Income and Education Disparities Track Genetic Ancestry

OpenPsych Pub Date : 2023-09-11 DOI:10.26775/op.2023.09.11
Meng Hu, Emil O. W. Kirkegaard, John Fuerst
{"title":"Income and Education Disparities Track Genetic Ancestry","authors":"Meng Hu, Emil O. W. Kirkegaard, John Fuerst","doi":"10.26775/op.2023.09.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span style=\"font-size:12pt; font-variant:normal; white-space:pre-wrap\"><span style=\"font-family:Times,serif\"><span style=\"color:#000000\"><span style=\"font-weight:400\"><span style=\"font-style:normal\"><span style=\"text-decoration:none\">Structural racism has often been invoked to explain observed disparities in social outcomes, such as in educational attainment and income, among different American racial/ethnic groups. Theorists of structural racism typically argue that racial categories are socially constructed and do not correspond with genetic ancestry; additionally, they argue that social outcome differences are a result of discriminatory social norms, policies, and laws that adversely affect members of non-White race/ethnic groups. Since the examples of social norms and policies commonly provided target individuals based on socially-defined race/ethnicity, and not on genetic ancestry, a logical inference is that social disparities will be related to socially-defined race/ethnicity independent of genetically-identified continental ancestry. In order to evaluate this hypothesis, we employ admixture-regression analysis and examine the independent influences of socially-identified race/ethnicity and genetically-defined ancestry on the educational attainment and income of parents, using data from a large sample of US children. Our study focuses on self-identified Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, and East Asians in the United States. Analyses generally show that the association between socially-identified race/ethnicity and outcomes is mediated by genetic ancestry and that non-White race/ethnicity is unrelated to worse outcomes when controlling for genetic ancestry. For example, conditioned on European genetic ancestry, Americans socially-identified as Black and as Hispanic exhibit equivalent or better social outcomes in both education and income as compared to non-Hispanic Whites. These results are seemingly incongruent with the notion that social outcome differences are due to social policy, norms, and practices which adversely affect individuals primarily based on socially-constructed group status</span></span></span></span></span></span>","PeriodicalId":471657,"journal":{"name":"OpenPsych","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"OpenPsych","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26775/op.2023.09.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Structural racism has often been invoked to explain observed disparities in social outcomes, such as in educational attainment and income, among different American racial/ethnic groups. Theorists of structural racism typically argue that racial categories are socially constructed and do not correspond with genetic ancestry; additionally, they argue that social outcome differences are a result of discriminatory social norms, policies, and laws that adversely affect members of non-White race/ethnic groups. Since the examples of social norms and policies commonly provided target individuals based on socially-defined race/ethnicity, and not on genetic ancestry, a logical inference is that social disparities will be related to socially-defined race/ethnicity independent of genetically-identified continental ancestry. In order to evaluate this hypothesis, we employ admixture-regression analysis and examine the independent influences of socially-identified race/ethnicity and genetically-defined ancestry on the educational attainment and income of parents, using data from a large sample of US children. Our study focuses on self-identified Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, and East Asians in the United States. Analyses generally show that the association between socially-identified race/ethnicity and outcomes is mediated by genetic ancestry and that non-White race/ethnicity is unrelated to worse outcomes when controlling for genetic ancestry. For example, conditioned on European genetic ancestry, Americans socially-identified as Black and as Hispanic exhibit equivalent or better social outcomes in both education and income as compared to non-Hispanic Whites. These results are seemingly incongruent with the notion that social outcome differences are due to social policy, norms, and practices which adversely affect individuals primarily based on socially-constructed group status
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
收入和教育差异追踪遗传祖先
结构性种族主义经常被用来解释美国不同种族/民族群体之间在教育程度和收入等社会结果上的差异。结构性种族主义的理论家通常认为,种族类别是社会建构的,与遗传血统不相符;此外,他们认为社会结果的差异是歧视性的社会规范、政策和法律的结果,这些规范、政策和法律对非白人种族/民族群体产生了不利影响。由于社会规范和政策的例子通常是基于社会定义的种族/民族,而不是基于遗传祖先,因此一个合乎逻辑的推论是,社会差异将与社会定义的种族/民族有关,而与基因确定的大陆祖先无关。为了评估这一假设,我们采用了混合回归分析,并使用来自美国儿童的大量样本数据,研究了社会认同的种族/民族和基因定义的祖先对父母教育程度和收入的独立影响。我们的研究集中在美国自我认同的白人、黑人、西班牙裔和东亚人。分析一般表明,社会认同的种族/民族与结果之间的关联是由遗传血统介导的,而非白人种族/民族与遗传血统控制下的较差结果无关。例如,在欧洲遗传血统的条件下,社会认同为黑人和西班牙裔的美国人在教育和收入方面表现出与非西班牙裔白人相当或更好的社会结果。这些结果似乎与社会结果差异是由于社会政策、规范和实践的概念不一致,这些政策、规范和实践主要基于社会建构的群体地位对个人产生不利影响
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Is Research on the Genetics of Race / IQ Gaps “Mythically Taboo?” Income and Education Disparities Track Genetic Ancestry
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1