Jump to Content Jump to Main Navigation

Sociology Discrimination
by
Issa Kohler-Hausmann

Introduction

Discrimination is an action or practice that excludes, disadvantages, or merely differentiates between individuals or groups of individuals on the basis of some ascribed or perceived trait, although the definition itself is subject to substantial debate. The sociological study of discrimination could be divided into two types of inquiries: discrimination as a social phenomenon to be explained and discrimination as an explanation for other observed social phenomenon. Discrimination has been addressed by a wide range of disciplines as an explanatory object—including sociology, anthropology, political science, psychology, economics, and law—all seeking to shed light on why discrimination occurs and what conditions give rise to and reproduce its practice. What distinguishes a sociological approach to discrimination as an explanatory object from that in other disciplines, namely psychology or economics, is its insistence on looking at the macro level of analysis, explaining the phenomenon as a result of social processes not necessarily reducible to individual-level preferences or cognitive processes. Sociologists have also addressed discrimination as an explanation for an observed phenomenon of interest, namely social stratification: the unequal distribution of status, material benefits, and political rights.

Definitions

Defining discrimination is a difficult task. Selecting among the competing definitions of discrimination has not only theoretical implications, but also methodological implications, because the definition determines the scope of empirical inquiry and appropriate methods for identification and study of the phenomenon. Because discrimination is typically considered something antithetical to norms of fair and equal treatment in a democratic market society, there are also significant normative implications to defining discrimination. Most definitions of discrimination cluster around two related yet distinguishable means of defining the phenomenon: intentional discrimination and disparate impact. Each of these two broad classes of definitions admits of a number of competing subdefinitions. Pager and Shepherd 2008 and Blank, et al. 2004 offer discussions of competing definitions of discrimination and maintain that most definitions fall in one of these two camps. Discrimination is often distinguished from other related phenomena such as racism, sexism, prejudice, or stereotypes in that discrimination refers to a set of behaviors, whereas the other concepts refer to ideology, attitudes, or beliefs that might, or might not, translate into discriminatory actions. Allport 1954 is a classic and seminal conceptual treatment of discrimination, explored in relation to cognitive and attitudinal dispositions such as categorization, stereotypes, and prejudice. Given the wide range of plausible definitions of discrimination, a researcher must first identify and justify his or her choice of a definition of discrimination before embarking on an explanatory or empirical agenda.

  • Allport, Gordon W. 1954. The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This is a seminal text in sociology and the social psychology of discrimination, in which the author proposes that individuals with negative attitudes toward what he terms “out-groups” behaviorally express these attitudes in one of five scaled manners: antilocution, avoidance, discrimination, physical attack, or extermination.

    Find this resource:

  • Blank, Rebecca M., Marilyn Dabady, and Constance F. Citro. 2004. Defining discrimination. In Measuring racial discrimination. Edited by Rebecca M. Blank, Marilyn Dabady, and Constance F. Citro, 55–70. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    Chapter 3 has a brief and accessible discussion of the various definitions of racial discrimination, which is applicable to discrimination against other types of groups. This chapter also motivates the discussion on racial discrimination by presenting data on differential outcomes between white and black Americans in five different domains: education, labor market, the criminal justice system, the housing market, mortgage lending, and health care.

    Find this resource:

  • Pager, Devah, and Hana Shepherd. 2008. The sociology of discrimination: Racial discrimination in employment, housing, credit, and consumer markets. Annual Review of Sociology 34:181–209.

    DOI: 10.1146/annurev.soc.33.040406.131740Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    An overview of recent empirical work on racial discrimination in labor markets, housing, and credit markets. The paper starts with a brief discussion of the concept of discrimination and methods for detecting and measuring its presence.

    Find this resource:

Intentional Discrimination

Intentional discrimination involves some deliberate act, omission, policy, or practice that is undertaken by an actor or organization by which members of a specific target group are purposefully treated differently than similarly situated members of the nontarget group. In most instances, the differential treatment is disadvantaging to members of the target group. Under this broad definition of discrimination, social scientists have conceptualized various precise definitions that fit under these criteria, such as invidious discrimination—the practice of disadvantaging members of a certain group because of animus or prejudice against that group—or statistical discrimination––the practice of using an ascriptive trait, such as race or ethnicity, as a proxy for characteristics relevant to a decision (such as hiring). Legal scholars have produced a large body of scholarship defining invidious discrimination, distinguishing it from other forms of discrimination and proposing various theories that ground antidiscrimination laws in overarching normative principles. For example, Koppelman 1996 explores various political and philosophical theories that support the state’s role in prohibiting invidious discrimination, and details a very sociological understanding of the connection between antidiscrimination laws and both the cultural and material status of groups antidiscrimination laws seek to protect. Invidious discrimination need not be a reductionist concept; it is susceptible to a quite sociological construction. The seminal paper Blumer 1958 argues that, in order to understand the prejudice motivating intentional discriminatory conduct, we must look to the collective social processes by which groups come to define the status and standing of other groups, instead of individual experiences or feelings. Bonilla-Silva 2010 argues that “colorblind racism” underlies many forms of contemporary intentional discrimination, disguising belief structures and institutional practices that systematically disadvantage racial and ethnic minorities as neutral or natural.

  • Blumer, Herbert. 1958. Race prejudice as a sense of group position. Pacific Sociological Review 1.1: 3–7.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    In this short seminal article, Blumer argues that prejudice is not an individual-level subjective phenomenon born of personal experience or affect, but rather an emergent social phenomenon born of intergroup dynamics and competition.

    Find this resource:

  • Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo. 2010. Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States. 3d ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This book contains the author’s conceptual and theoretical exploration of what he terms “color-blind racism” and qualitative interview data documenting this form of racial ideology. The author argues that this new racial ideology has replaced overt racist animus as the underlying belief structure motivating discrimination.

    Find this resource:

  • Koppelman, Andrew. 1996. Antidiscrimination law and social equality. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    Although this text focuses primarily on legal and political philosophy, it engages and relies upon a very sociological understanding of the meaning and operation of discrimination to reproduce stigmatized cultural meanings and material stratification between groups traditionally the object of discrimination in the United States.

    Find this resource:

Disparate Impact

Disparate impact discrimination involves some facially neutral practice (i.e., does not classify on the basis of race), procedure, or policy undertaken by an actor or organization that, not necessarily with a conscious purpose of injuring members of the target group, operates to disproportionately disadvantage the target group. There are various subdefinitions that fall under a disparate impact conception of discrimination. One could limit discrimination to those forms of conduct that create disparate impact only where the decision factor is insufficiently justified for a rational end (see Blank, et al. 2004, chapter 3). Another definition could limit discrimination to those acts where the disparate impact is a direct and foreseeable outcome of using the facial neutral factor in the decision. The most expansive definition of discrimination would include the use of any factor that merely correlates with the ascriptive trait at issue, even if rationally related to the end of the process in question. Schiller 2004 (chapter 10) presents a useful discussion of competing definitions of disparate impact discrimination, as does Blank, et al. 2004 (chapter 3). One criticism of this conception of discrimination, as noted by Reskin 2003, is that it posits the evidence of discrimination as the very definition of the phenomenon. The United States Supreme Court held in Griggs v. Duke Power 1971 that disparate impact was a form of discrimination prohibited by federal employment antidiscrimination law. In that landmark case, the Court held that an employment test producing disproportionate exclusion of black applicants violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, where the employer could not show the test had a clear relation to job performance, even if the test was facially neutral and there was no showing of invidious intent. Legal scholars have long debated the normative warrants of antidiscrimination law and principles, producing a prodigious body of scholarship on the topic. The seminal article Fiss 1976 argues that legal antidiscrimination principles should be guided by a concern with eliminating practices and institutions that perpetuate the subordination of traditionally disadvantaged groups, as opposed to a concern with eradicating classification by ascriptive traits per se. Balkin and Siegel 2002 offers a comprehensive and accessible overview of the legal, historical, and analytical debates about antidiscrimination law, specifically the relative role of group anti-subordination principles versus anti-classification principles.

  • Balkin, Jack M., and Reva B. Siegel. 2002. The American civil rights tradition: Anticlassification or antisubordination?. In Issues in legal scholarship, the origins and fate of antisubordination theory: A symposium on Owen Fiss’s “Groups and the equal protection clause.” Vol. 2. Edited by Reva B. Siegel. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Electronic Press.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This article offers an accessible history of judicial approaches to antidiscrimination law in the United States and an analytical exploration of the various normative approaches to antidiscrimination law.

    Find this resource:

  • Blank, Rebecca M., Marilyn Dabady, and Constance F. Citro. 2004. Defining discrimination. In Measuring racial discrimination. Edited by Rebecca M. Blank, Marilyn Dabady, and Constance F. Citro, 55–70. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    Chapter 3 of this comprehensive resource addressing the theoretical and empirical study of racial discrimination addresses definitions of discrimination, including disparate impact.

    Find this resource:

  • Fiss, Owen M. 1976. Groups and the equal protection clause. Philosophy and Public Affairs 5.2: 107–177.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    Discusses, in the context of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, two alternative normative jurisprudential frameworks: what has come to be known as anticlassification (classification on the basis of race, sex, or other ascriptive trait per se) and what has come to be known as the antisubordination principle (interrupting practices that subordinate traditionally marginalized groups).

    Find this resource:

  • Griggs v. Duke Power. (1971) 401 U.S. 424.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    Landmark United States Supreme Court case holding Title VII’s prohibition on employment discrimination because of race (among other characteristics) prohibits employment practices that have an adverse disparate impact on protected groups, unless the employer can demonstrate a compelling business necessity for the practice.

    Find this resource:

    • Reskin, Barbara F. 2003. Including mechanisms in our models of ascriptive inequality: 2002 presidential address. American Sociological Review 68.1: 1–21.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A very useful broad discussion of the state of sociological research on group inequality. Reskin argues that the majority of social science research addressing the unequal distribution of social and economic rights between ascriptive groups has centered around “why” questions—identifying the motives of actors in key decision contexts—to the neglect of “how” questions—identifying the mechanisms that (re)produce inequality along important dimensions.

      Find this resource:

    • Schiller, Bradley R. 2004. The economics of poverty and discrimination, 9th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      An accessible broad treatment of various methodological, empirical, and policy issues in the study of poverty, inequality, and discrimination.

      Find this resource:

    Unconscious Discrimination

    Unconscious discrimination refers to acts or omissions that effectively discriminate against members of a disadvantaged social group, motivated not by consciously endorsed subjective views about the inferiority or undesirability of members of the group, but rather by implicit negative associations, stereotypes, or biases held somewhere below the access of the conscious mind. This theory holds that implicit prejudicial attitudes or negative associations with out-groups form from cultural representations, personal experiences or socialization, and that these implicit attitudes give rise to discriminatory conduct, even when individuals consciously disavow racism, sexism, or other forms of prejudice. Fazio and Olson 2003 reviews the various methods and types of experiments that social psychologists have employed to asses implicit or unconscious bias. Quillian 2006 and Quillian 2008 offer very helpful summaries of the conceptual and methodological issues involved in detecting implicit prejudice and its operation in the form of behaviors and judgments. Tetlock and Mitchell 2008 offers a series of critiques of the concept of unconscious prejudice and the common experimental methods employed to detect it. Blanton and Jaccard 2008 explores important measurement validity issues with the implicit association test and interrogate the inferences warranted by evidence of such methods. Some scholarly works––such as Quillian 2006, Pager and Shephard 2008 (cited under Race), and Blanton and Jaccard 2008—have discussed unconscious prejudice as an explanatory candidate for the dwindling of explicit racist or sexist expressions in traditional survey instruments, yet the persistence of race and sex gaps in important social outcomes and extensive reports of discriminatory encounters by members of disadvantaged groups. Some legal scholars (e.g., Kang and Banaji 2006) argue psychological evidence of pervasive unconscious racial prejudice underscores the necessity of affirmative action programs to “de-bias” decision makers in key social and economic arenas.

    • Blanton, Hart, and James Jaccard. 2008. Unconscious racism: A concept in pursuit of a measure. Annual Review of Sociology 34:277–297.

      DOI: 10.1146/annurev.soc.33.040406.131632Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A review essay of the quickly expanding literature on implicit prejudice. The authors interrogate the conceptual issues and measurement procedures used in this literature and ask what kinds of theoretical inferences can be properly drawn from current studies.

