Socioeconomic Differentials among Single-race and Multi-race Japanese Americans

This article was downloaded by: [University of Texas at Austin]On: 04 October 2011, At: 18:44Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Ethnic and Racial StudiesPublication details, including instructions for authorsand subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rers20

Socioeconomic differentialsamong single-race and multi-race Japanese AmericansArthur Sakamoto, Isao Takei & Hyeyoung Woo

Available online: 02 Feb 2011

To cite this article: Arthur Sakamoto, Isao Takei & Hyeyoung Woo (2011): Socioeconomicdifferentials among single-race and multi-race Japanese Americans, Ethnic and RacialStudies, 34:9, 1445-1465

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2011.539241

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expresslyforbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make anyrepresentation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up todate. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should beindependently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liablefor any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damageswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith or arising out of the use of this material.

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rers20

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2011.539241

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Socioeconomic differentials among single-

race and multi-race Japanese Americans

Arthur Sakamoto, Isao Takei and Hyeyoung Woo

(First submission June 2007; First published February 2011)

AbstractUsing data from the 2000 US Census, this study investigates variousgroups of single-race and multi-race Japanese Americans in terms of theirschooling and wages. The results indicate that all categories of JapaneseAmericans tend to have higher schooling than whites. Single-raceJapanese Americans tend to have higher schooling than multi-raceJapanese Americans, and 1.5-generation Japanese Americans tend tohave higher schooling than native-born Japanese Americans. With theexception of foreign-educated, immigrant Japanese Americans, most ofthe wage differentials are explained by schooling and a few otherdemographic characteristics. These results are rather inconsistent withtraditional assimilation theory which posits rising socioeconomic attain-ments with increasing acculturation. Instead, the findings suggest areverse pattern by which the groups that are more closely related to Japantend to have higher levels of educational attainment which then becometranslated into higher wages.

Keywords: Asian Americans; assimilation; multi-race; racial classification; Japan;

education.

We investigate the demographic profile of contemporary JapaneseAmericans with a focus on their socioeconomic attainments. Whilesome basic tabulations are available (US Census Bureau 2004; Xie andGoyette 2004; Akiba 2006), recent studies have ignored the systematicanalysis of the education and wages of Japanese Americans. Althougha couple of references focusing on Japanese American men may befound in the literature (Sakamoto and Furuichi 1997; Sakamoto, Liuand Tzeng 1998), these investigations are based on older data thatare not indicative of the more current demographic features of theJapanese Americans. In particular, prior studies do not consider the

Ethnic and Racial Studies Vol. 34 No. 9 September 2011 pp. 1445�1465

# 2011 Taylor & FrancisISSN 0141-9870 print/1466-4356 onlineDOI: 10.1080/01419870.2011.539241

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

multi-racial dimension of the Japanese American population becausesuch information was not collected until the advent of the 2000 Censusracial classification system.

The lack of interest in contemporary Japanese Americans contrastswith the continued fascination with the notorious historical eventsrelating to the World War II era. Currently popular references onJapanese Americans implicitly portray them as ‘the group that wasinterned’. This characterization has unfortunately crowded outresearch on the salient life activities, achievements and generalcircumstances of Japanese Americans today. That is, the agency ofcontemporary Japanese Americans is disregarded when even theiressential demographic profile is typically dismissed as uninterestingbecause this group has been largely relegated to the study ofinternment camps and related issues associated with World War II.

In the following, we instead assume that the study of contemporaryJapanese Americans is noteworthy for several reasons. First, JapaneseAmericans constitute an important example of a racial minority which �in contrast to most Asian Americans who are primarily post-1965population groups � suffered from extremely harsh discrimination inthe pre-civil rights era, thus providing an additional insight into theevolving nature of the American stratification system. Second,Japanese Americans provide an avenue to study the enumerationand socioeconomic status of multi-race persons which again differssignificantly from most post-1965 Asian American groups. Third, theclosely related issue of assimilation may also be investigated usingJapanese Americans as an additional case study. Thus, the study ofJapanese Americans should not be narrowly confined to historicaldiscussions or peripheral ideological debates associated with ‘modelminority myth’ (Sakamoto and Yap 2006; Sakamoto, Goyette andKim 2009).

The socioeonomic attainments of Japanese Americans

The first Japanese American immigrants to the US (i.e. the Issei)reached a significant population size in the early twentieth century(Hirschman and Wong 1986, p. 7). On average, the educational level ofthe Issei at that time was higher than that of African Americans,Italian Americans, Mexican Americans and Native Americans, butlower than that of English Americans, German Americans, IrishAmericans and Scottish Americans (Darity, Dietrich and Guilkey1997, p. 302). As of 1910, most Issei were primarily employed in low-wage agricultural work so that their mean occupational status waslow and similar to that of African Americans (Darity, Dietrichand Guilkey 1997, p. 302). The Issei tended to move into small

1446 Arthur Sakamoto et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

self-employed farming and related businesses, however, which im-proved their incomes (Nee and Wong 1985).

The Issei had such a high level of fertility that by 1930 the majorityof the Japanese American population was comprised of native-born,second-generation children (i.e. the Nisei). Despite their typicallymodest socioeconomic origins, the Nisei of this era had highereducational attainment than whites (Thomas 1952; Bonacich andModell 1980; Hirschman and Wong 1986; Sakamoto, Liu and Tzeng1998; Sakamoto, Wu and Tzeng 2000; Chin 2005; Akiba 2006). Forexample, Sakamoto, Liu and Tzeng’s (1998, p. 233) analysis of the1940 Census data finds that the mean years of schooling completed byNisei men in the labour force was 2.26 higher than for whites.1 Thehigher educational attainment of the Nisei is notable given theirtendency (relative to whites) to be of slightly lower socioeconomicbackground (i.e. having parents with rural origins and more modestlevels of education, occupational status and income), as is evident inthe multivariate statistical results of Featherman and Hauser (1978,p. 449) and Mare and Winship (1988, p. 190).

Research on Nisei men suggests that this group faced considerablediscrimination in the labour market before World War II (Ichihashi1932; Thomas 1952; Levine and Montero 1973; Hirschman and Wong1986; Sakamoto, Liu and Tzeng 1998; Sakamoto, Wu and Tzeng 2000;Yoo 2000; Chin 2005). These studies find that Nisei men tended tohave lower levels of occupational status and income compared to whitemen with similar ages and educational credentials. Despite oftenhaving college degrees in an era when such credentials were rare, manyNisei would not be employed by white-owned companies, and largeproportions ended up working as gardeners and grocers in theJapanese-American economic enclave (Kitano 1976).

