College Students and “Interracial” Relationships: How Our Measures Matter

IF 1.8 Q2 SOCIOLOGY Social Currents Pub Date : 2022-08-07 DOI:10.1177/23294965221118071
K. Tillman, Ladanya Ramirez Surmeier, Byron Miller
{"title":"College Students and “Interracial” Relationships: How Our Measures Matter","authors":"K. Tillman, Ladanya Ramirez Surmeier, Byron Miller","doi":"10.1177/23294965221118071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We use data from a random sample of students collected at two large public universities, one in the Midwestern region and one in the Southeastern region of the U.S., to document the prevalence of self-reported “interracial” romantic relationships (SR-IRRs) and the extent to which self-identifications differ from researcher-defined categorizations that label as “interracial/interethnic” all partnerships that cross racial or Latino/Hispanic ethnic boundaries (RD-IRRs). Our findings show that a substantial percentage of students in relationships that cross racial/ethnic lines do not identify them as “interracial.” As a result, measures of SR-IRR and RD-IRR produce very different prevalence figures for cross-group relationships (SR-IRR = 18% of respondents; RDIRR = 24%). The disjuncture between self-reports and researcher-defined categorizations is particularly pronounced for Hispanics and, to a lesser degree, non-Hispanic Whites. The consistency with which relationships that include non-Hispanic Black individuals are labeled, however, stands out as unique: every instance of racial/ethnic boundary crossing that involved an individual from this group was labeled as “interracial.” Multivariate analyses identify significant predictors of SR-IRRs and RDIRRs and how race/ethnicity, nativity status, and university location interact to shape relationship engagement and the likelihood of self-identifying relationships as “interracial.” Our discussion concludes with implications and suggestions for future research.","PeriodicalId":44139,"journal":{"name":"Social Currents","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Currents","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23294965221118071","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We use data from a random sample of students collected at two large public universities, one in the Midwestern region and one in the Southeastern region of the U.S., to document the prevalence of self-reported “interracial” romantic relationships (SR-IRRs) and the extent to which self-identifications differ from researcher-defined categorizations that label as “interracial/interethnic” all partnerships that cross racial or Latino/Hispanic ethnic boundaries (RD-IRRs). Our findings show that a substantial percentage of students in relationships that cross racial/ethnic lines do not identify them as “interracial.” As a result, measures of SR-IRR and RD-IRR produce very different prevalence figures for cross-group relationships (SR-IRR = 18% of respondents; RDIRR = 24%). The disjuncture between self-reports and researcher-defined categorizations is particularly pronounced for Hispanics and, to a lesser degree, non-Hispanic Whites. The consistency with which relationships that include non-Hispanic Black individuals are labeled, however, stands out as unique: every instance of racial/ethnic boundary crossing that involved an individual from this group was labeled as “interracial.” Multivariate analyses identify significant predictors of SR-IRRs and RDIRRs and how race/ethnicity, nativity status, and university location interact to shape relationship engagement and the likelihood of self-identifying relationships as “interracial.” Our discussion concludes with implications and suggestions for future research.
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
大学生与“异族”关系:我们的措施如何重要
我们使用了两所大型公立大学随机收集的学生样本数据,一所在美国中西部地区,一所在美国东南部地区,以记录自我报告的“跨种族”浪漫关系(SR-IRRs)的流行程度,以及自我认同与研究人员定义的“跨种族/跨种族”所有跨越种族或拉丁裔/西班牙裔种族界限的伙伴关系(RD-IRRs)的不同程度。我们的研究结果表明,在跨种族/民族关系中的学生中,有相当一部分人并不认为他们是“跨种族”的。因此,SR-IRR和RD-IRR的测量结果在跨群体关系中产生了非常不同的患病率数字(SR-IRR = 18%的受访者;Rdirr = 24%)。自我报告和研究人员定义的分类之间的脱节在西班牙裔和非西班牙裔白人中尤为明显,程度较轻。然而,包括非西班牙裔黑人在内的关系的一致性被贴上了独特的标签:每一个涉及该群体个人的种族/民族边界跨越的例子都被贴上了“跨种族”的标签。多变量分析确定了SR-IRRs和RDIRRs的重要预测因子,以及种族/民族、出生状况和大学位置如何相互作用,形成关系参与和自我识别为“跨种族”关系的可能性。我们的讨论总结了对未来研究的启示和建议。
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
Social Currents
Social Currents SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Social Currents, the official journal of the Southern Sociological Society, is a broad-ranging social science journal that focuses on cutting-edge research from all methodological and theoretical orientations with implications for national and international sociological communities. The uniqueness of Social Currents lies in its format. The front end of every issue is devoted to short, theoretical, agenda-setting contributions and brief, empirical and policy-related pieces. The back end of every issue includes standard journal articles that cover topics within specific subfields of sociology, as well as across the social sciences more broadly.
期刊最新文献
Returning from Prison to a Changed City: How Does Gentrification Shape the Employment and Housing Opportunities of Returning Citizens? Fight the Power? How Black Adults’ Racial Capital Associates With Their Political Activities Rent Burden and Demographic Change Among Veterans: A Research Brief “A Future for White Children”: Examining Family Ideologies of White Extremist Groups at the Intersection of Race and Gender The Impacts of Landscape Loss on Industrial Communities: Solastalgia in Coal Regions
×
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