      Find this resource:

    • Fazio, Russell H., and Michael A. Olson. 2003. Implicit measures in social cognition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology 54:297–327.

      DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145225Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      An overview of the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological issues involved in the social-psychological measurement of implicit or unconscious bias. The authors interrogate whether the attitudes or cognition measured in the most prevalent tests are accurately conceptualized as “implicit,” as opposed to the measurement itself being an implicit assessment of what could possibly be conscious attitudes subject to social desirability self-reporting issues.

      Find this resource:

    • Kang, Jerry, and Mahzarin R. Banaji. 2006. Fair measures: A behavioral realist revision of “affirmative action.” California Law Review 94:1063–1118.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      The authors review literature on implicit social cognition, arguing its findings are relevant to providing new grounds to support affirmative action policies. The authors argue that implicit prejudice may be responsible for mismeasurement of out-group candidates’ merits, and affirmative action policies can counter the implicit biases present in many key decision points determinative of social and economic benefits.

      Find this resource:

    • Quillian, Lincoln. 2006. New approaches to understanding racial prejudice and discrimination. Annual Review of Sociology 32:299–328.

      DOI: 10.1146/annurev.soc.32.061604.123132Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This is a broad review essay with many helpful overviews of literature in various areas relating to the study of prejudice and discrimination. There are several sections on implicit racial prejudice, its relation to behaviors and judgments, and the content of stereotypes (both implicit and explicit) (see pp. 314–322).

      Find this resource:

    • Quillian, Lincoln. 2008. Does unconscious racism exist? Social Psychology Quarterly 71.1: 6–11.

      DOI: 10.1177/019027250807100103Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Brief and accessible article defining the concept of implicit prejudice, the psychological laboratory experiments used to detect its presence, and the various scholarly critiques of the concept and methodology for measuring it. The article briefly discusses some empirical evidence that counters various criticisms of the significance of implicit bias.

      Find this resource:

    • Tetlock, Philip, and Gregory Mitchell. 2008. Calibrating prejudice in milliseconds. Social Psychology Quarterly 71.1: 12–16.

      DOI: 10.1177/019027250807100104Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      The authors challenge the most common method employed to measure implicit bias, the implicit association test (IAT), which compares reaction times in association tasks matching minority and majority groups to negative or positive concepts. They question if the test really gets at implicitly held negative associations with minorities, as opposed to mere familiarity with socially prevalent stereotypes.

      Find this resource:

    Data Sources

    A wide range of methodologies has been employed to study the incidence, prevalence, and effects of discrimination, and each methodology calls for a different sort of data. Two of the most common classes of data in the study of discrimination are data on prejudicial, biased, or invidious attitudes toward minority groups; and data on a specific outcome of interest that could vary by membership in a particular group. Whether or not data of either type—attitudes or disparate outcomes—can provide strong evidence of the existence of discrimination may depend on inferential assumptions that are often not empirically verifiable in the data. The General Social Survey (GSS) offers both cross-section and panel data on standard demographic, behavioral, and attitudinal issues in the United States. The GSS has included questions about individuals’ beliefs about the prevalence of various types of discrimination, attitudes about various groups, and other questions that could be used to study both prejudicial attitudes and perceptions of discrimination. The World Values Survey is a source for international comparative data on values and beliefs; it contains some questions that could be used to study discriminatory or prejudicial attitudes and the role of government in addressing discrimination. The Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research(ICPSR) hosts a range of datasets that explore perceptions of discrimination, attitudes about discrimination, and general attitudes about race, sex, age, or other possible bases of discrimination. The ICPSR also hosts various datasets with information about a wide range of different types of individual-level outcomes (e.g., employment, crime, court processing) and individual demographic traits that could be used to identify racial or sex disparities. The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life offers a wealth of resources to researchers of religion in the United States and internationally, including information on legal issues of religious freedom and discrimination. Other sources of data on discrimination are discussed in the Methodology section.

    Methodology

    Methodological and theoretical issues are deeply intertwined in the study of discrimination. For example, a very large literature documents gaps between gender, race, or ethnic groups in a variety of important outcomes like income or employment (see Unexplained Differentials). Under a disparate outcomes definition of discrimination these gaps are evidence of discrimination, even if they are due to differences in human capital or experience, if we believe the differences in premarket factors are caused by unequal opportunities. These gaps are not evidence of discrimination under an intentional invidious definition of discrimination unless the researcher can show that the differentials are not caused by some factor rationally relevant to the outcome, but that correlate with the trait at issue (see Definitions). Other common methodologies for detecting discrimination include measuring perceptions and reports of individuals subject to discriminatory acts, attitudinal studies documenting prejudicial belief systems that tend to lead to discriminatory conduct, self-reports of discriminatory conduct, and audit studies, in which pairs matched along all relevant dimensions except one trait are sent to test for different treatments or outcomes. The key is to note that all methods involve strengths and drawbacks; selecting a method to study discrimination should be driven by a clearly specified research question and theoretical framework.

    Perceptions and Reports

    One way of getting at the prevalence and nature of discrimination is by asking individuals about their experiences with discrimination using survey methods or qualitative interviews. Schuman, et al. 1997 presents a range of quantitative data from surveys about the causes of racial inequality, including discrimination. They also present data on experiences with social exclusion, segregation and fair treatment in various domains. The authors maintain a website with more up-to-date survey data on experiences and perceptions of discrimination in a host of settings, including retail stores, restaurants, entertainment venues, workplaces, and police encounters. Sigelman and Welch 1991 explores a host of topics relating to racial inequality and opportunity, including a wide variety of survey and poll data on perceptions of and experiences with discrimination. The Gallup Social Audit on Black/White Relations in the US, taken in 1997 and 2001, includes questions on personal experiences with discrimination and racial profiling (see Ludwig 2001). Feagin and Sikes 1994 offers a more qualitative approach, exploring through in-depth interviews middle-class African Americans’ experiences of discrimination in various settings and pursuits. Bobo and Suh 2000 provides both quantitative survey data and qualitative descriptions of discriminatory encounters from a sample of white, African American, Asian American, and Latino respondents. Another source of data on incidents of discrimination comes from legal cases filed under the nation’s federal antidiscrimination statute, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Nielsen and Nelson 2005 uses data on workplace discrimination law suits filed with the Equal Employment and Opportunity Commission or the federal courts to track changes in formal initiation and settlement of employment discrimination claims. Perceptions of discrimination have also been used to explain certain outcomes, such as disparate health outcomes. Krieger 2000 discusses a variety of studies relating self-reports of discrimination to negative mental and physical health outcomes. Krieger, et al. 2005 offers a rigorous investigation of self-reported discrimination survey instruments used in various health studies.

    • Bobo, Lawrence D., and Susan A. Suh. 2000. Surveying racial discrimination: Analyses from a multiethnic labor market. In Prismatic metropolis: Inequality in Los Angeles. Edited by Lawrence D. Bobo, Melvin L. Oliver, James H. Johnson Jr., and Abel Valenzuela Jr., 523–560. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Reports quantitative and qualitative data from the Los Angeles Study of Urban Inequality, specifically the components of the survey on experiences of discrimination from a medium-sized sample of white, Asian, Latino, and black adults in Los Angeles. The authors also present other demographic and background information on respondents and the results from an open-ended descriptive question about the nature of the discriminatory encounter.

      Find this resource:

    • Feagin, Joe R., and Melvin P. Sikes. 1994. Living with racism: The black middle-class experience. Boston: Beacon.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This book is a qualitative exploration of experiences with discrimination and prejudice in various domains, including public accommodations, education, workplaces, businesses, and neighborhoods, gathered from interviews with more than two hundred middle-class African Americans.

      Find this resource:

    • Ludwig, Jack. 2001. Gallup social audit on black/white relations in the U.S.. Gallup.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      The poll included questions about race relations, perceptions of discrimination, and experiences with access to various opportunities and amenities, broken down by race of respondent.

      Find this resource:

    • Krieger, Nancy. 2000. Discrimination and health. In Social epidemiology. Edited by Lisa F. Berkman and Ichirō Kawachi, 36–75. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This chapter explores the literature on the health effects of discrimination, including a number of studies that have used self-reports of discrimination as predictors of negative mental and physical health outcomes. The author offers a helpful methodological and conceptual discussion of measuring discrimination and causally relating it to health outcomes.

      Find this resource:

    • Krieger, Nancy, Kevin Smith, Deepa Naishadham, Cathy Hartman, and Elizabeth M. Barbeau. 2005. Experiences of discrimination: Validity and reliability of a self-report measure for population health research on racism and health. Social Science & Medicine 61.7: 1576–1596.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      The authors investigate the validity and reliability of particular measures of self-reported discrimination used in various health studies on a sample of black, white, and Latino workers in the Boston area. Although some aspects of the paper require familiarity with statistics to comprehend, the paper presents a very accessible discussion of measurement validity and interesting data on discriminatory experiences accessible to most students.

      Find this resource:

    • Nielsen, Laura Beth, and Robert L. Nelson. 2005. Scaling the pyramid: A sociolegal model of employment discrimination litigation. In Handbook of employment discrimination research: Rights and realities. Edited by Laura Beth Nielsen and Robert L. Nelson, 3–34. New York: Springer.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This article provides a very helpful overview of the legal framework of antidiscrimination law accessible to non-lawyers. The authors document a dramatic upsurge in employment discrimination filings with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and with federal courts, but, relying on the “litigation pyramid,” argue that the underlying instances of discrimination are still quite large in comparison to formal legal complaints filed.

      Find this resource:

    • Schuman, Howard, Charlotte Steeh, Lawrence Bobo, and Maria Krysan. 1997. Racial attitudes in America: Trends and interpretations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This book contains a wealth of data on the racial attitudes and experiences of both white and black Americans; chapter 5 presents data on black perceptions of discrimination generally. Many of the questions touch on different but related topics, such as the cause of racial inequality and appropriate government response to inequality or discrimination. The authors maintain a website with more up-to-date data on a wide array of topics.

      Find this resource:

    • Sigelman, Lee, and Susan Welch. 1991. Black Americans’ views of racial inequality: The dream deferred. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This book focuses on the attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, and expression of experiences of black Americans on the topics of racial inequality, discrimination, and social and economic opportunities. Although most of the data in this book are now more than twenty years old, it is one of the few book-length treatments on the subject.

      Find this resource:

    Attitudinal Studies

    Another method used to study the incidence of discrimination is directly asking individuals, especially individuals in positions of power with respect to the disbursement of valued social resources or opportunities, about their attitudes and perceptions of specific groups. Schuman, et al. 1997 provide a rich resource of data over an extended time period on racial attitudes of both black and white Americans. Although the data are informative on their own terms, whether they can provide evidence for discrimination in action requires some inferential leap from expressed attitudes to actions. There is a substantial literature in social psychology that tries to assess this relationship between attitudes and actions. See Talaska, et al. 2008 for a meta-analysis of fifty-seven studies addressing the topic of racial/ethnic attitudes, emotions, or beliefs and their effect on discriminatory action. Feagin and O’Brien 2003 reports rich qualitative data from a medium-sized sample of white men on a host of racial issues, including their perceptions of, encounters with, and engagement in discriminatory conduct. Devine and Elliot 1995 argues that the prevalence of negative racial stereotypes of blacks—the culturally salient picture of the group’s attributes—is not fading among whites, but personal beliefs and endorsement of this stereotype has declined since the Civil Rights movement. Bobo 2001 documents that there has been a steady and pronounced trend in the attitudes of white Americans toward support for the principles of formal racial equality of opportunity and citizenship rights and endorsement of the ideal of racial integration. In some senses, the massive increase in expressed endorsement of racial equality presents something of a research puzzle to social scientists: Has this change in attitudes translated in to an increase in opportunities and, if so, why has it not translated into equalized outcomes between groups? Pager and Quillian 2005 takes this puzzle as a starting point, asking whether expressed attitudes or beliefs are adequate proxies for discriminatory actions. This study juxtaposes two methodologies—experimental audit and survey method—to assess the degree of conformity between expressed willingness to hire black employees and the rate of callbacks actually given in an audit study with matched black and white applicants. The study looks at the relationship between expressed attitudes and actual behavior along two dimensions: race and criminal record.

