Classifying multiple ethnic identifications: Methodological effects on child, adolescent, and adult ethnic distributions
<b>Background</b>: The burgeoning global multi-ethnic population, in conjunction with the importance of accurate ethnic group counts for research and policy purposes, make classification of multiple ethnic responses a complex but important issue. There are numerous possible classificatio...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research
2021-03-01
|
| Series: | Demographic Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.demographic-research.org/articles/volume/44/21 |
| _version_ | 1797739495050706944 |
|---|---|
| author | Esther S. Yao Kane Meissel Pat Bullen Polly Atatoa Carr Terryann Clark Susan Morton |
| author_facet | Esther S. Yao Kane Meissel Pat Bullen Polly Atatoa Carr Terryann Clark Susan Morton |
| author_sort | Esther S. Yao |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <b>Background</b>: The burgeoning global multi-ethnic population, in conjunction with the importance of accurate ethnic group counts for research and policy purposes, make classification of multiple ethnic responses a complex but important issue. There are numerous possible classification approaches, differing in ethical implications and ease of statistical application. <b>Objective</b>: This study empirically examines the validity and consistency of three comparatively accessible ethnic classification methods (total response, administrative-prioritisation, and self-prioritisation) in increasingly ethnically diverse age cohorts (adults, adolescents, and children). <b>Methods</b>: We utilised secondary data from two large-scale studies in Aotearoa/New Zealand which asked children (N = 6,149; responded via mother proxy), adolescents (N = 8,464), and adults (N = 11,210) to select (1) all the ethnicities they identified with, and (2) their main ethnicity. The data were coded, then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests for proportional differences. <b>Results</b>: The majority of multi-ethnic participants were able to select a main ethnic group when required, but around 20Š could not or refused to do so, and there was over 60Š discrepancy between self-prioritised ethnicity and administrative-prioritised ethnicity. Differences by age group and ethnic combination were apparent. Comparison of overall ethnic group proportions outputted by the three classification methods revealed within-group variation, particularly where there were higher rates of multi-ethnic identification. <b>Contribution</b>: This study empirically demonstrates that researchers' choice of ethnic classification method can have a strong influence on ethnic group proportions. Researchers should therefore select the classification method most appropriate for their research question and clearly report the method employed. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T13:57:56Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-919b9f065c324822b56bc63876efeaff |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1435-9871 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T13:57:56Z |
| publishDate | 2021-03-01 |
| publisher | Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Demographic Research |
| spelling | doaj.art-919b9f065c324822b56bc63876efeaff2023-08-22T11:19:15ZengMax Planck Institute for Demographic ResearchDemographic Research1435-98712021-03-01442110.4054/DemRes.2021.44.215024Classifying multiple ethnic identifications: Methodological effects on child, adolescent, and adult ethnic distributionsEsther S. Yao0Kane Meissel1Pat Bullen2Polly Atatoa Carr3Terryann Clark4Susan Morton5University of AucklandUniversity of AucklandUniversity of AucklandUniversity of WaikatoUniversity of AucklandUniversity of Auckland<b>Background</b>: The burgeoning global multi-ethnic population, in conjunction with the importance of accurate ethnic group counts for research and policy purposes, make classification of multiple ethnic responses a complex but important issue. There are numerous possible classification approaches, differing in ethical implications and ease of statistical application. <b>Objective</b>: This study empirically examines the validity and consistency of three comparatively accessible ethnic classification methods (total response, administrative-prioritisation, and self-prioritisation) in increasingly ethnically diverse age cohorts (adults, adolescents, and children). <b>Methods</b>: We utilised secondary data from two large-scale studies in Aotearoa/New Zealand which asked children (N = 6,149; responded via mother proxy), adolescents (N = 8,464), and adults (N = 11,210) to select (1) all the ethnicities they identified with, and (2) their main ethnicity. The data were coded, then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests for proportional differences. <b>Results</b>: The majority of multi-ethnic participants were able to select a main ethnic group when required, but around 20Š could not or refused to do so, and there was over 60Š discrepancy between self-prioritised ethnicity and administrative-prioritised ethnicity. Differences by age group and ethnic combination were apparent. Comparison of overall ethnic group proportions outputted by the three classification methods revealed within-group variation, particularly where there were higher rates of multi-ethnic identification. <b>Contribution</b>: This study empirically demonstrates that researchers' choice of ethnic classification method can have a strong influence on ethnic group proportions. Researchers should therefore select the classification method most appropriate for their research question and clearly report the method employed.https://www.demographic-research.org/articles/volume/44/21ethnic classificationethnic measurementethnicitymethodsmultiple ethnicitiesrace/ethnicity |
| spellingShingle | Esther S. Yao Kane Meissel Pat Bullen Polly Atatoa Carr Terryann Clark Susan Morton Classifying multiple ethnic identifications: Methodological effects on child, adolescent, and adult ethnic distributions Demographic Research ethnic classification ethnic measurement ethnicity methods multiple ethnicities race/ethnicity |
| title | Classifying multiple ethnic identifications: Methodological effects on child, adolescent, and adult ethnic distributions |
| title_full | Classifying multiple ethnic identifications: Methodological effects on child, adolescent, and adult ethnic distributions |
| title_fullStr | Classifying multiple ethnic identifications: Methodological effects on child, adolescent, and adult ethnic distributions |
| title_full_unstemmed | Classifying multiple ethnic identifications: Methodological effects on child, adolescent, and adult ethnic distributions |
| title_short | Classifying multiple ethnic identifications: Methodological effects on child, adolescent, and adult ethnic distributions |
| title_sort | classifying multiple ethnic identifications methodological effects on child adolescent and adult ethnic distributions |
| topic | ethnic classification ethnic measurement ethnicity methods multiple ethnicities race/ethnicity |
| url | https://www.demographic-research.org/articles/volume/44/21 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT esthersyao classifyingmultipleethnicidentificationsmethodologicaleffectsonchildadolescentandadultethnicdistributions AT kanemeissel classifyingmultipleethnicidentificationsmethodologicaleffectsonchildadolescentandadultethnicdistributions AT patbullen classifyingmultipleethnicidentificationsmethodologicaleffectsonchildadolescentandadultethnicdistributions AT pollyatatoacarr classifyingmultipleethnicidentificationsmethodologicaleffectsonchildadolescentandadultethnicdistributions AT terryannclark classifyingmultipleethnicidentificationsmethodologicaleffectsonchildadolescentandadultethnicdistributions AT susanmorton classifyingmultipleethnicidentificationsmethodologicaleffectsonchildadolescentandadultethnicdistributions |