IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v103y2022i1p82-89.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public beliefs about the black/white socioeconomic status gap: What's “upbringing” got to do with it?

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew O. Hunt
  • Paul R. Croll
  • Maria Krysan

Abstract

Objective Citing the black family as the locus of responsibility for black disadvantage has a long history in the United States; however, only limited research has examined the place of family upbringing in studies of Americans’ beliefs about the causes of racial inequality. Methods We use data from the 2010, 2012, and 2014 General Social Surveys (GSS) to examine the prevalence and selected correlates of a newly offered (by the GSS) and culturally centered explanation of the black/white socioeconomic status gap focusing on “differences in upbringing.” Results The “upbringing” explanation is the most popular of the five reasons offered by the GSS in all three waves of data available for examination. Three‐quarters of GSS respondents endorse this view, while less than half endorse the next most popular explanation. Upbringing is also the most popular explanation among all three race/ethnic groups we examine, though non‐Hispanic whites endorse this view most strongly. Conclusion Our results offer important insights for future survey design and investigations of public beliefs about racial inequality.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew O. Hunt & Paul R. Croll & Maria Krysan, 2022. "Public beliefs about the black/white socioeconomic status gap: What's “upbringing” got to do with it?," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(1), pages 82-89, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:103:y:2022:i:1:p:82-89
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13103
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13103?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:103:y:2022:i:1:p:82-89. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.