    • Bobo, Lawrence D. 2001. Racial attitudes and relations at the close of the twentieth century. In America becoming: Racial trends and their consequences. Vol. 1. Edited by Neil J. Smelser, William Julius Wilson, and Faith Mitchell, 264–301. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      In this chapter Bobo explores a wide range of survey data on racial attitudes and trends in such attitudes, including data on beliefs in the prevalence of discrimination and the causes of racial inequality. The author also offers an interesting theoretical discussion of trends and patterns of racial attitudes.

      Find this resource:

    • Devine, Patricia, and Andrew Elliot. 1995. Are racial stereotypes really fading? The Princeton trilogy revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 21.11: 1139–1150.

      DOI: 10.1177/01461672952111002Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A short article revisiting the methodological merits of a series classic psychological studies using an adjective checklist to assess the strength of and trends in negative stereotypes about blacks. The authors argue the classic methodology conflates awareness of the content of the stereotype with personal belief in the content of the stereotype.

      Find this resource:

    • Feagin, Joe R., and Eileen O’Brien. 2003. White men on race: Power, privilege, and the shaping of cultural consciousness. Boston: Beacon.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Analysis of extensive qualitative interviews from a sample of one hundred upper-middle-class and upper-class white men on topics relating to race relations, inequality, social familiarity, and public policy. Chapter 6 explores the respondents’ encounters with or perpetration of discriminatory conduct, in addition to their understandings of the nature and prevalence of discrimination and attitudes toward the practice.

      Find this resource:

    • Pager, Devah, and Lincoln Quillian. 2005. Walking the talk? What employers say versus what they do. American Sociological Review 70.3: 355–380.

      DOI: 10.1177/000312240507000301Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Discusses the limits of attitudinal survey methods to measure discriminatory behavior, such as the concern with social desirability bias (subject’s desire to express socially normative answer even if not his or her true opinion) and documenting only conscious, deliberated opinions in a research context.

      Find this resource:

    • Schuman, Howard, Charlotte Steeh, Lawrence Bobo, and Maria Krysan. 1997. Racial attitudes in America: Trends and interpretations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Contains extensive survey data on attitudes toward and evaluations of various issues about race, race relations, public policy relating to racial inequality, and perceptions of discrimination. This book also provides an interesting discussion of the methodological and conceptual issues involved in studying racial attitudes.

      Find this resource:

    • Talaska, Cara A., Susan T. Fiske, and Shelly Chaiken. 2008. Legitimating racial discrimination: Emotions, not beliefs, best predict discrimination in a meta-analysis. Social Justice Research 21.3: 263–296.

      DOI: 10.1007/s11211-008-0071-2Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      The article presents a helpful exploration of key concepts such as emotional prejudice, evaluations, stereotyping, cognitive belief, and behavior that is helpful to the beginning student of social psychology of discrimination, although the technical details of the meta-analysis are dense.

      Find this resource:

    Self-Reports of Discriminatory Conduct

    Another method for assessing the presence and scope of discrimination is to ask individuals in positions of authority about important decisions concerning the determinants of their choices. Some studies ask specifically about discriminatory behaviors in certain areas, such as employment. The strength of this method is that, instead of inferring discrimination from, say, an observed unexplained gap in outcomes between groups, it allows researchers to explore and document directly the ground-level processes that produce disparate outcomes. The drawback is that, given the social norms and legal rules against discrimination, some subjects might be less than forthcoming about their actual practices. However, several researchers have documented extensive candid discussions of discriminatory behavior or preferences, most often in the context of labor markets. Kirschenman and Neckerman 1991 presents data from in-depth interviews with employers in Cook County, Illinois discussing hiring and recruitment practices, in addition to attitudes and beliefs about the local labor force and minority workers in particular. Holzer 1996 studies employer recruitment, screening, and hiring practices in four major cities. The method used in this study did not involve asking employers directly about their preferences or beliefs about minority workers, but rather asked employers to talk extensively about their recruitment procedures, job requirements, screening processes, and applicant pool, and then to describe the most recent job opening and who was hired for that position. One chapter of the classic book Wilson 1996 deals specifically with the perceptions and hiring practices of Chicago-area employers regarding black inner-city workers. The employers interviewed for this study discussed both how they perceive black inner-city workers and how they have acted in past hiring and interview situations. Moss and Tilly 2001 presents data from three qualitative employer surveys addressing, among other things, attitudes toward and hiring practices of minority workers.

    • Holzer, Harry J. 1996. What employers want: Job prospects for less-educated workers. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This book draws on data gathered from the Multi-City Study of Urban Inequality, a large four-city (Atlanta, Boston, Detroit, and Los Angeles) survey of individuals and employers regarding racial attitudes, employment, and housing choices. The employer survey addressed the individual responsible for hiring and asked her/him to discuss recruitment and hiring practices and to specify the most recent hire as a way to avoid direct discussion of the topic of discrimination and minimize social desirability bias.

      Find this resource:

    • Kirschenman, Joleen, and Kathryn M. Neckerman. 1991. “‘We’d love to hire them, but . . .’: The meaning of race for employers.” In The urban underclass. Edited by Christopher Jencks and Paul E. Peterson, 203–234. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      An extensive interview-based study of Chicago-area employers on the topics of recruitment and hiring practices and perceptions of racial and ethnic minority workers, inner-city workers, and class background of workers. Despite the date of this study, its method and findings still provide important insights into how attitudes and beliefs about racial and ethnic minorities affect the real-life decisions of employers.

      Find this resource:

    • Moss, Philip, and Chris Tilly, eds. 2001. Stories employers tell: Race, skill, and hiring in America. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This book draws on an extensive range of qualitative data produced by face-to-face interviews and phone surveys of employers in four major cities—Atlanta, Detroit, Boston, and Los Angeles—to explore how employers make business location and hiring decisions, how race or ethnicity play into these decisions, and how employers view the skills of various demographics of workers.

      Find this resource:

    • Wilson, William J. 1996. When work disappears: The world of the new urban poor. New York: Knopf.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A classic book on the roots of and cycle of black inner-city disadvantage. Chapter 5 presents qualitative data from a relatively large sample of Chicago-area employers speaking about their perceptions of and practices with hiring black inner-city workers.

      Find this resource:

    Audit Studies

    An audit study is a quasi-experimental method, which means it involves generating new data under circumstances controlled (as much as possible) by the researchers in a real-life field context. Audit studies typically involve selecting a pair of auditors that are as similar as possible on every criterion theoretically relevant to the outcome of interest, but varied along the one dimension that the researcher hypothesizes is a basis for discrimination. A key advantage of the audit methodology is that it can control directly, through experimental design, what plagues observational studies—those confounding variables that correlate with the main explanatory variable of interest. Audit studies still involve methodological challenges and conceptual choices––namely, which characteristics to hold constant, which to vary, and how to conceive of and train similarly paired auditors. Heckman 1998 discusses some limits and critiques of audit methodology in the context of labor market studies. He argues that matching pairs on observable (to audit study designers) traits signaling productivity, such as education and experience, does not ensure that pairs are matched on unobservable (to audit study designers) characteristics relevant to employers’ perceptions of productivity. Pager 2007b overviews the audit methodology, specifically in the context of detecting racial discrimination in employment callbacks and job offers, and summarizes the findings of a number of audit studies on the topic. Pager also responds to the critiques of the audit methodology presented in Heckman 1998. The audit method has been used to detect discrimination in various settings. Yinger 1995 uses audit methodology to detect racial discrimination in the housing market. Ayres 1995 detects racial and sex discrimination in the pricing offers at new car dealerships with the audit method. Pager 2007a uses audit methods to detect both race and criminal record discrimination in the labor market.

    • Ayres, Ian. 1995. Further evidence of discrimination in new car negotiations and estimates of its cause. Michigan Law Review 94:109–147.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This is a relatively large-scale in-person audit of race and gender discrimination in car dealership negotiations, involving thirty-eight testers bargaining for four hundred cars at over two hundred dealerships in the Chicago area. The author found that black men, and to a slightly lesser extent black women, were offered significantly higher opening prices and final price offers on new cars.

      Find this resource:

    • Heckman, James J. 1998. Detecting discrimination. Journal of Economic Perspectives 12.2: 101–116.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This article discusses several issues involved in the various methods that have been employed to detect discrimination. The author focuses on his methodological critiques on the audit methodology.

      Find this resource:

    • Pager, Devah. 2007a. Marked: Race, crime, and finding work in an era of mass incarceration. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      An audit study of discrimination on the basis of race and criminal record conducted on 350 entry-level employers in Milwaukee using callback, as opposed to job offer, as the outcome of interest. The author finds that white men, even those with a criminal record for a drug offense, are significantly more likely than black men, both with and without a criminal record, to receive callbacks.

      Find this resource:

    • Pager, Devah. 2007b. The use of field experiments for studies of employment discrimination: Contributions, critiques, and directions for the future. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 609.1: 104–133.

      DOI: 10.1177/0002716206294796Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      The author discusses the merits and drawbacks of both correspondence tests—using mailed or faxed resumes to employers similar along every dimension except the possible discriminatory variable of interest (race, age, etc.)—and in-person audits—using trained individuals matched along all relevant traits who physically go to workplaces (or another encounter).

      Find this resource:

    • Yinger, John. 1995. Closed doors, opportunities lost: The continuing costs of housing discrimination. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This book presents extensive evidence on discrimination in the housing market, from rental landlords to real estate brokers, against black and Hispanic home seekers relative to white seekers. It also provides an extensive overview of audit methods generally and specifically their use in the study of discrimination in housing.

      Find this resource:

    Unexplained Differentials

    There is an immense literature documenting differentials in some important outcomes between racial, ethnic, gender, or other socially salient groups. These studies document group outcome gaps in employment, earnings, wealth, housing, criminal justice outcomes, education, and health, to name a few such groups. Such studies endeavor to decompose the determinates of the outcome by estimating an “explained” and “unexplained” differential between the outcome of the studied group (e.g., the minority group) and the control group (e.g., the majority group). The explained fraction corresponds to that proportion of the differential in the outcome between the majority and minority group that is accounted for by all measured variables legitimately related to the outcome at issue (i.e., in the case of wage differences, variables such as education or labor market experience). The unexplained fraction corresponds to any residual differential in the outcome between the majority and minority group after accounting for all legitimate explanatory variables that may vary between group members and relate to the outcome. As Altonji and Blank 1999 points out in a discussion of statistical methods for wage decomposition studies, what proportion of the gap one attributes to discrimination depends on the definition of discrimination adopted by the researcher. The authors note that the unexplained fraction—attributable to the effect of discrimination in the process determining the outcome—will be overestimated if the estimation method does not control for all relevant determinates of the outcome that differ between the groups. The unexplained fraction will be underestimated by including all correlated relevant determinates, if one takes the definition of discrimination to include all the accumulated disadvantages from historical processes that have produced differences in legitimately relevant variables. Blank, et al. 2004 offers a thorough discussion of the methodological issues involved in using observational data to identify the operation of discrimination in an outcome. There are innumerable studies using statistical methods to decompose observed gaps in an outcome between groups. For example, Neal and Johnson 1996 have published a much-cited study estimating the proportion of the black–white wage gap due to differences in acquired skill before market entry versus discrimination, arguing that many past studies have conflated discriminatory market barriers with barriers to acquiring human capital. Grodsky and Pager 2001 offer a theoretically and methodologically sophisticated discussion of determinates of racial wage inequality, looking at both individual determinants (such as human capital) and organizational placement (occupation). Heckman 1998 offers a critique of various studies attributing unexplained observed gaps in labor market outcomes to discrimination.

    • Altonji, Joseph G., and Rebecca M. Blank. 1999. Race and gender in the labor market. In Handbook of labor economics. Vol. 3C. Edited by Orley C. Ashenfelter and David Card, 3143–3259. New York: Elsevier.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Altonji and Blank overview theoretical and empirical literature on a variety of topics: labor market differentials by race and sex, economic theories offering explanations of these differentials, and methodologies advanced to provide direct evidence of discrimination and explorations of premarket factors (i.e. human capital, experience) and post-market factors (i.e. experience, training, seniority, mobility) causing labor market differentials.

      Find this resource:

    • Blank, Rebecca M., Marilyn Dabady, and Constance F. Citro. 2004. Statistical analysis of observational data. In Measuring racial discrimination. Edited by Rebecca M. Blank, Marilyn Dabady, and Constance F. Citro, 118–161. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Chapter 7 of this book overviews the statistical procedures used to estimate the role of discrimination in various outcomes of interest, from employment and education to health and housing. The authors also cite key studies employing these methods to estimate discrimination in various domains and explore the methodological limitations of these procedures.

      Find this resource:

    • Grodsky, Eric, and Devah Pager. 2001. The structure of disadvantage: Individual and occupational determinants of the black-white wage gap. American Sociological Review 66.4: 542–567.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This paper gives an accessible discussion of both individual and occupational determinants of racial wage inequality and presents important findings on the variable level of black–white wage differentials across the occupational scale. The statistical methodology may not be too accessible to those without a solid background in quantitative methods.

      Find this resource:

    • Heckman, James J. 1998. Detecting discrimination. Journal of Economic Perspectives 12.2: 101–116.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A brief and accessible critique of various methods, including regression techniques decomposing outcome gaps and the audit method, employed by social scientists to measure the extent of discrimination in various contexts.

      Find this resource:

    • Neal, Derek A., and William R. Johnson. 1996. The role of premarket factors in black-white wage differences. Journal of Political Economy 104.5: 869–895.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      The authors attempt to control for skill and effort endogeneity in the estimation of labor market racial discrimination—the possibility that effort and post-labor-market-entry skills can be affected by the worker’s perception of and experience with discrimination—by including a single measure of premarket skill, the Armed Forces Qualification Test.

      Find this resource:

    Against Specific Groups

    The study of discrimination often clusters around discrimination against certain socially salient groups and discrimination in certain areas—such as in housing, the labor market, or other important social and economic arenas. The subheadings in this section address discrimination against specific socially salient groups defined on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity and national origin, religion, age, and disability. Also included is sexual harassment, which is typically considered a form of sex-based discrimination.

    Race

    Race discrimination is one of the largest fields of research on discrimination in the social sciences. It is also the most common basis for stating a claim under United States federal employment antidiscrimination law according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Discrimination on the basis of race is defined by Quillian 2006 as “the difference between the treatment that a target group actually receives and the treatment they would receive if they were not members of the target group but were otherwise the same” (p. 302). This counterfactual definition of racial discrimination requires a conceptual specification of what race is in order to determine whether or not someone has been treated differently because of race. The EEOC Compliance Manual lists five racial categories (American Indian or Alaska Native; Asian; Black or African American; Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander; and White) and one ethnic category (Hispanic or Latino) and discusses characteristics or traits courts have found to be sufficiently constitutive of race to violate federal law. Yet, in social science (and in law) the question of how we define race such that we can identify when an agent has discriminated on that basis is a much-debated topic (see Methodology). Loury 2002 offers a very sociological account of the category of race, focusing on African Americans, and explores the operation, explanation, and signification of racial discrimination. Omi and Winant 1986 develops a historical, constructivist approach to the category of race and racial discrimination. For an international comparative treatment of both state-imposed racial stratification and different national modes of racial discrimination, including the now-dismantled system of racial apartheid in South Africa, see Marx 1998. There is a vast literature on racial discrimination in a number of different arenas, much of which concentrates on discrimination against African Americans. Massey 2007 presents a very helpful overview of research on racial discrimination in a variety of contexts, including housing, lending markets, labor markets, product markets, and criminal justice. Quillian 2006 offers a detailed review article on racial discrimination, with a focus on audit methodologies and recent innovations in social-psychological studies of prejudice. Pager and Shepherd 2008 summarizes key research literature on racial discrimination in the areas of employment, housing credit, and consumer markets. The Panel on Methods for Assessing Discrimination (see Blank, et al. 2004) published a volume produced by some of the top social science researchers on the topic of racial discrimination.

    • Blank, Rebecca M., Marilyn Dabady, and Constance F. Citro, eds. 2004. Measuring racial discrimination. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      The first main section of the volume is dedicated to a discussion of methodology in the detection and measurement of racial discrimination. It is a valuable resource for identifying important, high-quality studies that employ the various methodologies discussed. There is also a very informative discussion of the concept of cumulative discrimination accessible to students new to the concept.

      Find this resource:

    • Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. 2006. Compliance manual on “race and color discrimination." No. N-915-003. Washington, DC: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A comprehensive discussion of both invidious intentional and disparate impact racial discrimination as interpreted and defined under federal law. As case law is developed form real-life experiences of discrimination, the Manual’s discussion is quite specific in defining instances of discrimination and thus useful to social scientific purposes of defining discrimination.

      Find this resource:

    • Loury, Glenn C. 2002. The anatomy of racial inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      A sophisticated, yet accessible, discussion of the conceptual category of race. The author argues that popular conceptualizations of racial discrimination (defined as unequal reward for the same activities) are inadequately narrow and that we must also attend to development bias—the systematic exclusion of black Americans from opportunities to acquire valued economic and social capacities.

      Find this resource:

    • Marx, Anthony W. 1998. Making race and nation: A comparison of South Africa, the United States, and Brazil. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This book presents a comparative study of public and private modes of racial discrimination and domination in South Africa, Brazil, and the United States, exploring state policies of racial exclusion through the lens of state-building and the forging of ruling political alliances.

      Find this resource:

    • Massey, Douglas S. 2007. Categorically unequal: The American stratification system. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Massey discusses racial discrimination, both its invidious and institutional forms, in the context of exploring the mechanisms responsible for generating social and economic stratification. Chapter 3 deals with racial stratification and provides a very helpful overview of the major research on discrimination in housing, lending markets, labor markets, product markets, and criminal justice.

      Find this resource:

    • Omi, Michael, and Howard Winant. 1986. Racial formation in the United States from the 1960s to the 1980s. New York: Routledge.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Taking race as a socially constructed category, the authors explore the social mechanism and historical contests around the meaning of race in America in recent history, debating a number of alternative theoretical conceptions of race in the process. Also contains discussions of discrimination in the context of specifying a historical-constructivist theory of race.

      Find this resource:

    • Pager, Devah, and Hana Shepherd. 2008. The sociology of discrimination: Racial discrimination in employment, housing, credit, and consumer markets. Annual Review of Sociology 34:181–209.

      DOI: 10.1146/annurev.soc.33.040406.131740Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This review article is a great resource to identify key studies of racial discrimination in each area it addresses: labor markets, housing credit markets, and consumer goods markets. It also offers an interesting discussion of the literature on the causes of discrimination, at the individual, organizational, and societal level.

      Find this resource:

    • Quillian, Lincoln. 2006. New approaches to understanding racial prejudice and discrimination. Annual Review of Sociology 32:299–328.

      DOI: 10.1146/annurev.soc.32.061604.123132Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This is a broad review essay on the conceptualization and empirical study of racial discrimination. It contains many citations to numerous studies on the topic.

      Find this resource:

    Sex

    Sex discrimination is most often defined as disadvantageous treatment or outcomes on the basis of sex or gender. As with other forms of discrimination, there is significant debate over the both the concept of sex and the scope of conduct that qualifies as discrimination. For example, the Supreme Court has recognized in its landmark case Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins that federal antidiscrimination law (Title VII) is not limited to discrimination on the basis of biological sex as such, but prohibits discrimination for failure to conform to gender norms. Ridgeway and England 2007 presents a conceptual typology of sex discrimination and discusses the individual-level and institutional-level causes sociologists have advanced to explain sex discrimination. Kanter 1977, a classic ethnography of the corporate workplace, puts forward a theory of sex segregation within a workplace, “homosocial reproduction,” which posits that those who occupy positions of power and authority tend to promote members of their own group. Many researchers have investigated whether discrimination is the causal culprit behind observed sex earnings differentials or occupational segregation. England 1992 addresses the empirical evidence on occupational sex segregation and income gaps, and explores the complex methodological and theoretical issues involved in attributing gaps to discrimination, as opposed to sex differences in human capital, productivity, effort, or occupational preferences. McCall 2001 argues that there has been inadequate attention to the structural determinants of gender wage inequality and regional variation in labor market conditions. Tomaskovic-Devey and Skaggs 2002 investigate various theories accounting for the relationship between occupational sex composition and lower average female wages, including the explanations that implicate employer discrimination and those that point to supply-side factors, such as human capital or preferences. Levanon, et al. 2009 discusses competing (yet not mutually exclusive) theories of employer sex discrimination: queuing—lower wages resulting from employers preferring men for all occupations, while men and women seek high-wage jobs from a single job queue—and devaluation—the reduction in wages resulting from increased female composition, because feminization leads to depreciation of the labor’s value. Audit studies have also been used to detect sex discrimination (see Audit Studies). Goldin and Rouse 2000 found that masking the sex of applicants to the selection committee at live orchestra auditions increased the probability a woman was advanced and eventually hired. Sex discrimination is also studied as an explanation for other observed outcomes: Kessler, et al. 1999 explores the relationship between perceived sex discrimination and mental health.

    • England, Paula. 1992. Comparable worth: Theories and evidence. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Although the data contributing to the empirical evidence in this book are now almost two decades old, the methodological and theoretical discussions in this book are still relevant to any student of sex discrimination. The book also contains extensive explorations of theories of labor market operation across disciplinary boundaries, including various models of sex discrimination.

      Find this resource:

    • Goldin, Claudia, and Cecilia Rouse. 2000. Orchestrating impartiality: The impact of “blind” auditions on female musicians. American Economic Review 90.4: 715–741.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This paper exploits a natural experiment—the adoption of screens for blind auditions across major orchestras across the country—to get at the question of sex discrimination in hiring. The authors find that the adoption of blind auditions account for 25 to 33 percent of the increase in female new hires in the sampled orchestras during this period.

      Find this resource:

    • Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. 1977. Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Kanter’s seminal qualitative study of one corporation in the 1970s is a classic in the field. She argues that certain jobs are more prone to discriminatory behavior—those in which judging skill and capacities are more opaque and prone to uncertainty—because those in positions of power seek to minimize this uncertainty by selecting candidates that look like themselves in important respects, namely race and gender.

      Find this resource:

    • Kessler, Ronald C., Kristin D. Mickelson, and David R. Williams. 1999. The prevalence, distribution, and mental health correlates of perceived discrimination in the United States. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 40.3: 208–230.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      The authors explore the experience of discrimination as a stressor and possible cause of observed disparities in mental health between men and women, and racial minorities and whites, in the United States.

      Find this resource:

    • Levanon, Asaf, Paula England, and Paul Allison. 2009. Occupational feminization and pay: Assessing causal dynamics using 1950–2000 US census data. Social Forces 88.2: 865–891.

      DOI: 10.1353/sof.0.0264Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      The authors explore competing explanations for the existence and persistence of certain facts about gender earnings differentials, such as the fact that occupations with higher proportions of females pay lower wages, even after controlling for education and skill requirements. The authors employ a complex methodology of sort out evidence of two different types of demand-side sex discrimination that would give rise to this phenomenon: queuing and devaluation.

      Find this resource:

    • McCall, Leslie. 2001. Complex inequality: Gender, class and race in the new economy. New York: Routledge.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      The author argues that gender inequality must be understood as the result of both discriminatory practices and historical shifts in economic structures. Further, she shows that patterns of sex inequality vary between regional labor markets, because the patterns of economic restructuring have varied regionally.

      Find this resource:

    • Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins (1989) 490 U.S. 228.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      This US Supreme Court case held that federal antidiscrimination law (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) prohibiting employment discrimination “because of sex” extended to protect against gender stereotyping in the case in which an employee was refused promotion because she failed to conform to norms of femininity.

      Find this resource:

      • Ridgeway, Cecilia, and Paula England. 2007. Sociological approaches to sex discrimination in employment. In Sex discrimination in the workplace: Multidisciplinary perspectives. Edited by Faye J. Crosby, Margaret S. Stockdale, and S. Ann Ropp, 189–212. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This is a helpful volume for beginning students of sex discrimination because it provides a range of disciplinary perspectives and covers a variety of topics. Much of the volume is dedicated to sex discrimination law, litigation, or legal perspectives, but Part 3 contains four essays on the academic study of sex discrimination.

        Find this resource:

      • Tomaskovic-Devey, Don, and Sheryl Skaggs. 2002. Sex segregation, labor process organization, and gender earnings inequality. American Journal of Sociology 108.1: 102–128.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This article explores various theories that account for the observed correlation between higher female composition in an occupation and lower wages, including social closure theories (men occupy positions of authority and control in workplaces and exclude females from desirable positions and training opportunities), and gendered labor process (gender meanings infuse the very process of valuation and organization of work process).

        Find this resource:

      Sexual Harassment

      Sexual harassment is most often defined as unwelcome physical contact, advances, requests, speech, jokes, or other conduct of a sexual nature that either makes the working environment hostile or is imposed as a condition of employment opportunities. This definition follows the framework laid out by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1990, and its guidelines are useful in understanding not just the legal definition of sexual harassment, but also how most social scientists conceptualize the phenomenon. The pioneering work of MacKinnon 1979 was formative in brining legal and public recognition to sexual harassment as a form of sex discrimination. MacKinnon defined sexual harassment as “the unwanted imposition of sexual requirements in the context of a relationship of unequal power,” a circumstance she argued women are particularly vulnerable to because of their position as both sexually subjugated by men in the domestic private sphere and materially dependent upon employers in the public sphere. Uggen and Blackstone 2004 empirically explores aspects of MacKinnon’s theory of sexual harassment, documenting who and under what conditions men and women of various ages are most likely to experiences—and identify—behaviors constitutive of sexual harassment. A number of articles from a special issue of the Journal of Social Issues deal with measurement, detection, and variable construction in the social scientific study of sexual harassment. Frazier, et al. 1995 explores layperson—as opposed to legal or organizational—definitions of sexual harassment and uses survey data to assess whether perceptions of harassment differ by gender of the target or characteristics of the harasser. Arvey and Cavanaugh 1995 discusses the methodological hurdles involved in using survey methods to generate reliable and generalizable estimates of the prevalence and nature of sexually harassing experiences in workplaces or other settings. Legal scholars have generated a large body of literature on sexual harassment. MacKinnon and Siegel 2004 is an outstanding volume of essays on sexual harassment law and theory. The wide range of topics covered is accessible and informative to non-lawyers and lawyers alike. A very cogent philosophical treatment of the wrongs of sexual harassment and corresponding legal conceptualizations of such wrongs can be found in Anderson 2006. Saguy 2003 offers a comparative sociological analysis of the legal concept of sexual harassment, its depiction in mass media, and organizational responses inside major corporations in the United States and France.

      • Anderson, Elizabeth. 2006. Recent thinking about sexual harassment: A review essay. Philosophy and Public Affairs 34:284–312.

        DOI: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2006.0069.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This article overviews recent legal and theoretical scholarship on sexual harassment and offers a very helpful framework for interpreting the normative debates in the field.

        Find this resource:

      • Arvey, Richard D., and Marcie A. Cavanaugh. 1995. Using surveys to assess the prevalence of sexual harassment: Some methodological problems. Journal of Social Issues 51.1: 39–52.

        DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01307.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        The authors review a number of studies using survey methods to measure the incidences of sexual harassment and discuss methodological pitfalls. This paper provides a very useful discussion of external and internal validity concerns in such measurement techniques, and discusses the interplay between social scientific study of sexual harassment and legal definitions.

        Find this resource:

      • Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. 1990. Policy guidance on current issues of sexual harassment. No. N-915-050. Washington, DC: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        Synthesizes definition of sexual harassment from ruling Supreme Court cases on the issues, discussing both “quid pro quo” and “hostile environment” types of sexual harassment.

        Find this resource:

      • Frazier, Patricia A., Caroline C Cochran, and Andrea M. Olson. 1995. Social science research on lay definitions of sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues 51.1: 21–37.

        DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01306.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        The authors used survey data from a sample of individuals associated with a Midwestern university, including faculty, staff, and graduate and undergraduate students, to assess the consistency of subjective definitions of sexual harassment. Although the data are now out of date, the methodological discussion is still quite useful.

        Find this resource:

      • MacKinnon, Catharine. 1979. Sexual harassment of working women: A case of sex discrimination. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        A seminal treatment of the topic, often credited with bringing public and legal recognition to sexual harassment as a practice of gender-based domination with structural implications, as opposed to merely a private affront.

        Find this resource:

      • MacKinnon, Catharine A., and Reva B. Siegel, eds. 2004. Directions in sexual harassment law. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        An extensive collection of essays by prominent legal scholars on various topics relating to sexual harassment, including theoretical perspectives on why sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination, its social and cultural function and significance, the implication of various legal doctrines on the rights of sex discrimination claimants, and the intersection of sex and other-basis (such as race and sexual orientation) discrimination.

        Find this resource:

      • Saguy, Abigail Cope. 2003. What is sexual harassment? From Capitol Hill to the Sorbonne. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This book presents a comparative cultural sociological study comparing the legal content, public conceptualization, and corporate practices around sexual harassment in the United States and France. The author discusses the various structural and cultural forces that can account for the observed differences between the two countries in these realms.

        Find this resource:

      • Uggen, Christopher, and Amy Blackstone. 2004. Sexual harassment as a gendered expression of power. American Sociological Review 69: 64–92.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        Authors use survey data, supplemented by qualitative interview data, to empirical test a series of propositions derived form MacKinnon’s account of sexual harassment as part of a gender hierarchy of power and domination.

        Find this resource:

      Sexual Orientation

      Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation includes a wide variety of individual behaviors and institutional practices, from antigay workplace harassment to laws prohibiting same-sex couples from marriage or adoption. Conceptually identifying the object of study is difficult here as in other areas of discrimination studies: a researcher must specify the meaning of sexual orientation in order to conclude a practice is discriminatory on that basis. Fausto-Sterling 2001, an exploration of the conceptualization of sex, gender, and sexuality, is helpful to any social scientist attempting to forge an operational definition of sexual orientation. A number of studies, including Pascoe 2007 and Human Rights Watch 2001, document harassment of gay and non-gender-normative students in elementary and high schools, and explore how male–female gender norms are constructed and policed through the use of homosexuality as a counterpoint to heteronormativity. Badgett and Frank 2007 is an edited volume with a wealth of essays on sexual orientation discrimination in various institutional contexts, from labor markets to public policies, across a number of countries. Labor market discrimination against gays and lesbians is easier to identify in the United States than other forms of discrimination, because most federal courts have interpreted Title VII to not forbid explicit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation (De Vos 2009), and many gay employees are excluded from fringe benefits if their same-sex partnership is not recognized as a marriage. Although econometric studies have consistently documented a wage “marriage premium” for heterosexual men and women and in most states homosexual couples are legally excluded from marriage, some researchers (e.g., Blandford 2003 and Elmslie and Tebaldi 2007) estimate labor market sexual orientation discrimination in earnings net of the marriage premium. Badgett 2006 discusses recent findings on labor market discrimination in hiring, pay, promotion, or job placement and the methodological limitations of existing data sources, noting that representative quantitative data on both labor market outcomes and sexual practices or preferences is hard to come by. Although there is no federal statute explicitly banning sexual orientation discrimination, a number of states and localities have laws banning sexual orientation and transgender discrimination, and the use of these laws is some indication of the prevalence of sexual orientation discrimination. Rubenstein 2002 attempts to quantify the frequency with which these laws are invoked, relative to the gay or lesbian workforce in the locality, and compares the population-adjusted discrimination complaint filing frequency to other forms of discrimination (i.e., race or sex).

      • Badgett, M. V. Lee. 2006. Discrimination based on sexual orientation: A review of the literature in economics and beyond. In Handbook on the economics of discrimination. Edited by William M. Rodgers III, 161–186. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This article offers a very helpful review of empirical studies of sexual orientation discrimination, including some international studies, and presents a thorough discussion of methodological issues such as constructing an operational definition of sexual orientation. Most studies found that gay or bisexual men consistently earned less than similarly situated heterosexual men, and the findings for lesbian or bisexual women are less consistent.

        Find this resource:

      • Badgett, Lee, and Jefferson Frank, eds. 2007. Sexual orientation discrimination: An international perspective. London and New York: Routledge.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This volume contains a number of essays presenting empirical data on discrimination, harassment, and disparities on the basis of sexual harassment from a variety of nations.

        Find this resource:

      • Blandford, John M. 2003. The nexus of sexual orientation and gender in the determination of earnings. Industrial and Labor Relations Review 56.4: 622–642.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This study discusses the theoretical importance of disaggregating the effect of gender-role nonconformity along other dimensions (apart from firm sexual practices) from sexual orientation per se, and includes a number of controls for occupation in estimating the earnings differentials between similarly situated gay or lesbian and heterosexual workers.

        Find this resource:

      • De Vos, Tanya. 2009. Sexuality and transgender issues in employment law. Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law 10: 599–624.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This accessible and brief article provides a clear overview of how federal courts have dealt with claims of sexual orientation or transgender discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and outlines other legal remedies available to victims of such discrimination at the state and local level.

        Find this resource:

      • Elmslie, Bruce, and Edinaldo Tebaldi. 2007. Sexual orientation and labor market discrimination. Journal of Labor Research 28.3: 436–453.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This article presents a number of sophisticated regression analyses of differences in earnings between gay or lesbians and heterosexuals, disaggregating the “marriage premium” from the discrimination estimate. The authors also test for occupation-specific effects, finding evidence of wage discrimination most pronounced in heavily masculinized occupations such as building, construction, and production.

        Find this resource:

      • Fausto-Sterling, Anne. 2001. Sexing the body: Gender politics and the construction of sexuality. New York: Basic Books.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        An excellent resource to explore competing conceptualizations of gender, sex, and sexuality categories; includes discussions of conceptions from different disciplines (from medical to anthropological) and historical trends in the debates.

        Find this resource:

      • Human Rights Watch. 2001. Hatred in the hallways: Violence and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students in U.S. schools. New York: Human Rights Watch.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This is a report from a national advocacy organization; although it did not draw its data from a random, representative sample, the qualitative information gleaned form hundreds of interviews of students, teachers, and administrators in seven states is a valuable resource.

        Find this resource:

      • Pascoe, C. J. 2007. Dude, you’re a fag: Masculinity and sexuality in high school. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This book draws on data from an ethnographic study at one high school, examining the construction of gender norms through the foil of homosexuality, often in the form of antigay harassment.

        Find this resource:

      • Rubenstein, William. 2002. Do gay rights laws matter? An empirical assessment. Southern California Law Review 75: 65–118.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        The author estimates the population-adjusted filing rates of discrimination lawsuits for sexual orientation, sex, and race discrimination claims lawsuits in jurisdictions with sexual orientation antidiscrimination statute. The article also offers a helpful overview of sexual orientation antidiscrimination laws, and debates surrounding such laws, at various levels of government.

        Find this resource:

      Ethnic and National Origin

      Ethnic or national origin discrimination encompasses any disadvantaging treatment because of country of origin, ancestry, or ethnic affiliation, which, among other things, extends to discrimination based on physical, linguistic, or cultural traits associated with an ethnic or national identity. There are innumerable studies of ethnic discrimination in countries across the globe. Myers and Corrie 2006 is an edited collection of essays on ethnic and caste discrimination in various national contexts including India, Russia, and Australia, and International Labour Organization 2007 is a report that details legal and policy approaches to ethnic and racial discrimination in a number of nation-states. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 2002 provides a clear explanation of the legal framework governing national origin and ethnic discrimination in the United States that is also useful to the social scientific conceptualization of the phenomena. The studies of race and ethnic discrimination often intersect, and definitions of the two are frequently contested and indeterminate. Foner and Fredrickson 2004 provides an illuminating discussion of the conceptual differences between race, ethnicity, and skin color, including how various ethnic groups have merged into and out of different racial classifications in US history. Massey 2007 provides an extensive discussion of racial and ethnic socioeconomic stratification, including a substantial exploration of discrimination based on ethnicity, national origin, and immigration status. Mason 2004 documents income inequality among Hispanic Americans, finding evidence of discrimination because of skin shade/phenotype and failure to acculturate to a white racial identity. Telles and Ortiz 2008 documents experiences with discrimination and segregation in various domains, and tracks trends in important outcomes, such as education and employment, using a unique longitudinal and intergenerational dataset on Mexican Americans. Some scholars contest the conclusion that the earnings gap between non-Hispanic whites and Hispanics is evidence that skill is rewarded differently in the labor market—i.e., in a discriminatory fashion. Carneriro, et al. 2008 presents quantitative evidence from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth to argue that, although there may be disadvantage or discrimination in the acquisition of skill, the reward to skill is equal between racial and ethnic groups. Kenney and Douglas 1994 constructed a matched-pair audit test of labor market discrimination against Hispanic youths in comparisons to white youths, finding Hispanic testers were less likely than white testers to be successful at each stage of job seeking.