By contrast, some research for the post-civil rights era finds thatnative-born Japanese-American men tend to have wages that are moresimilar to those of whites after controlling for education and otherdemographic factors (Sakamoto and Furuichi 1997; Sakamoto, Liuand Tzeng 1998; Zeng and Xie 2004). When compared to the pre-World War II era, the improvement in the occupational attainments ofnative born Japanese-American men seems so substantial that youngpeople today may not even be aware of the old stereotypes (i.e. of Niseimen as gardeners and grocers). These conclusions are based on the1990 Census data which uses a single-race classification system(Sakamoto, Goyette and Kim 2009).

We update this literature by analysing the 2000 Census data. Weprovide a comprehensive investigation of the Japanese-Americanpopulation by including both foreign-born and native-born JapaneseAmericans. We also consider women who have been excluded fromprior statistical studies of the socioeconomic attainments of Japanese

Contemporary Japanese Americans 1447

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

Americans. Furthermore, we utilize the more detailed racial categor-ization that is available in the 2000 Census in order to study multi-raceJapanese Americans who are a significant component of the con-temporary Japanese-American population because post-1965 immi-gration from Japan has been limited (Min 2006).

Intermarriage and multi-race Japanese Americans

Although the theoretical analysis of assimilation is beyond ourresearch concerns, we generally use that term to refer to tendenciesfor increased English-language usage, intermarriage and the adoptionof more mainstream American values, lifestyles and social associa-tions. Following conventional usage, assimilation usually encompassestwo generic processes. The first is intra-generational change whichtypically refers to foreign-born persons as they accumulate more yearsof experience in the US. The second is inter-generational change whichtypically refers to average differences across successive generations (i.e.immigrants versus their offspring).

Japanese Americans are often described as the most assimilatedAsian American group (Xie and Goyette 2004, p. 3). Among AsianAmericans, Japanese Americans are the only group for which themajority are native born and speak only English at home (Xie andGoyette 2004, p. 7). In regard to the traditional Asian custom ofresiding with elderly parents, the rate of such households is loweramong Japanese Americans than any other Asian group and is in factthe same as for whites (Xie and Goyette 2004, p. 21). Among Asiangroups, Japanese Americans have the lowest rate of post-1965immigration (which leads to lower ‘ethnic replenishment’) and thehighest rate of multi-race identity (Xie and Goyette 2004, p. 7; Min2006, p. 26). Indeed, Japanese Americans are the only Asian group inthe US whose single-race population size appears actually to havedeclined in absolute terms between the 1990 and 2000 Censuses.2

According to Xie and Goyette (2004, p. 24), 69 per cent of marriedJapanese-American men have a spouse who is Japanese Americanwhile 51 per cent of married Japanese-American women have a spousewho is Japanese American. Though these figures suggest a fair degreeof persistent marital homogamy, we emphasize that they refer only tosingle-race Japanese Americans. As the Japanese-American populationbecomes increasingly multi-race, intermarriage rates based on single-race Japanese represent an increasingly selected portion of theJapanese-American population that is more likely to be foreign-born(i.e. persons with greater marital homogamy (Akiba 2006, p. 159))than are the native-born and multi-race portions of the Japanese-American population.3 In general, multi-race Asian Americans are


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

known to be far more likely than single-race Asian Americans to bemarried to a non-Asian (Xie and Goyette 2004, p. 24).

The results reported by Xie and Goyette (2004, p. 7) imply that 31per cent of the Japanese-American population is multi-race. Althoughnot formally included in the Japanese-American racial categoryaccording to the official classification system of the 2000 Census, anadditional 102,200 non-Asian persons (most of whom identify assingle-race whites) reported having some Japanese ancestry but did notidentify as Asian or Japanese as a racial group.4 These non-Asianpersons with Japanese ancestry might include, for example, those whohave one grandparent or one great-grandparent who was Japanese. Ifnon-Asian persons who report some Japanese ancestry are added intothe Japanese-American population, then the proportion that is multi-race increases to 36 per cent. This figure should be interpreted as alower-bound estimate, however, because the 2000 Census question-naire mentions only ‘ancestry’ in general without specifically inquiringabout multiple ‘ancestries’ so that some persons who identify as whitemay have simply neglected to mention that they also have someJapanese ancestry.

The trend towards intermarriage is also evident in the results ofSakamoto, Kim and Takei (2011). Using recent data, their analysisinvestigates not only single-race Japanese Americans but also personswho identify as multi-race or multi-ethnic Japanese including single-race whites who report having some Japanese ancestry. Combining allof these groups to represent the total Japanese-American population,Sakamoto, Kim and Takei (2011) find that less than half (i.e. 44 percent) of married Japanese Americans are single-race Japanese Amer-icans married to another single-race Japanese American. Amongsingle-race, married Japanese Americans, about 58 per cent havespouses who are also single-race Japanese American (which is fairlyconsistent with the rates reported by Xie and Goyette (2004) notedabove). Among persons who identify specifically as multi-raceJapanese (including single-race whites who report having someJapanese ancestry), only about 7 per cent are married to a single-race Japanese American.

This trend towards Japanese-American intermarriage and a multi-race Japanese-American population may accelerate in the comingyears because native-born, single-race Japanese Americans who aremarried to other native-born, single-race Japanese Americans tend tobe elderly couples (Sakamoto, Kim and Takei 2011) who are likelyto pass away relatively soon. Outmarriage among younger native-born, single-race Japanese Americans is greater than among elderlyJapanese-American cohorts who were often subject to ‘miscegenation’laws or related lingering negative attitudes towards intermarriage. The58 per cent figure noted above (in regard to marital homogamy among


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

single-race Japanese Americans) is likely to decline substantially in thenear future as the elderly Nisei couples pass away.

In sum, the results indicate that outmarriage among JapaneseAmericans is common and that multi-race Japanese Americans are asubstantial component of the total Japanese-American population.The numerically enumerated growth of the latter as a proportion of thetotal Japanese-American population may be statistically dampened,however, because very few of them marry with a single-race JapaneseAmerican. Their offspring may drop out from being counted as part ofthe Japanese-American population if they no longer identify withbeing Japanese and view themselves as being completely assimilatedinto another racial or ethnic category. Thus, statistics such as thosereported by Xie and Goyette (2004) which refer only to single-raceJapanese Americans are increasingly referring to a select group of thetotal Japanese-American population if the latter is understood toinclude all of the descendants of persons who emigrated from Japan tothe US.

