Classifying multiple ethnic identifications: Methodological effects on child, adolescent, and adult ethnic distributions

Esther S. Yao, Kane Meissel, Polly Atatoa Carr, Pat Bullen, Terryann C. Clark and Susan Morton
Additional contact information
Esther S. Yao: University of Auckland
Kane Meissel: University of Auckland
Polly Atatoa Carr: University of Waikato
Pat Bullen: University of Auckland
Terryann C. Clark: University of Auckland
Susan Morton: University of Auckland

Demographic Research, 2021, vol. 44, issue 21, 481-512

Abstract: Background: 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. Objective: 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). Methods: 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. Results: The majority of multi-ethnic participants were able to select a main ethnic group when required, but around 20% could not or refused to do so, and there was over 60% 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. Contribution: 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.

Keywords: ethnicity; race/ethnicity; methods; multiple ethnicities; ethnic classification; ethnic measurement (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: J1 Z0 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol44/21/44-21.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:dem:demres:v:44:y:2021:i:21

DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2021.44.21

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Demographic Research from Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Editorial Office ().