      • Carneriro, Pedro, James J. Heckman, and Dimitriy V. Masterov. 2008. Understanding the sources of ethnic and racial wage gaps and their implications for policy. In Handbook of employment discrimination research: Rights and realities. Edited by Laura Beth Nielsen and Robert L. Nelson, 99–134. New York: Springer.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This paper uses data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth to argue that a high proportion of the ethnic and racial wage gap can be explained by differences in skills, such that earnings differentials are mostly a factor of premarket factors as opposed to market discrimination. The article engages the extensive debate on this topic and provides resources to track the key articles and issues in this long-ranging debate.

        Find this resource:

      • Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. 2002. EEOC compliance manual for national origin discrimination,. No. N-915-003. Washington, DC: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        These guidelines define ethnic and national origin discrimination within the legal framework of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (prohibiting employment discrimination), yet the conceptual discussion is quite helpful to social scientists in delineating the phenomenon.

        Find this resource:

      • Foner, Nancy, and George M. Fredrickson, eds. 2004. Not just black and white: Historical and contemporary perspectives on immigration, race, and ethnicity in the United States. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This is a multiauthor edited volume containing a wealth of articles helpful to clarifying the conception of race and ethnicity, and its relation to immigration and historical changes in the United States. The various articles discuss racial, ethnic, and national origin discrimination across a number of cases, in addition to how groups come to define and contest ethnic and racial status.

        Find this resource:

      • International Labor Organization. 2007. Equality at work: Tackling the challenge: International Labor Conference 96th Session 2007, Report I (B). Geneva, Switzerland: International Labor Office.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This report provides a helpful starting point for students interested in the legal and policy framework addressing ethnic discrimination in a large number of countries across various regions, including Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, and Europe. It also provides details on how international law and conventions have defined discrimination and how these conventions have been adopted at the nation-state level.

        Find this resource:

      • Kenney, Genevieve M., and Douglas A. Wissoker. 1994. An analysis of the correlates of discrimination facing young Hispanic job-seekers. American Economic Review 84.3: 674–683.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This was one of the early studies using audit methods to test for labor market discrimination. The authors found that white testers were more successful than Hispanic testers at each successive level of the application process, from being offered an interview to being offered a job, although the gap in interview offers was the largest and the job offer gap narrowed contingent on interview.

        Find this resource:

      • Mason, Patrick L. 2004. Annual income, hourly wages, and identity among Mexican-Americans and other Latinos. Industrial Relations 43.4: 817–834.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        The author conducts a quantitative study of the variation in earnings of Hispanic Americans, finding that acculturation into a white racial identity is associated with increased earnings and that darker complexions and non-European phenotypes are associated with lower earnings, irrespective of acculturation.

        Find this resource:

      • Massey, Douglas S. 2007. Categorically unequal: The American stratification system. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This book offers an extensive discussion of discrimination on the basis of ethnicity and immigration in the context of developing a comprehensive theory of social stratification. It also includes an extended exploration of Hispanic immigration and is a rich resource for citations of empirical studies of discrimination based on ethnicity.

        Find this resource:

      • Myers, Samuel L., and Bruce P. Corrie, eds. 2006. Racial and ethnic economic inequality: An international perspective. New York: Lang.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This volume deals with ethnic, caste, and cultural discrimination in various national settings, including India, Russia, Australia, New Zealand, and Haiti, in addition to discussing affirmative action policies as a remedy to discrimination.

        Find this resource:

      • Telles, Edward, and Vilma Ortiz. 2008. Generations of exclusion: Mexican Americans, assimilation, and race. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        Drawing on longitudinal and intergenerational data from interviews of Mexican Americans from around the United States, this study tracks several dimensions of change, including education, socioeconomic status, assimilation, ethnic and racial identity, language, and various other outcomes and experiences.

        Find this resource:

      Religion

      Discrimination on the basis of religion is one of the oldest areas of discrimination studies in sociology—one of Marx’s early (1843) writings critiquing the inadequacy of negative liberal rights to secure human emancipation was developed in his discussion of anti-Semitic discrimination in Germany in his seminal treatise “On the Jewish Question” (see Marx 1994). In the United States, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion, and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 2006 offers an extensive discussion of what sorts of acts constitute religious discrimination under federal law, and what sorts of accommodations employers must make for employees’ religious practices. Questions of anti-immigrant, ethnic, and religious discrimination are often intertwined, as explored in the European context by Strabac and Listhaug 2008. The topic of religious discrimination—particularly against Muslims—has regained significant scholarly attention in the wake of the events of and reactions to September 11, 2001. Fekete 2004 explores what she terms “religious profiling” and other policing measures directed at Europe’s Muslim population in the post–September 11 world. The European Union Monitoring Center 2006 is an extensive report on Islamophobia and discrimination against Muslim residents across European Union member states.

      Age

      Discrimination on the basis of age is a phenomenon increasingly studied, as the baby boomer generation ages toward retirement and economic restructuring makes older workers ever more vulnerable. Age discrimination in the workplace can be motivated by negative stereotypes of older workers or economic incentives to minimize pension or health care costs, as supported by Kalleberg 2009. Age discrimination is forbidden by federal law, by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), unless an employer can show that age is a bona fide occupational qualification. The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, interpreting federal statute and case law, has defined age discrimination as exclusion of individuals over the age of forty from apprenticeship programs, job notices, advertisements, or benefits, and harassment or provision of disadvantageous terms and conditions of employment on the basis of age (EEOC Regulations). Nelson 2002 is an edited volume of essays exploring the attitudinal underpinnings of age discrimination, termed ageism. Sargeant 2006 presents a helpful discussion of the conceptual issues involved in defining age discrimination before examining age discrimination legislation in various countries, with a focus on the United Kingdom and Europe. Gee, et al. 2007 asks if perceived discrimination varies over the life course, or if there are cohort effects, such that those coming of age during the Civil Rights era exhibit more sensitivity to age discrimination. The authors find that self-reports of discrimination are highest during the ages that employers have indicated they disfavor: early twenties and fifty or older. Roscigno, et al. 2007 examines age discrimination through the theoretical lens of social closure.

      • Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. 29 C.F.R part 1625: Age Discrimination in Employment Act.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        These are the official guidelines the EEOC uses to enforce age discrimination claims. Although standards expressed here have to do with constructing legal rights under federal statute, they are helpful in conceptualizing age discrimination, and the legal definition often guides social science research on the phenomena.

        Find this resource:

      • Gee, Gilbert C., Eliza K. Pavalko, and J. Scott Long. 2007. Age, cohort and perceived age discrimination: Using the life course to assess self-reported age discrimination. Social Forces 86.1: 265–290.

        DOI: 10.1353/sof.2007.0098Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        The authors use longitudinal data to explore the relationship between expectations of employer age preferences and self-reported instances of discrimination. The authors use their findings to comment on the validity of self-reports for detecting age discrimination.

        Find this resource:

      • Kalleberg, Arne. 2009. Precarious work, insecure workers: Employment relations in transition. American Sociological Review 74.1: 1–22.

        DOI: 10.1177/000312240907400101Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This article explores the structural forces behind the rise of precarious work and the classes of worker, such as older workers, particularly sensitive to the economic and social harms of job insecurity.

        Find this resource:

      • Nelson, Todd D., ed. 2002. Ageism: Stereotyping and prejudice against older persons. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This edited volume contains essays from various authors on a range of topics, focusing on ageist attitudes and beliefs, but also including the social-psychological basis of ageism and the workplace context of age discrimination.

        Find this resource:

      • Roscigno, Vincent J., Sherry Mong, Reginald Byron, and Griff Tester. 2007. Age discrimination, social closure and employment. Social Forces 86.1: 313–334.

        DOI: 10.1353/sof.2007.0109Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This article offers a helpful overview of the literature on both ageism—the attitudinal disposition disfavoring the elderly—and discriminatory behaviors against the elderly.

        Find this resource:

      • Sargeant, Malcolm. 2006. Age discrimination in employment. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This volume offers a comparative perspective on age discrimination legislation, focusing on the United Kingdom and Europe but also including overviews of Australia, Canada, Ireland, and the United States. The book’s comparative perspective is valuable especially in its discussion of age discrimination against groups not covered by federal antidiscrimination law in the United States, including young workers.

        Find this resource:

      Disability

      Discrimination against individuals with physical or mental impairments has gained scholarly attention, especially since the passage of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in 1990. As is the case in studying discrimination against other groups, the conceptual task of definitionally specifying disability is tied up with theoretical and methodological issues. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Compliance Manual has given some precision to the general term “disability” as used in the ADA, which, although it is a legal construction, is conceptually useful to social scientists seeking to specify an operational definition of disability for research purposes. Scotch and Schriner 1997 conceptualizes disability as “variation in human ability,” and argue that improving the social and economic position of disabled persons is not limited to eradicating discrimination due to stigma, but must extend to engineering institutional, social, and physical adaptations to the full range of human physical and mental capabilities. Baldwin and Johnson 2006 offers a critical review and summary of the quantitative empirical literature on disability discrimination in the labor market. Engel and Munger 2003 explores the study of disability discrimination in a decidedly more qualitative fashion, with seven in-depth life stories of disabled individuals, chronicling how legal protections afforded by the ADA have shaped their daily lives. Some scholars (e.g., Karlan and Rutherglen 1996) argue that legal protections for disabled workers––namely the ADA’s requirement that employers make “reasonable accommodations” to modify work functions or spaces so that a disabled worker can perform the job––portend a new paradigm of legal and social understanding of discrimination in which there is no requisite showing of prior, intentional, and invidious discrimination, but rather a positive duty to accommodate the limitations that define the worker’s disability. Thus, some have conceptualized exclusion of disabled individuals less as discrimination and more as inadequate accommodation. Jolls 2001 argues that antidiscrimination and accommodation are conceptually and operationally quite similar in many respects, thus the demand that employers expend resources to adapt workplaces to the needs of disabled workers is less an advent of a new principle of inclusion than an extension of logic central to legal and social understandings of traditional antidiscrimination principles.

      • Baldwin, Marjorie L., and William G. Johnson. 2006. A critical review of studies of discrimination against workers with disability. In Handbook on the economics of discrimination. Edited by William M. Rodgers III, 119–160. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This article offers a helpful overview of the conceptual and methodological issues involved in the empirical study of disability discrimination in the labor market, in addition to surveying key empirical studies on the topic.

        Find this resource:

      • Engel, David M., and Frank W. Munger. 2003. Rights of inclusion: Law and identity in the life stories of Americans with disabilities. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        The authors draw on a wealth of qualitative data from in-depth interviews with individuals with different forms of disability—learning disabilities, mental disabilities, physical disabilities—and focus their study through an in-depth presentation of seven selected life histories of people detailing the emergence of legal consciousness of their rights under the ADA and how it shaped their life experiences.

        Find this resource:

      • Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Executive summary: Compliance manual section 902, definition of the term “disability.”

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This document interprets federal law and offers a helpful conceptual discussion of disability.

        Find this resource:

      • Jolls, Christine. 2001. Antidiscrimination and accommodation. Harvard Law Review 115:642–699.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        Jolls argues that many strands of antidiscrimination law, and the business and organizational practices it engenders, can be understood as accommodation requirements, such as the requirement that businesses reform recruitment procedures that produce a disparate negative impact on minorities or women.

        Find this resource:

      • Karlan, Pamela S., and George Rutherglen. 1996. Disabilities, discrimination, and reasonable accommodation. Duke Law Journal 46.1:1–41.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This article overviews the statutory framework of the ADA and compares and contrasts it with that of “traditional” antidiscrimination statutes such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (forbidding discrimination on the basis of race, sex, and national origin). Although it is a legal article, the conceptual discussion is applicable to a social-scientific approach to disability discrimination.

