Do African Americans overreport or underreport their experiences of discrimination? Evidence from list experiments

Abstract Discrimination is one of the largest barriers that immigrants and racial/ethnic minorities face in contemporary society. Social scientists have developed and applied field experimental methods to detect the existence and prevalence of discrimination in various domains. In addition, researchers have utilized questionnaires to directly ask discrimination victims about their experiences and the frequency of discrimination they encounter. However, self-reports of discrimination may be biased due to judgment errors in attributing mistreatment to discrimination and intentional overreporting (vigilance) or underreporting (minimization) of discrimination. In this study, we propose a two-stage model that distinguishes between these judgment and reporting biases. We argue that vigilance and minimization stem from sensitivity concerns. We conducted a list experiment with African American respondents who asked about their experiences of employment and everyday discrimination. Comparing the list experiment and direct question estimates, we find no evidence of systematic underreporting or overreporting of employment discrimination. For everyday discrimination, we find overreporting concentrated among ideologically liberal African Americans. These results provide new insights into biases in self-reported discrimination and suggest researchers should be attentive to the conditions under which these biases arise.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Sociological Review
Published
2024-09-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcae036
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.42

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do African Americans overreport or underreport their experiences of discrimination? Evidence from list experiments

Akira Igarashi
2 citations
European Sociological Review
Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
1.42
article

Do African Americans overreport or underreport their experiences of discrimination? Evidence from list experiments

Akira Igarashi
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Discrimination is one of the largest barriers that immigrants and racial/ethnic minorities face in contemporary society. Social scientists have developed and applied field experimental methods to detect the existence and prevalence of discrimination in various domains. In addition, researchers have utilized questionnaires to directly ask discrimination victims about their experiences and the frequency of discrimination they encounter. However, self-reports of discrimination may be biased due to judgment errors in attributing mistreatment to discrimination and intentional overreporting (vigilance) or underreporting (minimization) of discrimination. In this study, we propose a two-stage model that distinguishes between these judgment and reporting biases. We argue that vigilance and minimization stem from sensitivity concerns. We conducted a list experiment with African American respondents who asked about their experiences of employment and everyday discrimination. Comparing the list experiment and direct question estimates, we find no evidence of systematic underreporting or overreporting of employment discrimination. For everyday discrimination, we find overreporting concentrated among ideologically liberal African Americans. These results provide new insights into biases in self-reported discrimination and suggest researchers should be attentive to the conditions under which these biases arise.

European Sociological ReviewVol. 41(4)
Museum of Japanese Art Yamato Bunkakan (JP), The University of Osaka (JP)
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
1.42
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.