INNUMERACY ABOUT MINORITY POPULATIONS

We use a small but nationally representative sample to investigatethe sources of innumeracy regarding the proportion of blacks,Hispanics, and Jews in the U.S. population. In addition to anumber of standard demographic differences, we find that overestimatesare closely related to region as well as to the density of thelocal black/Hispanic population. The extent to which minoritypopulations are perceived as a kind of threat is also relatedto perceived proportions, though the direction of causalitycannot be determined. We discuss the meaningfulness of thesepopulation estimates and speculate on whether trying to improvethem would alter attitudes toward minorities.     

Pseudo–Modelling of Outliers for Estimation of Regression And Time Series Models

This paper documents situations where the variance inflation model for outliers has undesirable properties. The model is commonly used to accommodate outliers in a Bayesian analysis of regression and time series models. The alternative approach provided here does not suffer from these undesirable properties but gives inferences similar to those of the variance inflation model when this is appropriate. It can be used with regression, time series, and regression with correlated errors in a unified way, and adheres to the scientific principle that inference should be based on the data after obvious outliers have been discarded. Only one parameter is required for outliers; it is interpretable as the a priori willingness to remove observations from the analysis.     

Sektion Jugendsoziologie Tätigkeitsbericht 2004

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Joint impact of multiple observations on a subset of variables in multiple linear regression

In multiple linear regression analysis, each observation affects the fitted regression equation differently and has varying influences on the regression coefficients of the different variables. Chatterjee & Hadi (1988) have proposed some measures such as DSSE_ij (Impact on Residual Sum of Squares of simultaneously omitting the ith observation and the jth variable), F_j (Partial F-test for the jth variable) and F_j(i) (Partial F-test for the jth variable omitting the ith observation) to show the joint impact and the interrelationship that exists among a variable and an observation. In this paper we have proposed more extended form of those measures DSSE_IJ, F_J and F_J(I) to deal with the interrelationships that exist among the multiple observations and a subset of variables by monitoring the effects of the simultaneous omission of multiple variables and multiple observations.     

Interpersonal dependency of preferences

Standard decision theoretic models disregard the phenomenon of interpersonal dependency of preferences. In this paper it is argued that interpersonal dependency of preferences is a serious challenge for standard utility theory. First we sketch the more philosophical aspects of the problem and then, using a simple, formal model for the two-person case, we show that interpersonal dependency of preferences generally results in indeterminacy of preferences (resp. of subjective utility).     

On the derivation of a full life table from mortality data recorded in five-year age groups

Mortality data are often gathered using 5-year age groups rather than individual years of life. Furthermore, it is common practice to use a large open-ended interval (such as 85 and over) for mortality data at the older ages. These limitations of the data pose problems for the actuary or demographer who wishes to compile a full and accurate life table using individual years of life. The author devises formulae which handle these problems. He also devises methods for handling mortality during the 1st year of life and for dealing with other technical problems which arise in the compilation of the full life table from grouped data.     

Effects of migration on family structure

This paper examines the situation and problems of migration on family structure, with emphasis on family reunification. The study is based on conditions and practices in Western Europe and Mediterranean countries relating to temporary labor migration. Most migrant workers have no intention of settling permanently and return to their country within a few years. The International Labour Office estimated in 1974 that at least 1/2 the migrant workers in Western Europe live without their families. Generally, migrants send for their families only when they are employed, earning adequate wages, and have adequate housing. Some reasons why migrants live apart from their families include 1) the receiving country discourages family immigration because it does not coincide with the economic necessities of migration policy and 2) some sending countries discourage it to ensure that the migrant worker returns to his own country. The main danger arising from family separation is that it frequently leads to the break up of the family. The leading European authorities recognize as a fundamental right the freedom of a migrant worker and his family to lead a normal family life in the receiving country. The author outlines the conditions for admission for residence and employment of migrant spouses and children for the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Belgium, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Austria, Luxembourg, and the United Kingdom. All countries require that the head be in regular employment for some time and be able to provide his family with suitable housing. Other problems concerning the arrival of migrant spouses and children include 1) acquiring employment and social information and counseling, 2) education of children, 3) obtaining vocational training and adaptation and 4) achieving entitlement to social security benefits. The effects of migration in the family context in sending countries include 1) providing activities for migrants to maintain cultural links with their countries of origin and 2) acquiring the nationality of the receiving countries. Countries should facilitate the admission to employment of migrant spouses and children, by maintaining provisions for the reuniting of families and imposing no limits on admission to residence; and 2) by overcome obstacles to admission to employment, by observing existing recommendations. In conclusion, governments should give family cohesion 1st priority, regardless of regulations.     

The U.S. legalization program: a preliminary final report

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 made 4 types of aliens eligible to receive legalization benefits: 1) those who resided "continuously" in the US since January 1, 1982; 2) those who had worked in the US perishable-crop agriculture for 90 "man-days" in specified time periods (Special Agricultural Workers [SAWS]); 3) those who were in the US since before January 1, 1972; and 4) those classified as Cuban/Haitian entrants and who had been in the US since January 1, 1982. Estimates of the number of aliens eligible for legalization, not including SAWS, ranges from 1.834 million to 2.56 million. Estimates of undercounts of undocumented aliens are 10% for those who entered before 1975 and 37.5% for those who arrived after 1975. Other refinements in the estimates of undocumented aliens include adjustments for 1) ethnic group and location, 2) the growth of the undocumented population between the census date and the legalization eligibility date under IRCA, and 3) emigration and deportation rates. Out of the 1,581,800 applicants entered into the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) computers (from a total of 2.15 million applicants) as of May 20, 1988, 73.7% were Mexican nationals. Only 5 other countries contributed more than 1%: El Salvador (6.5%), Haiti (2.3%), Guatemala (2.2%), the Philippines (1%), and Colombia (1%). The Mexican percentage was unexpectedly high, perhaps because the legalization had been much more successful in the Southwest than anywhere else in the country. Reasons that Mexicans have a higher legalization participation rate than other nationalities include 1) the distant eligibility date; 2) ethnic differences among non-Mexican nationalities; 3) particularly in the northeast, fears of exposing one's illegal status to INS; 4) the difficulty of information reaching ethnic communities, 5) the reluctance of those already undergoing the naturalization process to risk the legalization process; and 6) the reluctance of employees to admit employment of undocumented aliens. In the end, more than 90% of applicants are expected to be granted temporary resident alien status (and about 70% of agricultural workers), for a total of more than 2 million people. Researchers estimate that 2.5 - 3 million more persons remain in an undocumented status in the US.