        Find this resource:

      • Scotch, Richard K., and Kay Schriner. 1997. Disability as human variation: Implications for policy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 549:148–159.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        The authors explore the conceptual and policy limits of applying what they term a “minority group” model to people with disabilities, proposing that the elimination of stigma and discrimination is only a partial solution to the constraints faced by disabled persons on full social and economic integration and parity.

        Find this resource:

      In Specific Domains

      The study of discrimination often clusters around discrimination against certain socially salient groups—defined, for example, on the basis of race, sex, disability—and discrimination in certain areas—such as in housing, the labor market, or other important social and economic arenas. The subheadings in this section deal with the literature on discrimination in certain domains—Housing, Education, Employment and the Labor Market, and Criminal Justice—spanning various group targets of discrimination.

      Housing

      There is a substantial literature dedicated to detecting the existence of discrimination in housing and measuring the extent and nature of such discrimination. One of the pioneering sites for the use of audit studies was in the study of housing discrimination. Fix and Struyk 1992 is an edited volume reviewing the use of audit methodology, and the various contributors provide a very systematic discussion of the links between conceptual and methodological issues in the study of housing discrimination. Dymski 2006 summarizes a large body of research on discrimination in housing provision and credit markets for housing. Ross and Turner 2005 compares the results from audit studies in 1989 and 2000, assessing treatment discrimination against black and Hispanic testers (compared to white) and discussing possible interpretations and policy implications of their findings. Massey and Lundy 2001 offers an interesting twist on the traditional in-person audit methodology using testers speaking with identifiable black English vernacular, black accented English, and white middle-class English accents to conduct phone inquiries in the Philadelphia rental market. The study of housing discrimination also extends to the study of home-mortgage credit markets. Munnell, et al. 1996, a well-known study of mortgage lending in Boston, documents higher rejection rates for blacks and Hispanics relative to similarly situated whites. Williams, et al. 2005 looks at trends in home-mortgage lending and probes whether recent increases in minority home ownership and loans have occurred on equally favorable terms as those of whites. There is also a substantial literature on housing segregation, often looking to discrimination in the provision of housing or mortgage loans as one of the explanations of racial residential segregation. One of the most famous treatments of this topic is Massey and Denton 1993, which is a classic exploration of both the causes and consequences of racial segregation.

      • Dymski, Gary A. 2006. Discrimination in the credit and housing markets: Findings and challenges. In Handbook on the economics of discrimination. Edited by William M. Rodgers III, 215–259. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        The author overviews both the theories and empirical evidence that have been produced on housing and mortgage-lending discrimination. The article also provides a helpful overview of the legal framework addressing housing and credit discrimination and some of the data sources available on credit and mortgage-lending practices.

        Find this resource:

      • Fix, Michael, and Raymond Struyk, eds. 1992. Clear and convincing evidence: Measurement of discrimination in America. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        Contains a number of essays by different authors. The essays offer a very helpful discussion of key studies of housing discrimination, policy implications, the use of audit methods, and debates around the conceptualization of discrimination in housing, linking conceptual and methodological issues in a very clear and systematic way.

        Find this resource:

      • Massey, Douglas S., and Nancy A. Denton. 1993. American apartheid: Segregation and the making of the underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        The authors explore residential segregation as one of the primary mechanisms responsible for the perpetuation of racial inequality along numerous dimensions and trace its roots to, among other things, housing discrimination practiced on an institutional and personal level.

        Find this resource:

      • Massey, Douglas S., and Garvey Lundy. 2001. Use of black English and racial discrimination in urban housing markets: New methods and findings. Urban Affairs Review 36.4: 452–469.

        DOI: 10.1177/10780870122184957Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This study involved phone auditing of rental advertisements in the Philadelphia rental housing market, looking for racial discrimination on the basis of identifiable linguistic practices—speaking black English vernacular, black accented English, and white middle-class English. The authors measured various differential outcomes, including number of calls to reach an agent, barriers to access, and costs or prices quoted.

        Find this resource:

      • Munnell, Alicia H., Geoffrey M. B. Tootell, Lynn E. Browne, and James McEneaney. 1996. Mortgage lending in Boston: Interpreting HMDA data. American Economic Review 86.1: 25–53.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This study utilizes data from the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) and the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston to assess the extent to which higher rejection rates for black mortgage applicants, compared to white applicants, can be explained by racial differences in debt burdens, credit history, and other default-relevant factors.

        Find this resource:

      • Ross, Stephen L., and Margery Austin Turner. 2005. Housing discrimination in metropolitan America: Explaining changes between 1989 and 2000. Social Problems 52.2: 152–180.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        The article contains an informative discussion of various theoretical accounts of housing discrimination and findings from the national 1989 and 2000 Housing Discrimination Studies, which used matched-pair audit method to test for black-white and Hispanic-Anglo differential treatment in both rental and sales markets.

        Find this resource:

      • Williams, Richard, Reynold Nesiba, and Eileen Diaz McConnell. 2005. The changing face of inequality in home mortgage lending. Social Problems 52.2: 181–208.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        Against the backdrop of increasing rates of minority homeownership in the 1990s, the authors examine the rise of a new form of inequality in mortgage lending. They argue that, instead of explicit racial barriers and discrimination in mortgage lending, the new inequality in mortgage lending involves increased access for minority borrowers, but on less favorable terms.

        Find this resource:

      Education

      There is a vast literature documenting disparities in educational outcomes between various socially salient groups, such as racial, ethnic, or gender groups, and attempting to parse out the causes of these group disparities. For example, the National Center for Education Statistics (see Vanneman et al., 2009) regularly releases data on racial and gender achievement gaps, and a host of studies analyze data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Program (ECLS), documenting developmental and scholastic achievement differentials. Shavit, et al. 2007 explores inequalities in higher education. Discrimination in education is one of numerous other competing explanations for these disparities. An extensive exploration of the various theories that have been proposed and tested to explain racial achievement gaps in education, and their trends over time can be found in Magnuson and Waldfogel 2008. There are a variety of ways in which discrimination could manifest in educational settings, from using racial or gender stereotypes to track children into different types of programs, as supported by Mickelson 2001, to biased teacher perceptions of student’s skill or deflated expectations of competency, as supported by Ferguson 1998. Very helpful overviews of the empirical and methodological literature on discrimination in education can be found in Holzer and Ludwig 2003 and Farkas 2003. Some economists, such as Carneriro, et al. 2008, have attempted to methodologically address the possibility that anticipated discrimination in the labor market—understood as lower returns to skills for stigmatized groups—could depress expenditure of effort and resources on education if entrants accurately estimate expected return to educational investment.

      • Carneriro, Pedro, James J. Heckman, and Dimitriy V. Masterov. 2008. Understanding the sources of ethnic and racial wage gaps and their implications for policy. In Handbook of employment discrimination research: Rights and realities. Edited by Laura Beth Nielsen and Robert L. Nelson, 99–136. New York: Springer.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        Among other things, this paper uses data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth to attempt to estimate whether differences in measured skill or educational attainment are affected by expectations of discriminatory returns to skill or education.

        Find this resource:

      • Early Childhood Longitudinal Program (ECLS).

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This is a rich longitudinal data source on educational outcomes and school experiences; there are three waves from different time periods. The ECLS also posts a bibliography of data products and publications that have used the data, which is a valuable resource to identify a wide rage of studies on educational disparities or discrimination.

        Find this resource:

        • Farkas, George. 2003. Racial disparities and discrimination in education: What we know, how do we know it, and what do we need to know? College Record 105.6: 1119–1146.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          This article offers a wealth of citations to studies in the sociology of education that grapple with the question of discrimination in some aspect of education provision or administration. It also presents a very clear and accessible conceptual schema for identifying precise research questions and sorting out possible obstacles to drawing accurate inferences from available data.

          Find this resource:

        • Ferguson, Ronald. 1998. Teachers’ perceptions and expectations and the black-white test score gap. In The black-white test score gap. Edited by Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips, 273–317. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          This chapter reviews the theory and evidence for the proposition that biased teacher perceptions or expectations exasperate racial gaps in student achievement.

          Find this resource:

        • Holzer, H. J., and J. Ludwig. 2003. Measuring discrimination in education: Are methodologies from labor and housing markets useful? Teachers College Record 105.6: 114–1178.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          A comprehensive discussion of methodological issues involved in identifying discrimination in some aspect of education.

          Find this resource:

        • Magnuson, Katherine A., and Jane Waldfogel, eds. 2008. Steady gains and stalled progress: Inequality and the black-white test score gap. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          Contains essays by various top researchers in the research field addressing racial achievement gaps and their change over time.

          Find this resource:

        • Mickelson, Roslyn Arlin. 2001. Subverting Swann: First- and second-generation segregation in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools. American Educational Research Journal 38.2:215–252.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          The author examines segregation at the between-school and within-school level, documenting evidence of discriminatory practices and outcomes in tracking of black students into lower educational opportunities.

          Find this resource:

        • Shavit, Yossi, Richard Arum, and Adam Gamoran, eds. 2007. Stratification in higher education: A comparative study. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          The book offers an international comparative investigation of inequality in education, particularly in higher education. It contains numerous studies by a variety of authors addressing more than fifteen different nations, including a chapter on stratification in higher education in the United States.

          Find this resource:

        • Vanneman, Alan, Linda Hamilton, Janet Baldwin Anderson, and Taslima Rahman. 2009. Achievement gaps: How black and white students in public schools perform in mathematics and reading on the national assessment of educational progress. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          This is one of various reports issued by the National Center for Education Statistics presenting data on testing and educational achievement broken down along racial, ethnic, and gender lines.

          Find this resource:

        Employment and Labor Market

        Employment and labor market discrimination are the most studied sites of discrimination. Scholars give so much attention to employment discrimination because the labor market is the site where most individuals earn income for subsistence, and because the labor market is one of the primary institutions productive of social stratification. Further, employment discrimination was one of the primary targets of the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964. There are extensive bodies of literature exploring labor market discrimination by race and sex, and smaller literatures devoted to other types of discrimination, such as discrimination by ethnicity or sexual orientation. Rodgers 2006 is a handbook covering various methodological, empirical, and policy issues in the study of employment discrimination, with contributions mostly from economists. Pager and Shepherd 2008 and Quillian 2006 offer helpful overview articles focusing on the sociological literature. Because the literature addressing employment discrimination is so massive, it helps to divide it along disciplinary boundaries, although the two are not mutually exclusive in terms of either theory or method.

        • Pager, Devah, and Hana Shepherd. 2008. The sociology of discrimination: Racial discrimination in employment, housing, credit, and consumer markets. Annual Review of Sociology 34:181–209.

          DOI: 10.1146/annurev.soc.33.040406.131740Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          One section of this review article is dedicated to employment and labor markets on the basis of race and contains a wealth of citations on contemporary studies of the subject.

          Find this resource:

        • Quillian, Lincoln. 2006. New approaches to understanding racial prejudice and discrimination. Annual Review of Sociology 32:299–328.

          DOI: 10.1146/annurev.soc.32.061604.123132Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          Most of the studies cited here address race-based employment discrimination, with a focus on audit studies. The article also contains some citations of international studies of employment discrimination.

          Find this resource:

        • Rodgers, William, ed. 2006. Handbook on the economics of discrimination. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          This handbook offers an overview of the most common methods used to identify employment discrimination generally and a few chapters detailing empirical evidence of discrimination based on specific traits, such as disability, age, and sexual orientation. One section of this review article is dedicated in employment and labor markets on the basis of race and contains a wealth of citations to contemporary studies of the subject.