Methods

Data and target populations

We use data from the 5 per cent Public Use Microdata Sample(PUMS) of the 2000 Census. These data provide an adequate samplesize for Japanese Americans as well as reliable information onsocioeconomic and demographic characteristics including multi-raceidentification. In order to limit the sample to individuals with someclear attachment to the labour force, only persons who worked at least1,040 hours in 1999 are included. We further limit the sample to theages of 25 and 64 as is commonly done in labour-force studies. Becauseour primary focus is on racial differentials, the statistical analyses areestimated separately by gender.

Our analysis considers the following eight groups that are summar-ized in Table 1: (1) single-race, foreign-born Japanese; (2) single-race1.5-generation Japanese (i.e. foreign born but began schooling in theUS at the high school level or earlier); (3) single-race, native-bornJapanese; (4) native-born biracial persons who identify as Japaneseand Chinese; (5) native-born biracial persons who identify as Japaneseand non-Hispanic white; (6) native-born biracial persons who identifyas Japanese and African American;5 (7) single-race, native-born non-Hispanic whites with Japanese ancestry; and the reference category of(8) single-race, native-born non-Hispanic whites without Japaneseancestry. Although other groups of Japanese-origin persons do exist,their sample sizes were too low in these data to permit them to beinvestigated.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

Variables and regression models

The first dependent variable that we analyse is years of schoolingcompleted. Using an OLS regression model, the independent variablesinclude years of age, the square of years of age, a dichotomous variableto indicate disability status and a dichotomous variable to indicatewhether has had any military experience. The second socioeconomicoutcome that we analyse is the hourly wage derived from total labour-force earnings and hours worked in 1999. In order to adjust for thehighly positive skew in wages, the log transformation is applied(Sakamoto and Furuichi 1997). For this regression the independentvariables include years of age, the square of years of age, adichotomous variable to indicate disability status, a dichotomousvariable to indicate whether has had any military experience, adichotomous variable to indicate metropolitan residence, three dichot-omous variables to indicate region of residence (i.e. South, Midwest orNortheast versus West as the reference category) and five dichotomousvariables to indicate the highest level of education completed (highschool, some college, associate degree, college degree or a graduatedegree versus less than high school as the reference category).

Empirical results

Descriptive statistics

Descriptive statistics for men are shown in Table 2. The sample sizesfor the racial groups are: (1) 2369 single-race, foreign-born (i.e.‘immigrant’) Japanese; (2) 752 single-race 1.5-generation (i.e. ‘1.5generation’) Japanese; (3) 4952 single-race native-born (i.e. ‘native-born’) Japanese; (4); 139 native-born Japanese and Chinese biracialpersons (i.e. ‘Chinese Japanese’); (5) 150 native-born Japanese andwhite biracial persons (i.e. ‘white Japanese’); (6) 61 native-born

Table 1. Racial/ethnic groups

Group Description

Group 1 Immigrant Japanese (born in Japan and schooled in Japan)Group 2 1.5-generation Japanese (born in Japan but schooled primarily in US)Group 3 Native-Born Japanese (single-race Japanese born in US)Group 4 Chinese Japanese (identify as Chinese and Japanese born in US)Group 5 White Japanese (identify as bi-racial white and Japanese born in US)Group 6 Black Japanese (identify as bi-racial African American and Japanese

born in US)Group 7 Japanese whites (identify as native-born, single-race whites but with

some Japanese ancestry)Group 8 Whites (identify as native-born, non-Hispanic, non-Japanese, single-

race whites)


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

Table 2. Descriptive statistics for men

Immigrant

Japanese

1.5-generation

Japanese

Native-born

Japanese

Chinese

Japanese White Japanese

Black

Japanese Japanese whites Whites

Variable Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

Age 42.37 9.36 40.44 9.81 43.98 9.75 36.41 8.19 37.80 8.39 37.29 6.44 38.39 7.70 42.97 10.17

Educational attainment

Years of schooling 15.72 2.91 15.48 2.55 15.19 2.55 15.48 2.21 14.15 2.61 14.42 2.49 14.40 2.55 13.92 2.73

(less than high

school)

0.04 0.19 0.01 0.11 0.02 0.13 0.01 0.08 0.06 0.25 0.05 0.21 0.04 0.21 0.09 0.29

high school 0.13 0.34 0.09 0.29 0.13 0.34 0.08 0.27 0.30 0.46 0.24 0.43 0.22 0.41 0.29 0.45

some college 0.08 0.27 0.21 0.41 0.22 0.42 0.19 0.39 0.23 0.42 0.29 0.46 0.27 0.44 0.22 0.42

associate degree 0.04 0.19 0.08 0.27 0.10 0.30 0.09 0.28 0.06 0.23 0.06 0.24 0.09 0.29 0.07 0.26

college degree 0.47 0.50 0.38 0.49 0.35 0.48 0.47 0.50 0.22 0.41 0.19 0.39 0.25 0.43 0.20 0.40

more than college 0.24 0.43 0.22 0.42 0.18 0.38 0.17 0.37 0.13 0.34 0.17 0.37 0.12 0.33 0.12 0.32

Metropolitan area 0.95 0.22 0.94 0.23 0.89 0.31 0.88 0.33 0.82 0.38 0.86 0.35 0.88 0.33 0.73 0.44

Region

(West) 0.46 0.50 0.67 0.47 0.89 0.31 0.87 0.34 0.58 0.49 0.45 0.50 0.63 0.48 0.19 0.39

Northeast 0.23 0.42 0.13 0.34 0.03 0.17 0.02 0.14 0.07 0.26 0.16 0.37 0.07 0.26 0.20 0.40

Midwest 0.15 0.35 0.08 0.27 0.04 0.19 0.06 0.24 0.04 0.21 0.11 0.31 0.12 0.32 0.27 0.44

South 0.16 0.37 0.12 0.32 0.04 0.20 0.05 0.22 0.31 0.46 0.28 0.45 0.18 0.38 0.34 0.47

Wage 42.31 49.97 27.75 31.05 27.81 30.23 22.67 16.91 26.40 32.43 21.79 15.42 23.67 23.55 24.46 31.27

Log-wage 3.31 0.94 3.01 0.76 3.05 0.71 2.91 0.65 2.95 0.74 2.83 0.74 2.91 0.69 2.87 0.76

Total 2,369 752 4,952 139 150 61 1,177 2,202,551

Source: 2000 5 per cent PUMS

Note

Variables in parentheses are omitted categories used in regression models.

