Theoretical ObjectivePrediction of behavior based on attributes of a system
Macrostructural Theory Compared with Structural Functionalism
Macrostructural Theory Structural FunctionalismStructure refers to the “shape” of society based on demographic facts
Structure refers to systems and subsystems
Society is held together by social interactions
Systems are integrated through mutually dependent functions
Social action is heavily constrained by demographic realities
Social action is constrained by value orientations
Structural Models: Proximity
• Can’t marry someone you don’t meet– Meeting is based on:
1. The number of groups and how big they are relative to others
2. Education at the Individual level3. Geographic proximity
Group Size
Assumptions: A model of marriage based on demographic composition of the marriage market
-individual preferences do matter, but we can make reasonable inference without
them
High levels of Immigration
• Adds to the pool of potential in-group mates– Usually of lower education in the first generation
• Reinforce cultural differences (language, religion)
Education
• Education brings people of different backgrounds into contact
• Education is also a status marker – High education signifies potential success
Geographic Segregation/Isolation
• College educated black Americans are underrepresented in white middle and upper class neighbourhoods – Legacies of legal and social discrimination
reinforce group boundaries• Geographic segregation of Asian and Hispanic
immigrants is based on economic factors• Upwardly mobile immigrants tend to move into white
neighbourhoods which increases contact between groups
Raw Assortative Marriage Results
White-Hispanic and white-Asian marriages decreased over the period-Immigration allowed Hispanics and Asians to find spouses from within their group
Intermarriage between whites and Hispanics and whites and Asians were highest in the most educated categories
Changes in census definitions allowed the researchers to infer weakened boundaries between whites and Hispanics and whites and Asians
-mixed race children were more likely to identify as white, indicating that the racial boundary had shifted
White-black marriages started with a lower baseline but increased over the periodIncreases happened across education levels
Log-Linear Model Results(Marginal Free Assortative Marriage)
• Log-linear models control for changing population distributions– Should reduce the effect of immigration.
– Log linear models suggest that there has been an increase in marriages between whites and Asians and whites and Hispanics • While the raw percentages of intermarriages has
declined, if there had been no immigration the raw percentage would have increased
The Qian readings are the simplest case of social distance
• One main interest (racial homogamy) the other variables were control variables – they weren’t interested in the substantive relationships between the control variables
Multivariate Homogamy: Structural Theory of Intergroup Contact
1. Subject matter Macro theory
Three qualities of social organizationheterogeneityinequalitycorrelation between characteristics
2. Assumptions about social actionHuman behavior is predictable
People have the ability to act but it is highly constrained
3. Methodology Deductive theory of social systems
4. Theoretical ObjectivePrediction of behavior based on attributes of a system
-inequality, heterogeneity and intersection rather thanthe attributes of individuals
Blau’s Structural Theory of Intergroup Contact
• Intersecting Social Circles• Heterogeneity• Inequality • Correlation between characteristics
Simmel: Intersecting Social Circles
Consolidation/Concentric Social Circles
Intersection/Intersecting Social Circles
Nuclear Family
Kin
Lineage
Nuclear Family
Occupation
Alum Group
Intersecting Social Characteristics
High PoliticalPower
High Education
Protestant Religion
High Political Power
Protestant Religion
High Education
Low PoliticalPower
Catholic Religion
Low PoliticalPower
Low PoliticalPower
Catholic Religion
Heterogeneity increases out-group contact
• Heterogeneity is synonymous with diversity
• If there is no preference for in-group ties, then the proportion of in-group ties is just a function of the number of groups and the proportion of people in them.
Inequality increases out-group contact
• The extent to which status (income, education, occupational prestige) are concentrated
Intersecting Parameters
“Many intersecting parameters exert compelling constraints to become involved in intergroup relations, because they make a person’s in-group associates in one dimension frequently out-group members in other dimensions.”Blau et al. 1984:590
– If characteristics are less independent there will be less cross-group interaction
– If characteristics are more independent there will be more cross-group interaction
Measures of Intersection
Measured the intersection of:Education, occupation, race, national background,
industry, SEI and income• Cramer’s V – For two nominal variables
• Correlation ratio – For one nominal one numeric variable
• Person Correlation– For two numeric variables
Results
• Racial intermarriage is more likely where race is independent of education, income and occupation – It is driven by intersection not heterogeneity
• Intermarriage between people of different national origins is driven primarily by heterogeneity – not intersection
• Heterogeneity predicts regional intermarriage