Religion, Race, and Discrimination: A Field Experiment of How American Churches Welcome Newcomers

Wright, Bradley E.; Wallace, Michael; Wisnesky, Annie Scola; Donnelly, Christopher M.; Missari, Stacy; Zozula, Christine

doi:10.1111/jssr.12193

Cited by 35 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Beyond the traditional contexts of discrimination in employment (Bertrand and Mullainathan 2004; Deming et al 2016; Gaddis 2015; Pager 2003; Pager, Western, and Bonikowski 2009; Pedulla 2018a) and housing (Carpusor and Loges 2006; Ewens, Tomlin, and Wang 2014; Galster and Godfrey 2005; Turner et al 2002), researchers have documented racial-ethnic discrimination in banking and economic transactions (Ayers 1991; Ayers and Siegelman 1995; Doleac and Stein 2013; Hanson et al 2016); admission to nightclubs (May and Goldsmith 2018); scheduling of medical appointments (Kugelmass 2016; Sharma, Mitra, and Stano 2015); communication with church representatives (Wright et al 2015), college admissions counselors (Thornhill 2018), professors (Milkman et al 2012, 2015), and public officials (Butler and Broockman 2011; Einstein and Glick 2017; White, Nathan, and Faller 2015); and on Airbnb (Edelman, Luca, and Svirsky 2017), Craigslist (Gaddis and Ghoshal 2017, 2019), and Uber (Ge et al 2016). The literature suggests that racial-ethnic discrimination is prevalent across multiple and diverse contexts, knows no geographic bounds, and has been widespread for decades.…”

Section: Evidence Of Racial-ethnic Discrimination From Audit Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the “How” and “Why” Aspects of Racial-Ethnic Discrimination: A Multimethod Approach to Audit Studies

Gaddis

2019

Sociology of Race and Ethnicity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researchers have used audit studies to provide causal evidence of racial discrimination for nearly 60 years. Although audits are an excellent methodological tool to investigate the “what,” “where,” and “when” aspects of racial-ethnic discrimination, audits are less appropriate, by themselves, to investigate the “how” and “why” aspects of racial-ethnic discrimination. In this article, I review why audit studies are necessary to study racial-ethnic discrimination, the evidence from audit studies, and their limitations. I then argue that scholars should adopt a multimethod approach to audit studies to move from documenting the existence of racial-ethnic discrimination to examining how and why racial-ethnic discrimination occurs. Adoption of this multimethod approach will result in a deeper understanding of racial-ethnic discrimination with the potential to shape both opinions and policy surrounding discrimination.

show abstract

Section: Evidence Of Racial-ethnic Discrimination From Audit Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the “How” and “Why” Aspects of Racial-Ethnic Discrimination: A Multimethod Approach to Audit Studies

Gaddis

2019

Sociology of Race and Ethnicity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Audits have uncovered unequal treatment by race (Quillian et al 2017), gender (Öblom and Antfolk 2017), motherhood status (Correll, Benard, and Paik 2007), family structure (Lauster and Easterbrook 2011), age (Baert et al 2016), sexual orientation (Tilcsik 2011), neighborhood reputation (Besbris et al 2015), disability status (Ameri et al 2018), class background (Kugelmass 2016), religion (Wright et al 2013), and other characteristics. The approach has mostly been used to examine hiring and housing discrimination but has also gauged responsiveness by elected officials (Butler and Broockman 2011), graduate school mentors (Milkman, Akinola, and Chugh 2015), churches (Wright et al 2015), therapists (Kugelmass 2016), and bureaucrats (White, Nathan, and Faller 2015); treatment on sites like AirBnB (Edelman, Luca, and Svirsky 2017), Facebook (Hebl et al 2012), and Uber (Ge et al 2016); and other outcomes. Many audits have been U.S.-based, but several hundred now have addressed unequal group treatment in other countries (e.g., Ahmed and Hammarstedt 2009; