, Volume 36, Issue 3, pp 399–407 | Cite as

Kinship networks that cross racial lines: The exception or the rule?

Markers of Racial and Ethnic Identity


I estimate the frequencies of interracial kin relations, an important indicator of the isolation of racial groups in the United States. I use two techniques to estimate the size and heterogeneity of extended families. First, I develop a simple model that takes account only of kinship network sizes and intermarriage levels by race. This model allows a crude estimation of the frequency of multiracial kinship networks. Second, I produce more precise empirical estimates using a new hot-deck imputation method for synthesizing kinship networks from household-level survey data (the June 1990 Current Population Survey and the 1994 General Social Survey). One in seven whites, one in three blacks, four in five Asians, and more than 19 in 20 American Indians are closely related to someone of a different racial group. Despite an intermarriage rate of about 1%, about 20% of Americans count someone from a different racial group among their kin.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Amir, Y. 1969. “The Contact Hypothesis in EthnicRelations.” Psychological Bulletin 71:319–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkins, J.R. 1984. “On the Fundamental Consanguineal Numbers and Their Structural Basis.” American Ethnologist 1(1):1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Becker, G.S., E.M. Landes, and R.T. Michael. 1977. “An Economic Analysis of Marital Instability.” Journal of Political Economy 85(6):1141–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blau, P.M., T.C. Blum, and J.E. Schwartz. 1982. “Heterogeneity and Intermarriage.” American Sociological Review 47:45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davis, J.A. and T.W. Smith. 1994. General Social Surveys, 1972–1994: Cumulative Codebook. Storrs, CT: Roper.Google Scholar
  6. de Tocqueville, A. 1988 [1934]. Democracy in America, edited by J.P. Mayer, translated by G. Lawrence. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  7. Edmonston, B. and J.S. Passel. 1993. “Immigration and Ethnicity in National Population Projections.” Pp. 277–99 in International Population Conference, Montreal, Vol. 2. Liege, Belgium: International Union for the Scientific Study of Population.Google Scholar
  8. Ford, B.L. 1983. “An Overview of Hot-Deck Procedures.” Pp. 185–207 in Incomplete Data in Sample Surveys, Vol. 2, Part IV, edited by W.C. Madow, H. Nisselson, and I. Olkin. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hammel, E.A. and B. Herrchen. 1993. “Statistical Imputation in Family Reconstitution.” Pp. 245–58 in International Population Conference, Montreal, Vol. 3. Liege, Belgium: International Union for the Scientific Study of Population.Google Scholar
  10. Kalmijn, M. 1993. “Trends in Black/White Intermarriage.” Social Forces 72(1):119–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lieberson, S. and M.C. Waters. 1988. From Many Strands: Ethnic and Racial Groups in Contemporary America, The Population ofthe United States in the 1980s: A Census Monograph Series. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Little, R.J. and D.B. Rubin. 1987. Statistical Analysis With Missing Data. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Liu, P. 1986. Foundations of Kinship Mathematics. Nankang, Taipei: Institute of Ethnology, Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
  14. Massey, D.S. 1996. “The Age of Extremes: Concentrated Affluence and Poverty in the Twenty-First Century.” Demography 33:395–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pagnini, D.L. and S.P. Morgan. 1990. “Intermarriage and Social Distance Among U.S. Immigrants at the Tum of the Century.” American Journal of Sociology 96:405–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Preston, S.H. 1976. “Family Sizes of Children and Family Sizes of Women.” Demography 13:105–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Romney, A.K. and R.G. D’Andrade. 1964. “Cognitive Aspects of English Kin Terms.” American Anthropologist 66(3, Part 2): 146–70. Special Publication: Transcultural Studies in Cognition.Google Scholar
  18. Root, M.P.P. 1992. Racially Mixed People in America. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  19. Schneider, D. M. 1980. American Kinship: A Cultural Account, 2nd edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Schoen, R. 1986. “A Methodological Analysis of Intergroup Marriage.” Sociological Methodology 16:49–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schoen, R., J. Wooldredge, and B. Thomas. 1989. “Ethnic and Educational Effects on Marriage Choice.” Social Science Quarterly 70:617–30.Google Scholar
  22. Stack, C.B. 1974. “All Our Kin: Strategies for Survival in a Black Community.” New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  23. Stephan, W.G. 1985. “Intergroup Relations.” Pp. 599–658 in The Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 2, 3rd edition, edited by G. Lindzey and E. Aronson. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  24. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Demographic Surveys Division. 1991. “Current Population Survey, June 1990: Fertility, Birth Expectations, and Marital History.” Number CPS 90-6 in Technical Documentation, Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census.Google Scholar
  25. —. 1994. Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1994, 114th edition. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census.Google Scholar
  26. U.S. Office of Management and Budget. 1997. “Revisions to the Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity; Notices.” Federal Register 62(October 30, 1997): 58782–90.Google Scholar
  27. Waters, M.C. 1997. Testimony before the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, May 22, 1997. Pp. 442–60 in Federal Measures of Race and Ethnicity and the Implications for the 2000 Census, Vol. 105-57. Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Population Association of America 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Office of Population ResearchPrinceton UniversityPrinceton

Personalised recommendations