14

52

Arth

ur

Sa

ka

mo

toet

al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

Japanese and African American biracial persons (i.e. ‘black Japanese’);(7) 1177 single-race whites with Japanese ancestry (i.e. ‘Japanesewhites’); and (8) 2,202,551 non-Hispanic whites. These sample sizesshow that the largest Japanese-origin groups are native-born Japanese,immigrant Japanese and Japanese whites. The smallest groups haveconsiderably lower sample sizes including black Japanese, ChineseJapanese and white Japanese. The much larger number of Japanesewhites compared to white Japanese may derive from many whiteJapanese intermarrying with whites and having offspring who identifythemselves as Japanese whites which appears to be consistent with theresults of Sakamoto, Kim and Takei (2011).

In terms of residence, Table 2 shows that all the Japanese-origingroups are more likely than non-Hispanic whites to live in the West orin a metropolitan area. Average age is youngest for the biracial groupsand for Japanese whites. All the Japanese-origin groups are more likelythan non-Hispanic whites to have a graduate degree, and the meanyears of schooling is higher for each Japanese-origin group than fornon-Hispanic whites.

Regarding the mean wage, it is higher for some Japanese-origingroups but lower for Chinese Japanese, black Japanese and Japanesewhites who are notably younger than whites (and age is correlated withlabour-market experience which is associated with higher wages).Immigrant Japanese men stand out, however, as having a very highaverage wage which may reflect some selectivity in this immigrantstream. In regard to understanding this statistical finding, many(though certainly not all) of these foreign-born and foreign-educatedJapanese men are likely to be employees of Japanese corporations whoare sent to the US on temporary assignment to work in Americanbranch offices. These Japanese employees are typically temporaryresidents in the US, and their high wages derive from the pay systemsof Japanese corporations that are highly globalized6 (Zeng and Xie2004, p. 1101; Akiba 2006, p. 165).

Descriptive statistics for women are shown in Table 3. The samplesizes include 2111 immigrant Japanese, 802 1.5-generation Japanese,4581 native-born Japanese, 141 Chinese Japanese, 146 white Japanese,57 black Japanese, 1122 Japanese whites and 1,926,246 non-Hispanicwhites. Though a bit lower in absolute terms, the relative ranking ofthese sample sizes is almost the same as for men. The finding thatJapanese whites are the third largest group of Japanese-origin persons(i.e. more than half the population size of immigrant Japanese)suggests a high level of assimilation and intermarriage as discussedearlier. This conclusion is especially notable given that, as wassuggested above, Japanese whites are likely to be undercounted.

As is the case among men, the biracial groups and Japanese whiteshave younger average ages among women. Japanese-origin women are


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

Table 3. Descriptive statistics for women

Immigrant

Japanese

1.5-generation

Japanese

Native-born

Japanese

Chinese

Japanese

White

Japanese

Black

Japanese

Japanese

whites Whites

Variable Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

Age 45.05 10.58 38.66 9.67 44.24 9.69 37.35 8.39 38.26 8.54 38.53 6.74 38.34 8.11 42.84 10.11

Educational attainment

Years of schooling 14.21 2.49 15.41 2.55 15.15 2.33 15.38 2.45 14.13 2.49 15.01 3.00 14.34 2.37 13.92 2.46

(less than high school) 0.07 0.25 0.02 0.15 0.01 0.12 0.01 0.11 0.04 0.19 0.10 0.31 0.04 0.19 0.07 0.25

high school 0.23 0.42 0.10 0.30 0.12 0.32 0.12 0.33 0.22 0.41 0.10 0.31 0.19 0.39 0.29 0.45

some college 0.16 0.37 0.17 0.38 0.21 0.41 0.19 0.39 0.24 0.43 0.24 0.43 0.30 0.46 0.24 0.43

associate degree 0.18 0.38 0.11 0.31 0.11 0.31 0.09 0.28 0.13 0.34 0.14 0.35 0.10 0.29 0.09 0.29

college degree 0.27 0.44 0.37 0.48 0.39 0.49 0.39 0.49 0.30 0.46 0.15 0.36 0.27 0.44 0.20 0.40

more than college 0.10 0.30 0.23 0.42 0.16 0.37 0.20 0.40 0.07 0.26 0.26 0.44 0.11 0.31 0.11 0.31

Metropolitan area 0.93 0.26 0.94 0.24 0.90 0.30 0.92 0.26 0.85 0.36 0.87 0.34 0.86 0.35 0.74 0.44

Region

(West) 0.57 0.50 0.62 0.49 0.88 0.32 0.82 0.38 0.61 0.49 0.37 0.48 0.64 0.48 0.19 0.39

Northeast 0.16 0.36 0.15 0.36 0.03 0.17 0.03 0.16 0.06 0.24 0.17 0.38 0.08 0.27 0.21 0.41

Midwest 0.10 0.30 0.09 0.29 0.05 0.22 0.05 0.23 0.12 0.33 0.19 0.39 0.12 0.33 0.27 0.45

South 0.17 0.38 0.14 0.34 0.04 0.20 0.10 0.29 0.20 0.40 0.26 0.44 0.16 0.37 0.33 0.47

Wage 18.97 28.44 20.76 19.92 21.98 25.68 20.96 22.11 17.43 16.11 21.60 13.73 19.42 24.59 17.11 23.48

Log-wage 2.59 0.78 2.78 0.71 2.85 0.66 2.77 0.73 2.62 0.69 2.86 0.69 2.69 0.69 2.55 0.70

Total 2,111 802 4,581 146 141 57 1,122 1,926,246

Source: 2000 5 per cent PUMS

Note

Variables in parentheses are omitted categories used in regression models.

14

54

Arth

ur

Sa

ka

mo

toet

al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

also more likely to be concentrated in the West. They all have highermean years of schooling than non-Hispanic white women. In contrastto men, however, all Japanese-origin women have higher mean wagesthan non-Hispanic white women.

