Between 2000 and 2010, 2.5 million Latina/o Americans switched their racial classification from “some other race” to “White” on the U.S. Census (Liebler et al. 2014). Upon learning of this aggregate shift, New York... [ view full abstract ]
Between 2000 and 2010, 2.5 million Latina/o Americans switched their racial classification from “some other race” to “White” on the U.S. Census (Liebler et al. 2014). Upon learning of this aggregate shift, New York Times columnist Nate Cohn argued that this provided “new evidence consistent with the theory that Hispanics may assimilate as white Americans.” However, instructions for the Census question about race changed between 2000 and 2010, and could have accounted for some of the shift. In order to analyze these relationships more closely, we examine Latina/o racial classification shifts in contexts where the question wording remains the same.
Moreover, though Latina/o racial classification choices have garnered significant media and scholarly attention as of late, we note that racial identification can vary both in the content of one’s stated choice and the degree to which one meaningfully believes in that choice. While journalists and others may be reaching conclusions about the viability of a Latina/o Whitening hypothesis and other assimilation theories on the basis of Latina/o racial identification shifts alone, a more rigorous analysis would examine if said shifts coincide with other changes predicted by those theories. In this study, we examine potential relationships between socioeconomic changes, and racial identification changes. Specifically, we analyze whether or not a racial identification shift from “Other” to “White” coincides with upward socioeconomic mobility for Latina/os, or whether or not a shift from “White” to “Other” coincides with downward socioeconomic mobility, as assimilation theories might suggest. Moreover, in accordance with classical straight-line assimilation theory (Gordon 1964), we would expect that identification shifts to “White,” would coincide with more positive feelings of social closeness with Whites. Similarly, we would expect that if Whitening were to occur, that Latina/os who switch their racial identification to White would be more likely than others to shed their ethnic identity as Hispanic or Latina/o. To date, these are unanswered questions, but they are important questions to consider given recent media and scholarly debates about the plausibility of Latina/o Whitening.
Using the General Social Surveys’ paneled longitudinal design, we examine these relationships in detail. Preliminary analyses suggest that shifts in Latina/o racial classification over time are not closely associated with changes in socioeconomic status, feelings of closeness towards Whites, or the shedding of an ethnic identity, as traditional assimilation theories would predict. Rather, we find that Latina/os move between racial categories with regularity, and much more than members of other racial and ethnic groups. Of all Latina/os who changed their racial identification from 2010 to 2012, more than half were changing back to the race they listed on the 2008 survey. We find that the most plausible explanation for these shifts is not underscored by assimilation theories or “Latina/o Whitening,” but rather, that there is a mismatch between what respondents want to say, and their available survey options. We argue that when respondents do not meaningfully believe in the available racial options, they will switch back and forth in unpatterned ways, and with a high degree of regularity.
