Linked fate over time and across generations

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Correction Statement

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1 See DeSante (2017) provides a helpful comparative analysis of “old” versus “new” APC methods, and Yang and Land (2013) for a more robust explanation of APC-IE.

2 We also control for age effects, but we do not have specific hypotheses for this dimension of social change.

3 In addition to compiling the survey years, responses to the linked fate questions, year of birth (or age) of the respondents, we also maintained the post-stratification weights from the survey when available. While we did analyses which included these weights, ultimately the unweighted results did not change significantly or substantively. All data analyses here are based on unweighted data.

4 We do not have data from the 1996–2000 period for Latinxs on the question of linked fate.

5 It is typical for data to be broken into five-year “chunks” in order to employ the Age-Period-Cohort Intrinsic Estimator. As such, data for Black respondents includes 6 periods, 14 age groups, and 19 cohorts. Data for Latinx respondents includes 4 periods, 13 age groups, and 17 birth cohorts.[5] The APC-IE provides an estimate for each, thus producing 39 estimates for Blacks and 34 for Latinx respondents.

6 López (2015) explained that many misconstrued Toni Morrison’s characterization of Bill Clinton as the “first black president,” but his moniker of “New Democrat” should be best understood as “one resistant to black concerns, tough on crime, and hostile to welfare.”

7 We thank Christopher DeSante for his help and insight on this article, the co-editors of this special edition, and the anonymous reviewers for their feedback.