Another notable gender difference is that immigrant Japanesewomen do not stand out as having a very high wage. The averagewage for Immigrant Japanese women is actually among the lowestacross the Japanese-origin groups. This latter finding seems consistentwith the interpretation that the high average wage of immigrantJapanese men reflects their employment with Japanese corporations.The latter provide fewer managerial opportunities for Japanese womenbecause many (though not all) are married to Japanese men but‘traditional gender role expectations are reflected in employmentpractices in Japan’ (Akiba 2006, p. 156).7

Regression results for schooling

Table 4 shows the results for the regressions of years of schooling. Theshort model for men includes only dichotomous variables to indicatethe different racial groups (with non-Hispanic whites serving as thereference category) without any other covariates. The estimates for thisshort model for men indicate that the bivariate differentials in terms ofyears of schooling are statistically significant at the .05 level for each of

Table 4. Estimates of OLS regression of years of schooling

Men Women

Racial groupImmigrant Japanese 1.88966*** 1.80133*** 0.33223*** 0.37480***1.5-generation

Japanese1.69841*** 1.7112***4 1.55155*** 1.47760***

Native-born Japanese 1.38675*** 1.30489*** 1.30089*** 1.27768***Chinese Japanese 1.79870*** 1.85449*** 1.52804*** 1.42414***White Japanese 0.44904* 0.50271* 0.23570 0.15757Black Japanese 0.58122 0.61569 1.04030** 0.90309**Japanese whites 0.58960*** 0.62832*** 0.53997*** 0.46426***

Age 0.09177*** 0.05877***

Age-squared �0.00083*** �0.00081***

Disability status �1.10237 �0.87147

Military experience �0.28393*** 0.20736***

Intercept 13.78763*** 11.69197*** 13.82813*** 12.98945***R square 0.0013 0.0275 0.0009 0.0198

Note

*pB.05; **pB.01; ***pB.001 (two-tailed tests).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

the Japanese-origin groups except black Japanese (who have thesmallest sample size). These results imply that, relative to the meanyears of schooling of 13.79 for non-Hispanic white men, the meanyears of schooling is greater by 1.89 years for immigrant Japanese, 1.80years for Chinese Japanese, 1.70 years for 1.5-generation Japanese and1.39 years for native-born Japanese. The smaller differentials are .59for Japanese whites, .58 for black Japanese and .45 for white Japanese.

The long model in Table 4 for men shows that these basic results donot vary much after controlling for age, disability status and militaryexperience. All of the differentials are still statistically significant at the.05 level except for black Japanese. The estimated differentials aresimilar in size to those from the short model although the coefficientfor Chinese Japanese becomes slightly larger than that for immigrantJapanese.

The results in Table 4 for the short model for women also generallyindicate that the Japanese-origin groups have higher mean years ofschooling than non-Hispanic white women. Relative to men, however,the pattern of the differentials differs slightly. In contrast to men, thegroup that is not statistically significant at the .05 level is whiteJapanese. Their estimated mean years of schooling are just .24 yearshigher than for non-Hispanic whites. In contrast to men, the meanyears of schooling for black Japanese women is statistically significantand fairly large (i.e. 1.04 years). Another gender difference is that themean years of schooling for immigrant Japanese women is amongthe lowest for the Japanese-origin groups. These basic conclusions arealso generally evident in the results for the long model for women inTable 4.

Regression results for log-wage

Table 5 shows the results for the regressions of log-wage separately formen and women. The short model for men indicates that the means forlog-wage for immigrant Japanese, 1.5-generation Japanese, native-born Japanese and Japanese whites are statistically significant at the.05 level in regard to their differences from the mean log-wage for non-Hispanic white men. In other words, the populations of immigrantJapanese, 1.5-generation Japanese, native-born Japanese and Japanesewhites probably have higher means on log-wage than non-Hispanicwhite men while the log-wage differentials are not statisticallysignificant for Chinese Japanese, white Japanese and black Japanese.

The long model for men in Table 5 indicates, however, that, aftercontrolling for education, age, disability status, military experience,metropolitan status and region of residence, most of the racial wagedifferentials for men are not statistically significant at the .05 level. Theobserved bivariate differentials in mean log-wages across the racial


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

groups are explained by the aforementioned demographic character-istics for all of the Japanese-origin groups except immigrant Japanesemen who continue to receive a significant net-wage advantage in thelong model. More specifically, our results for the 2000 Census datashow that 1.5-generation and native-born Japanese American men are

Table 5. Estimates of OLS regression of log-wage

Men Women

Racial groupImmigrant

Japanese

a0.45965*** fgh0.19736*** ij0.05657*** mn�0.06273***

1.5-generationJapanese

bc0.17389*** �0.03328 k0.24710*** 0.02548

Native-bornJapanese

de0.20693*** 0.00287 l0.31752*** 0.09167***

Chinese Japanese 0.07691 �0.09644 0.25145*** 0.04715White Japanese 0.09355 0.05591 0.06689 0.01458Black Japanese �0.03030 �0.07950 0.27736** 0.15231Japanese whites 0.05513* �0.00933 0.16366*** 0.07708***

Age 0.05697*** 0.03525***

Age-squared �0.00054*** �0.00034***

Disability status �0.10389*** �0.06810***

Military experience �0.02665*** �0.00421

Educationalattainment

High school 0.14364*** 0.14424***Some college 0.26006*** 0.29137***Associate degree 0.29930*** 0.41977***College degree 0.55400*** 0.62565***More than college

degree0.76957*** 0.82799***

Metropolitan area 0.20113*** 0.20049***

RegionSouth �0.05596*** �0.06518***Midwest �0.04109*** �0.07112***Northeast 0.01302*** 0.01799***

Intercept 2.84387*** 1.05084*** 2.52506*** 1.23319***R-square 0.0006 0.1608 0.0006 0.1720

Notes

*pB.05; **pB.01; ***pB.001 (two-tailed tests).apB.001 relative to JW, JB, JC and WJ; bpB.05 relative to JB; cpB.001 relative to WJ;dpB.05 relative to JB and JC; epB.001 relative to WJ; fpB.05 relative to JW; gpB.01 relative

to JB; hpB.001 relative to JC and WJ; ipB.05 relative to JB; jpB.001 relative to JC and WJ;kpB.01 relative to JW and WJ; lpB.001 relative to JW and WJ; mpB.05 relative to JB and

JC; and npB.001 relative to WJ.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

paid on a par with non-Hispanic white men with comparabledemographic characteristics while the net-wage advantage for immi-grant Japanese men is about 22 per cent (i.e. e0.197 � 1). The net-wageadvantage of immigrant Japanese men has been reported in priorstudies using older data (Iceland 1999; Zeng and Xie 2004).

The short model for women in Table 5 shows that the high averagewages for the Japanese-origin groups are all statistically significant(relative to non-Hispanic white women) except for white Japanese. Inthe long model of log-wage for women in Table 5, the racialdifferentials that retain statistical significance are immigrant Japanese,native-born Japanese and Japanese whites. Thus, the controls foreducation, age, disability status, military experience, metropolitanstatus and region of residence statistically explain away the bivariatewage differentials (evident in the short model) for 1.5-generationJapanese, Chinese Japanese, white Japanese and black Japanesewomen relative to non-Hispanic white women.