          Find this resource:

        Economic Approaches

        Although economic theories are often contested in sociology, they form an important backdrop and counterpoint to the sociological study of discrimination, and they are prominent in policymaking circles. In a classic economic account, Becker 1971, the cause of discrimination is a “taste,” or preference about which types of people one desires to associate with, work for, work with, live near, or otherwise encounter, no different than a preference for certain types of consumer goods. In this account, prejudiced employers receive utility from discrimination but also suffer costs from lost profits by paying a wage premium for workers with a particular trait (who, by assumption, did not vary in productivity). Consequently, this model predicts that, under certain assumptions, discriminatory employers will be driven out of the market and wage gaps eroded over the time by competition and free-entry of non-discriminating firms. Phelps 1972 and Arrow 1973 pioneered another popular economic theory, termed statistical discrimination, which builds on the assumption that employers undertake hiring decisions in the context of imperfect information about applicants’ relevant efficiency traits—skill, reliability, turnover rate, trainability, etc. Furthermore, the search costs of acquiring accurate information about these relevant traits for each applicant is costly. Statistical discrimination refers to the use of ascriptive traits, such as sex, race, ethnicity, as proxies for the relevant productive propensity of applicants when employers believe sex, racial, or ethnic groups have different average efficiency traits. Aigner and Cain 1977 extends the statistical discrimination model to consider the implications of different assumptions concerning the precision of employers’ measures of applicants’ ability. They explore the implications for the statistical discrimination model of varying assumptions about the average abilities of each group, the variation in ability within each group, and the variance and reliability of the tests used to measure ability between groups. Altonji and Blank 1999 provides a rich overview of major economic theories of discrimination, including more recent expansions on taste-based accounts of discrimination in the context of imperfect information about relevant worker characteristics such as competency, skill, and effort. Unlike the simple taste model of discrimination, where the long-run equilibrium predicts elimination of discrimination through competition, these models show that long-run equilibrium of group differences are consistent with competitive markets plagued by informational problems.

        • Aigner, Dennis J., and Glen G. Cain. 1977. Statistical theories of discrimination in labor markets. Industrial and Labor Relations Review 30.2: 175–187.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          This paper discusses conceptual clarifications of the meaning of statistical between-group discrimination and presents various formal models to explore the implications of differential reliability and variance in productivity indicators between groups. Familiarity with technical economic modeling helpful for parsing the paper’s arguments.

          Find this resource:

        • Altonji, Joseph G., and Rebecca M. Blank. 1999. Race and gender in the labor market. In Handbook of labor economics. Vol. 3C. Edited by Orley C. Ashenfelter and David Card, 3143–3259. New York: Elsevier.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          A very thorough and extensive overview of economic models of discrimination, including “taste-based” and statistical discrimination models. The various theories are presented conceptually and in model (mathematical) format, so large portions of the paper require moderate to advanced understanding of economic notation. The authors also discus various methodological issues in the research of labor market discrimination.

          Find this resource:

        • Arrow, Kenneth. 1973. The theory of discrimination. In Discrimination in labor markets. Edited by Orley Ashenfelter and Albert Reese, 3–33. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          In this seminal paper, Arrrow discusses both Becker’s taste theory of discrimination and develops his model of discrimination as a response to imperfect information in the labor market where race (or sex or another ascriptive trait) is used as a proxy for productivity.

          Find this resource:

        • Becker, Gary. 1971. The economics of discrimination. 2d ed. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          This is the seminal book for economic taste-based theories of discrimination; most of the argument is explicated in text but also presented in formal economic mathematical models.

          Find this resource:

        • Phelps, Edmund S. 1972. The statistical theory of racism and sexism. American Economic Review 62.4: 659–661.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          One of the first articles to introduce the theory of statistical discrimination, it is a very short and clear statement of the theory in both text and formal mathematical model format.

          Find this resource:

        Sociological Approaches

        The sociological approach to discrimination tends to focus on how the social and cultural meanings of various groups are constructed, and in turn deployed to the systematically disadvantage of certain groups. Sociological theories of labor market discrimination also tend to focus on the role of labor markets in generating long-term and stable patterns of social stratification. Tilly 1998 and Lucas 2008 exemplify such an approach. Building on a Weberian and Marxian framework, Tilly theorizes discrimination as productive of categorical differences (i.e., race, sex, ethnic differences) and deeply linked to durable patterns of inequality. Tilly’s approach is paradigmatic of a sociological approach to discrimination, because the focus is on organizational and institutional processes not reducible to individual-level preferences or beliefs. Lucas 2008 theorizes discrimination as a damaged social relation, a “matrix of norms, values, and public support mechanisms,” extending beyond an individual-level encounter between a disadvantaged victim and a discriminatory perpetrator (p. 175). The seminal work by Blumer 1958 on racial prejudice gave rise to what some have termed the conflict theory of discrimination, which holds that discrimination is motivated by the desire of dominant group members to guard valuable social and economic resources against the perceived threats of out-group members. Bobo and Hutchings 1996 overviews various lines of theory and research on group conflict theory and provides survey data on different groups’ perceptions of threat or competition. While many sociological accounts, such as Reskin 2000, cite individual-level beliefs, values or nonconscious associations as causes of employment discrimination, they often also cite organizational processes and structures as the key mediating force that can either constrain or foster the translation of individual-level biases into discriminatory conduct. Sociological accounts of discrimination also urge us to consider that discrimination operates not merely through differential reward to similar levels of skill, but through the exclusionary function of certain patters of social association, such as networks or housing. Royster 2003 uses qualitative methods to document the discriminatory functioning of segregated employment networks.

        • Blumer, Herbert. 1958. Race prejudice as a sense of group position. The Pacific Sociological Review 1.1: 3–7.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          In this short yet influential article, Blumer argues that prejudice is not an individual-level, subjective phenomenon born of personal experience or affect, but rather an emergent social phenomenon born of intergroup dynamics and competition.

          Find this resource:

        • Bobo, Lawrence, and Vincent L. Hutchings. 1996. Perceptions of racial group competition: Extending Blumer’s theory of group position to a multiracial social context. American Sociological Review 61.6: 951–972.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          The authors review various theories of group conflict and competition, including Blumer’s classic theory of group position, and present survey data on black, Asian, white, and Latino beliefs about perceived competition in key areas such as job, housing, politics, and general economic resources.

          Find this resource:

        • Lucas, Samuel Roundfield. 2008. Theorizing discrimination in an era of contested prejudice: Discrimination in the United States. Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          This is an extensive theoretical treatment putting forward a new paradigm for conceptualizing discrimination and measuring its effects. The author proposes analyzing discrimination as a “damaged social relation.”

          Find this resource:

        • Reskin, Barbara F. 2000. The proximate causes of employment discrimination. Contemporary Sociology 29.2: 319–328.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          Reskin draws on social cognition theory to explicate the individual-level cognitive basis for discrimination, and further argues that sociologists should focus on understanding the “proximate causes” of discrimination, which include the organizational context in which decisions are made that can either foster or inhibit the indulgence of cognitive bias against out-groups.

          Find this resource:

        • Royster, Deirdre A. 2003. Race and the invisible hand: How white networks exclude black men from blue-collar jobs. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          Using extended interviews with young black and white men during their school-to-work transition years, Royster documents various forms of discrimination, including the exclusionary functioning of social networks in securing jobs in blue-collar industries.

          Find this resource:

        • Tilly, Charles. 1998. Durable inequality. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          Tilly’s book sets out to explain those lasting forms of inequality in life chances and material well-being that we observe persisting over generations; he argues that such durable inequalities grow up along categorical distinctions, as opposed to individual-level gradients in skills, attributes, or performance.

          Find this resource:

        Criminal Justice

        As incarceration rates have skyrocketed in the United States over the last few decades, social scientists have given increased attention to studying why there are such high levels of minorities involved in the criminal justice system, debating whether discrimination may be one of the explanations for this phenomenon. Pettit and Western 2004 documents the racial disparities in imprisonment between white and black men, comparing current trends with those of thirty years ago to demonstrate how the incarceration boom has disproportionately affected black Americans. Blumstein 1993 is a well-respected study of racial disparities in prisons, showing that for the most serious crime types (e.g., homicide, burglary), the majority of racial disparities in prison are accounted for by racial composition at arrest, with the notable exception of those incarcerated for drug offenses, which make up an ever-larger proportion of prison populations. Tonry 1995 also examines whether disproportionate minority incarceration rates can be accounted for by differences in offense rates or discrimination at various points in the criminal justice system by focusing on drug arrests—the largest category of nonviolent crimes where disproportionate incarceration rates are not explained primarily by disproportionate offense rates. Sampson and Lauritsen 1997 overviews a substantial selection of the literature addressing discrimination or bias at different points of contact in the criminal justice system, including police encounters, bail, conviction, sentencing, and types of penalties. Sociologists have also looked at how the unequal distribution of mass imprisonment—highly concentrated among young black men without college educations—creates social meanings and practices that engender discrimination in other areas outside of the criminal justice system. Wacquant 2001 argues that mass incarceration of young black men has served a “race making” function—producing a stigmatized social meaning of blackness that in turn affects the lived experiences of black Americans in every arena of social and economic life. Western 2006 explores how incarceration affects various key life outcomes, such as employment, wages, and family formation, and argues that mass incarceration functions to stigmatize African Americans, further subjecting them to discrimination and exclusion from various mainstream institutions. Pager 2007 documents how a criminal felony record operates as a negative credential in the labor force, especially for black job seekers, thus further disadvantaging this class of individuals, who are already subject to racial discrimination in the labor market. Wakefield and Uggen 2010 overview the literature on incarceration and stratification, noting that incarceration is now widely understood as a influential institution in the (re)production of social inequality.

        • Blumstein, Alfred. 1993. Racial disproportionality of U.S. prison populations revisited. University of Colorado Law Review 64.3: 743–760.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          The author looks at the difference between racial composition at arrest and racial composition in prison within various crime categories to estimate whether discrimination at the various points of discretion within criminal justice processing is responsible for the disproportionately high levels of minority men in prison.

          Find this resource:

        • Pager, Devah. 2007. Marked: Race, crime, and finding work in an era of mass incarceration. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          Pager uses audit methods to demonstrate that a criminal record severely restricts the employment possibilities of ex-felons. Her study also documents racial discrimination in the labor market: white male testers assigned a felony record were more likely to receive an employment offer than black male testers without a felony record.

          Find this resource:

        • Pettit, Becky, and Bruce Western. 2004. Mass imprisonment and the life course: Race and class inequality in U.S. incarceration. American Sociological Review 69.2: 151–169.

          DOI: 10.1177/000312240406900201Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          Using data from various governmental sources, the authors estimate the lifetime risk of imprisonment for various demographic groups and document the rising disparities in racial and educational composition of the growing prison population.

          Find this resource:

        • Sampson, Robert J., and Janet L. Lauritsen. 1997. Racial and ethnic disparities in crime and criminal justice in the United States. Crime and Justice 21: 311–374.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          This review article offers a “big picture” take on the expansive literature addressing racial disparities in both victimization and criminal justice outcomes (e.g. arrest, bail, sentencing, etc.). It is a great resource for those seeking to understand the current state of theoretical and empirical debates on these topics and to find citations of specific studies addressing questions related to race, ethnicity, and crime.

          Find this resource:

        • Tonry, Michael H. 1995. Malign neglect: Race, crime, and punishment in America. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          This book examines racial disparities in various levels of the criminal justice system, from both a normative and descriptive point of view.

          Find this resource:

        • Wacquant, Loic. 2001. Deadly symbiosis: When ghetto and prison meet and mesh. Punishment & Society 3.1: 95–133.

          DOI: 10.1177/14624740122228276Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          The author argues mass incarceration of African Americans serves the same sociocultural function of prior institutions of racial oppression, such as slavery and Jim Crow, to manage and stigmatize lower-class black Americans.

          Find this resource:

        • Wakefield, Sara and Christopher Uggen. 2010. Incarceration and stratification. Annual Review of Sociology 36:387–406.

          DOI: 10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102551Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          A very helpful review article addressing the theoretical and empirical literature on the link between mass incarceration and social inequality. The authors cover how mass incarceration affects inequalities in a wide variety of domains, including labor markets, education, health, and family formation.

          Find this resource:

        • Western, Bruce. 2006. Punishment and inequality in America. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          This book explores incarceration in the context of the reproduction of social inequality. The author documents how mass incarceration functions as a labor market institution, effectively concealing aspects of inequality by transferring large numbers of the most disadvantaged populations into penal institutions, and how incarceration functions to reproduce and expand social inequality by limiting the life chances of an already disadvantaged class of people.

          Find this resource:

        LAST MODIFIED: 07/27/2011

        DOI: 10.1093/OBO/9780199756384-0013

        back to top

        Article

        Up

        Down