Understanding Recent Empirical Evidence on Race and Labor Market Outcomes in the USA
Racial inequality remains a substantial problem in American society. Competing explanations of African American - white inequality often overlap but they are often also quite contentious. Recent empirical studies on the role of race and labor have tended to absolve the market process of contributing to persistent racial discrimination. The most sophisticated studies that claim to show no discrimination within the labor market rely on a single test score variable (the AFQT) within one dataset. However, the AFQT over-estimates African American - white pre-labor market skill differences, its predictions have not been replicated by studies that employ different measures of cognitive skills, and it yields inconsistent and counter-intuitive results when decomposed into its component parts. After reviewing some of the most recent literature, this study concludes that the notion that competition will eliminate discrimination within the labor market is little more than conservative political ideology masquerading as science. So-called pre-labor market inequality, which may also be summarized as the class and cultural background of individuals, does have an impact on individual well-being and intergenerational mobility. However, we are unable to distinguish the manner in which class background matters. Is it because superior class position creates an advantage in skill acquisition or because is it because superior social status increases access to persons embedded into positions of power and authority? In addition, several studies present strong empirical evidence of discrimination within the labor market.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 58 (2000)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RRSE20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RRSE20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rsocec:v:58:y:2000:i:3:p:319-338. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.