In the case of immigrant Japanese women, their coefficient is�.0627 in the long model indicating that they receive about a 6 percent lower wage than demographically comparable non-Hispanicwhite women. One possible interpretation of this negative effect isthat it may partly derive from some immigrant Japanese women whoare married to immigrant Japanese men and who are limiting theiremployment prospects for the advancement of their husband’s (nottheir own) careers. On the other hand, the net wage advantages ofnative-born Japanese and Japanese whites (i.e. about 9 per cent and8 percent, respectively) do not present any obvious interpretations.These net advantages require further analysis regarding the possibilityof other mediating factors such as family structure or type ofeducational attainment.

Discussion

Racial groups, assimilation and socioeconomic differentials

The definition of the immigrant, 1.5-generation and native-bornJapanese groups is partly objective in terms of utilizing informationon year of immigration and place of birth. However, membershipacross the native-born biracial groups is strictly based on self-identification that reflects an inherently subjective response. There isno objectively articulated conceptualization of what sort of familybackground corresponds to being in a biracial group or of havingJapanese ancestry (e.g. what is white Japanese as opposed to Japanesewhite is not commonly agreed upon). For this reason, the populationcounts of these groups may be sensitive to the wording of the survey orother methodological issues.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

We furthermore recognize that Japanese whites and the biracialgroups do not always have a high generational status (i.e. thirdgeneration or higher) in all individual cases. Generational status is notspecifically asked by the 2000 Census and is therefore not available inthese data. Although they are all native born in our classificationscheme, Chinese Japanese, white Japanese, black Japanese andJapanese whites may vary to some extent in their generation status(i.e. second, third, or higher generation).8

Nonetheless, these racial groups probably do have some relevancefor understanding assimilation processes as they are likely to correlatewith generational status and acculturation (on average). ImmigrantJapanese are culturally and socially more closely linked to Japan than1.5-generation Japanese because the latter group usually spent feweryears living in Japan. In turn, native-born Japanese typically have livedvery few if any years in Japan.9 Their socialization is therefore likely toinvolve fewer Japanese influences. Given the history of Japaneseimmigration (Akiba 2006; Min 2006), many native-born Japanese areundoubtedly third generation (Kitano and Daniels 1995) with parentswho are also native born in contrast to the parents of immigrant and1.5-generation Japanese. As discussed earlier, basic statistical indica-tors are consistent with the view that Japanese Americans are the mostassimilated of the Asian groups.

In addition, there is a well-known tendency for higher rates ofintermarriage among native-born Asian Americans than amongforeign-born Asian Americans (Xie and Goyette 2004; Qian andLichter 2007). Consistent with that general trajectory, Tafoya, Johnsonand Hill (2004, p. 13) report that intermarriage among AsianAmericans is even greater in the third generation than in the secondgeneration while Xie and Goyette (2004, p. 7) report that multiracialAsian Americans are much more likely to be native born and speakEnglish at home than are any single-race Asian groups (including evensingle-race Japanese Americans). Given that many Japanese Amer-icans are more assimilated and are more likely to be third generationor higher, and given that most Japanese American intermarriage iswith whites (Lee and Fernandez 1998), white Japanese and Japanesewhites may be reasonably assumed to be likely be of a highergeneration than are native-born Japanese, at least on average.10

Despite the greater probability of having higher generational status,the results in Table 4 indicate lower levels of educational attainmentamong white Japanese and Japanese whites than among native-bornJapanese (among both men and women whether considered in terms ofyears of schooling completed or net effects in the multiple regressionof schooling). In turn, native-born Japanese have lower years ofschooling than 1.5-generation Japanese among both men and women.Thus, the groups that are more acculturated have lower levels of


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

schooling, suggesting the interpretation that, at least in the case ofJapanese Americans, assimilation reduces (rather than increases)socioeconomic attainment.

This conclusion is difficult to reconcile with traditional assimilationtheory which generally posits rising socioeconomic attainments withincreasing acculturation (Zhou 1997). Instead, our results generallyindicate the reverse pattern in that the racial groups with greater socialand cultural connections with Japan tend to have higher socioeconomicattainments. 1.5-generation Japanese have higher mean years ofschooling than Native-Born Japanese men who in turn have highermean years of schooling than white Japanese and Japanese whites eventhough the latter two groups are likely to the most acculturated.Furthermore, as is evident in Table 5, these educational differentials aretranslated into wage differentials in the post-civil rights era.

The segmented assimilation perspective (Zhou 1997) emphasizesselective assimilation which is said to improve the socioeconomicattainments of Asian American immigrant children by maintainingsome traditional values and norms in order to counteract the ‘poverty,poor schools, violence, drugs, and a generally disruptive social environ-ment’ (Zhou 1997, p. 988) in the inner city. Our results suggest, however,that the maintenance of traditional values and norms may also bebeneficial for the socioeconomic attainments of Japanese Americansmore generally and is not limited to immigrants in the inner city. That is,for Japanese Americans, traditional values and family processes mayenhance educational attainment even in the middle-class segment ofAmerican society (Sakamoto, Kim and Takei 2011). The educationalattainments of Japanese Americans are thereby raised above those ofnon-Hispanic whites rather than simply serving as protective insulationfrom the depressed socioeconomic conditions and the so-called‘oppositional culture’ of the inner city as emphasized by Zhou (1997).

One complication for our interpretation of the significance oftraditional Japanese and Asian cultural influences is the socioeco-nomic attainment of immigrant Japanese women. Their lower wagesand schooling are evident not only relative to immigrant Japanesemen, but also to relative to most of the other Japanese-origin femalegroups. Although 1.5-generation and native-born Japanese women aswell as Chinese Japanese women have higher educational attainmentthan white Japanese and Japanese whites, immigrant Japanese womenappear to lag behind.

This result may relate to some the traditional aspects of Japanesecultural influences in regard to gender and the selective nature ofcontemporary immigration from Japan. By custom, Japanese womenare supposed to subordinate their socioeconomic attainments relativeto the careers of their husbands (Akiba 2006). This subordination isperhaps most pronounced in the case of immigrant Japanese women


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

who are sometimes married to immigrant Japanese men because thelatter are the ones who normally receive overseas corporate assign-ments (due to a greater acceptance of traditional gender roles andheightened gender discrimination in Japan). Because a significantproportion of immigrant Japanese women appear to have husbandswho are not immigrant Japanese men (Bean and Stevens 2003, p. 187),however, the greater traditional family orientation among immigrantJapanese women may partially carry over to those who are married tomen who were not raised in Japan.

