Churning races in Canada: Visible minority response change between 2006 and 2011.

Why do most people have stable responses to census race questions, while some do not? Using linked Canadian data, we examine personal, social, and economic characteristics that predict response stability as White or as one of six large visible minority groups, versus a change in response to/from White or to/from another visible minority group. Response change rates in Canada are generally comparable to those in the US, UK, and New Zealand. Likely reflecting the centuries-old hegemony of Whites in these countries, White is the most stable response group in Canada as well as the US, UK, and New Zealand. Multiple-race response groups are among the newest and least stable response groups. Social statuses and experiences (mixed ethnic heritage, immigration status, and exposure to own-group members) are generally more predictive of race response stability and change than economic (income level and change in income) or personal statuses (education, age). This highlights the socially-constructed nature of race group boundaries. Joining and leaving a group are often predicted by the same status/characteristic and in the same direction, hinting that the status/characteristic adds complexity to the race-related experiences of constituents.

Counting America's First Peoples.

The descendants of the First Peoples of the Americas (labeled "American Indians and Alaska Natives" in the federal definition) are a particularly challenging group to count in censuses. In this review, I describe some enumeration issues and then outline what we have learned about American Indians and Alaska Natives from efforts that rely on individuals' answers to census questions on race, ancestry, ethnicity, and tribe. Those who do not report a tribe and those who change their race response from one census to another complicate these efforts. Tribal self-enumeration and indigenous data sovereignty may improve data about some portions of the population. Census and survey enumeration efforts should continue to separate the concepts of race, ancestry, and tribe lest the various sub-populations become indistinguishable in the data, making the data much less useful and possibly misleading.

America's Churning Races: Race and Ethnicity Response Changes Between Census 2000 and the 2010 Census.

A person's racial or ethnic self-identification can change over time and across contexts, which is a component of population change not usually considered in studies that use race and ethnicity as variables. To facilitate incorporation of this aspect of population change, we show patterns and directions of individual-level race and Hispanic response change throughout the United States and among all federally recognized race/ethnic groups. We use internal U.S. Census Bureau data from the 2000 and 2010 censuses in which responses have been linked at the individual level (N = 162 million). Approximately 9.8 million people (6.1 %) in our data have a different race and/or Hispanic-origin response in 2010 than they did in 2000. Race response change was especially common among those reported as American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, Other Pacific Islander, in a multiple-race response group, or Hispanic. People reported as non-Hispanic white, black, or Asian in 2000 usually had the same response in 2010 (3 %, 6 %, and 9 % of responses changed, respectively). Hispanic/non-Hispanic ethnicity responses were also usually consistent (13 % and 1 %, respectively, changed). We found a variety of response change patterns, which we detail. In many race/Hispanic response groups, we see population churn in the form of large countervailing flows of response changes that are hidden in cross-sectional data. We find that response changes happen across ages, sexes, regions, and response modes, with interesting variation across racial/ethnic categories. Researchers should address the implications of race and Hispanic-origin response change when designing analyses and interpreting results.

Joining, Leaving, and Staying in the American Indian/Alaska Native Race Category Between 2000 and 2010.

Conceptualizing and operationalizing American Indian populations is challenging. Each census for decades has seen the American Indian population increase substantially more than expected, with indirect and qualitative evidence that this is due to changes in individuals' race responses. We apply uniquely suited (but not nationally representative) linked data from the 2000 and 2010 decennial censuses (N = 3.1 million) and the 2006-2010 American Community Survey (N = 188,131) to address three research questions. First, to what extent do American Indian people have different race responses across data sources? We find considerable race response change, especially among multiple-race and/or Hispanic American Indians. Second, how are people who change responses different from or similar to those who do not? We find three sets of American Indians: those who (1) had the same race and Hispanic responses in 2000 and 2010, (2) moved between single-race and multiple-race American Indian responses, and (3) added or dropped the American Indian response, thus joining or leaving the enumerated American Indian population. People in groups (1) and (2) were relatively likely to report a tribe, live in an American Indian area, report American Indian ancestry, and live in the West. Third, how are people who join a group different from or similar to those who leave it? Multivariate models show general similarity between joiners and leavers in group (1) and in group (2). Population turnover is hidden in cross-sectional comparisons; people joining each subpopulation of American Indians are similar in number and characteristics to those who leave it.

History, place, and racial self-representation in 21st century America.

How is a person's racial self-representation related to the race history of the place in which he or she lives? We use Census Bureau data about race and ancestry to address this research question for two groups of people with mixed racial heritage: those reporting white and American Indian heritages, or reporting black and American Indian heritages. Links between history, place, and self-representation can be seen in geographic clustering for each race/ancestry response combination. We use multinomial logistic regression models to predict individuals' race/ancestry responses (e.g., white with American Indian ancestry versus white and American Indian races) using measures of local race history and the area's contemporary racial composition. Multivariate results highlight the relationship between a person's identity claims and the history of the area, net of contemporary area composition. Future research should attend to the history of the place as a potential contributor to contemporary patterns.

More than one million new American Indians in 2000: who are they?

More than one million people reported their race as American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) in the 2000 U.S. census but did not do so in the 1990 census. We ask three questions. First, which subgroups had the greatest numerical growth? Second, which subgroups had the greatest proportional increase? And third, are the 2000 single-race AIANs and the 1990 AIANs the same set of people? We use full-count and high-density decennial census data; adjust for birth, death, and immigration; decompose on age, gender, Latino origin, education, and birth state; and compare the observed subgroup sizes in 2000 with the sizes expected based on 1990 counts. The largest numerical increases were among adolescent and middle-aged non-Latinos, non-Latino women, and adults with no college degree. Latinos, women, highly educated adults, and people born in Eastern states had the largest proportionate gains. The ability to report multiple races in 2000 and the new federal definition of "American Indian" may have especially affected these groups, although personal-identity changes are probably also involved. We find that thousands of new Latino AIANs reported only one race in 2000, but many 1990 AIANs reported multiple races in 2000. Thus, the 1990 AIANs and 2000 single-race AIANs are not always the same individuals.

A practical approach to using multiple-race response data: a bridging method for public-use microdata.

Revised federal policies require that multiple-race responses be allowed in all federal data collection efforts, but many researchers find the multitude of race categories and variables very difficult to use. Important comparability issues also interfere with using multiple-race data in analyses of multiple data sets and/or several points in time. These difficulties have, in effect, discouraged the use of the new data on race. We present a practical method for incorporating multiple-race respondents into analyses that use public-use microdata. Our method is a modification of the regression method developed by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), which uses multiple-race respondents' specific combination of races, as well as other individual-level and contextual characteristics, to predict the respondents 'preferred single race. In this paper we (1) apply the NCHS-generated regression coefficients to public-use microdata with limited geographic information; and (2) provide a downloadable computer program with which researchers can apply this practical and preferable method for including multiple-race respondents in a wide variety of analyses.