Notably, 1.5-generation and native-born Japanese women as well asChinese Japanese women appear to have discarded this negativeinfluence of traditional Japanese gender roles on educational attain-ment. As stated by Zhou, ‘Asian subgroups . . . selectively unpack fromtheir cultural baggage those traits suitable to the new environment,such as two parent families, a strong work ethic, delayed gratification,and thrift. Also, they either bury at the bottom of their trunks or keepstrictly to themselves others things considered not so fit’ (1997, p. 994).Thus, the idea of selective assimilation as discussed in segmentedassimilation theory is indeed selective because it recognizes thatimmigrants are aware that not all aspects of their traditional culturalheritages (e.g. traditional gender roles) have beneficial socioeconomicconsequences for their children.

In any event, our results suggest that the preservation of somecultural influences can probably be broadly beneficial to the socio-economic attainment of Japanese Americans. This interpretation ismost clearly evident for men and is generally consistent with thesegmented assimilation perspective. This conclusion seems to contrastwith traditional assimilation theory. Our explanation for this result isthat assimilation in the post-civil rights era is more open to multi-cultural influences. That is, in contrast to earlier decades in thetwentieth century, unequivocal proof of ‘Anglo-conformity’ is nolonger a critical prerequisite for being accepted by the educational orlabour-market institutions of twenty-first-century America. In thecontemporary US several decades after the passage of the historicCivil Rights Act of 1964, the prospect of racial discrimination againstJapanese Americans in the stratification system is not so severe as torequire them to abandon all aspects of their ethnicity as quickly aspossible (in contrast to the pre-World War II era).

Future research may therefore more fully investigate ethnic identityamong contemporary Japanese Americans. Subjective understandingsof ethnicity and ancestry among Japanese Americans may be evolvingin conjunction with multi-race identification. The extent to whichone’s subjective sense of ethnicity may play some causal role inaffecting socioeconomic outcomes should be carefully considered infuture research.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

Conclusions

Traditional assimilation theory does not appear to apply very directlyto the socioeconomic attainments of Japanese Americans in the post-civil rights era because greater acculturation is associated with lowerrather than higher socioeconomic attainments. Given greater accep-tance of minorities and multiculturalism in contemporary American,Japanese Americans now tend to obtain higher wages due to theirhigher educational attainment than whites. This situation contrastswith the pre-civil rights era during which native-born JapaneseAmericans faced considerable wage penalties stemming from racialdiscrimination despite their higher levels of educational attainment.

Our results point to the theoretical significance of the segmentedassimilation perspective. The recognition that the preservation of someAsian and immigrant values can be a substantial asset in socio-economic attainment is probably relevant to the enhanced educationalattainments of Japanese Americans who have closer social and culturalties to Japanese culture (Sakamoto, Kim and Takei 2011). Theimportance of assimilation strategies for advancing the social mobilityof the second generation is emphasized in the segmented assimilationliterature (Zhou 1997), and they have greater socioeconomic implica-tions given the more pronounced levels of class inequality in twenty-first-century America.

Finally, some of our results also suggest the continuing relevance oftraditional assimilation theory. Although it does not accurately explainthe socioeconomic attainments of the Japanese-origin population,traditional assimilation theory may still be useful in recognizing theincreasing demographic diversity generated by the intermarriage of animmigrant population across time and generational status. The Japanese-origin population is not limited to single-race first, 1.5-generation andnative-born Japanese Americans. White Japanese, black Japanese andJapanese whites are increasingly becoming a significant portion of theJapanese-origin population. The educational attainments of especiallywhite Japanese and Japanese whites tend to be closer to those of themajority non-Hispanic white population. To the extent that the attain-ments of white Japanese and Japanese whites are converging towardsthose of the majority group, then a general assimilation trajectory wouldindeed appear to be evident albeit in a downward direction in terms ofsocioeconomic attainment (Sakamoto, Goyette and Kim 2009).

Acknowledgements

We thank the Population Research Center of the University of Texasfor excellent research support. Direct correspondence on this article toArthur Sakamoto or Hyeyoung Woo.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

Notes

1. These differentials are substantively meaningful because in that era most workers did

not have extensive schooling.

2. Although we believe that this conclusion represents a reasonable interpretation, it is

debatable because the 1990 Census figures do not distinguish between single-race and multi-

race persons.

3. Lee and Fernandez (1998, p. 335) and Akiba (2006, p. 159) report the curious finding

that Japanese are the only Asian ethnic group for whom outmarriage is slightly greater

among the foreign born than among the native born in the 1990 Census data. This

anomalous Japanese result probably derives from the endogeneity of racial identity among

multi-race Japanese in a single-race classification system. Native-born, multi-race Japanese

who are married to a Japanese are probably more likely to choose Japanese as their single-

race identity than are native-born, multi-race Japanese who are married to a non-Japanese.

Native-born, multi-race Japanese who are married to a non-Japanese thereby drop out of the

native-born Japanese population (when defined in terms of a single-race system) resulting in

low outmarriage among those who do identify as a native-born Japanese.

4. This number was obtained from the authors’ analysis of the 1 per cent Public Use

Microdata Sample of 2000 Census.

5. According to the classification system of the 2000 Census, Japanese and Chinese are

considered to be different ethnic groups but in the same racial category (i.e. Asian). For

convenience, we use the term ‘biracial’ to simply refer to both bi-ethnic and/or biracial as

defined by the 2000 Census.

6. This explanation about the higher mean wage of immigrant Japanese men is not meant

to imply that all of them are working for Japanese corporations.

7. This explanation about the mean wage of immigrant Japanese women is not meant to

imply that all of them are married to immigrant Japanese men who are working for Japanese

corporations.

8. Some of these biracial groups include foreign-born persons, but we did not include

them in this analysis because of very small sample sizes.

9. Trans-nationalism among Japanese Americans is generally uncommon due to the

physical distance between the US and Japan, the traditionally closed nature of Japanese

society and the World War II historical experience that accelerated the severing of ties

between Japan and the Japanese-American community (Kitano 1976).

10. To assess this assumption, we investigated all persons in the 2000 Census who identified

as single-race Japanese, biracial Japanese and white and single-race whites with Japanese

ancestry. The proportion of these three groups that is native born is lowest for single-race

Japanese and highest for single-race whites with Japanese ancestry. Although not direct

evidence about higher generations per se, this pattern of results is consistent with the

assumption that single-race Japanese are closest to being immediately associated with

immigration and thus are the least likely to be generationally distant from Japan in

comparison to biracial Japanese and white and to single-race whites with Japanese ancestry.

References

AKIBA, DAISUKE 2006 ‘Japanese Americans’, in Pyong Gap Min (ed.), Asian Americans:

Contemporary Trends and Issues, 2nd edn, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 148�77

BEAN, FRANK D. and STEVENS, GILLIAN 2003 America’s New Comers and the

Dynamics of Diversity, New York: Russell Sage Foundation

BONACICH, EDNA and MODELL, JOHN 1980 The Economic Basis of Ethnic Solidarity:

Small Business in the Japanese American Community, Berkeley, CA: University of California

Press


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

CHIN, AIMEE 2005 ‘Long-run labor market effects of Japanese American internment

during World War II on working-age male internees’, Journal of Labor Economics, vol. 23,

pp. 491�525

DARITY, WILLIAM, DIETRICH, JASON and GUILKEY, DAVID K. 1997 ‘Racial and

ethnic inequality in the United States: a secular perspective’, American Economic Review, vol.

87, pp. 301�5

FEATHERMAN, DAVID L. and HAUSER, ROBERT M. 1978 Opportunity and Change,

New York: Academic Press

HIRSCHMAN, CHARLES and WONG, MORRISON G. 1986 ‘The extraordinary

educational attainment of Asian-Americans: a search for historical evidence and explana-

tions’, Social Forces, vol. 65, pp. 1�27

ICELAND, JOHN 1999 ‘Earnings returns to occupational status: are Asian Americans

disadvantaged’, Social Science Research, vol. 28, pp. 45�65

ICHIHASHI, YAMATO 1932 Japanese in the United States, Palo Alto, CA: Stanford

University Press

KITANO, HARRY H. L. 1976 Japanese Americans, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

KITANO, HARRY H. L. and DANIELS, ROGER 1995 Asian Americans: Emerging

Minorities, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall

LEE, SHARON M. and FERNANDEZ, MARILYN 1998 ‘Trends in Asian American

racial/ethnic intermarriage: a comparison of 1980 and 1990 Census data’, Sociological

Perspectives, vol. 41, pp. 323�42

LEVINE, GENE and MONTERO, DARREL 1973 ‘Socio-economic mobility among three

generations of Japanese Americans’, Journal of Social Issues, vol. 29, pp. 33�48

MARE, ROBERT D. and WINSHIP, CHRISTOPHER 1988 ‘Ethnic and racial patterns of

educational attainment and school enrollment’, in Gary D. Sandefur and Martha Tienda

(eds), Divided Opportunities, New York: Plenum Press, pp. 173�203

MIN, PYONG GAP 2006 ‘Asian immigration: history and contemporary trends’, in Pyong

Gap Min (ed.), Asian Americans: Contemporary Trends and Issues, 2nd edn, Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage, pp. 7�31

NEE, VICTOR and WONG, HERBERT T. 1985 ‘Asian American socioeconomic

achievement’, Sociological Perspectives, vol. 28, pp. 281�306

QIAN, ZHENCHAO and LICHTER, DANIEL T. 2007 ‘Social boundaries and marital

assimilation: interpreting trends in racial and ethnic intermarriage’, American Sociological

Review, vol. 72, pp. 68�94

SAKAMOTO, ARTHUR and FURUICHI, SATOMI 1997 ‘Wages among white

and Japanese American male workers’, Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, vol.

15, pp. 177�206

SAKAMOTO, ARTHUR and YAP, KENG-LOONG 2006 ‘The myth of the model

minority myth’, paper presented at the annual meetings of the American Sociological

Association, Montreal, Canada

SAKAMOTO, ARTHUR, LIU, JENG and TZENG, JESSIE 1998 ‘The declining

significance of race among Chinese and Japanese American men’, Research in Social

Stratification and Mobility, vol. 16, pp. 225�46

SAKAMOTO, ARTHUR, WU, HUEI-HSIA and TZENG, JESSIE 2000 ‘The declining

significance of race among American Men during the latter half of the twentieth century’,

Demography, vol. 37, pp. 41�51

SAKAMOTO, ARTHUR, GOYETTE, KIMBERLY and KIM, CHANGHWAN 2009 ‘The

socioeconomic attainments of Asian Americans’, Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 35,

pp. 255�76

SAKAMOTO, ARTHUR, KIM, CHANGHWAN and TAKEI, ISAO 2011 ‘The Japanese-

American family’, in Roosevelt Wright, Charles H. Mindel, Robert W. Habenstein and Than

Van Tran (eds), Ethnic Families in America: Patterns and Variations, 5th edn, New York:

Pearson-Prentice Hall


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

TAFOYA, SONYA M., JOHNSON, HANS and HILL, LAURA E. 2004 Who Chooses to

Choose Two?, New York: Russell Sage Foundation

THOMAS, DOROTHY S. 1952 The Salvage: Japanese American Evacuation and Resettle-

ment, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press

US CENSUS BUREAU 2004 We the People: Asians in the United States, Census 2000

Special Report, no.17, Washington, DC: US Census Bureau

XIE, YU and GOYETTE, KIMBERLY A. 2004 A Demographic Portrait of Asian

Americans, New York: Russell Sage Foundation

YOO, DAVID K. 2000 Growing Up Nisei: Race, Generation, and Culture among Japanese

Americans of California, Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press

ZENG, ZHEN and XIE, YU 2004 ‘Asian-Americans’ earnings disadvantage reexamined:

the role of place of education’, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 109, pp. 1075�108

ZHOU, MIN 1997 ‘Segmented assimilation: issues, controversies, and recent research on the

new second generation’, International Migration Review, vol. 31, pp. 975�1008

ARTHUR SAKAMOTO is Professor in the Department of Sociologyat University of Texas at Austin.ADDRESS: Department of Sociology, University of Texas, 1University Station A1700, Austin, Texas 78712-0118, USA.Email: [email protected]

ISAO TAKEI is Assistant Professor in the Department of InternationalRelations at Nihon University.ADDRESS: Department of International Relations at NihonUniversity, Mishima CampusBunkyo-cho 2-31-145, Mishima-city,Shizuoka-ken 411-8555, Japan. Email: [email protected]

HYEYOUNG WOO is Assistant Professor in the Department ofSociology at Portland State University.ADDRESS: Department of Sociology, Portland State University,1721 SW Broadway, Portland, Oregon 97207-0751, USA.Email: [email protected]


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

at A

ustin

] at

18:

44 0

4 O

ctob

er 2

011

Socioeconomic Differentials among Single-race and Multi-race Japanese Americans

Documents

Transcript of Socioeconomic Differentials among Single-race and Multi-race Japanese Americans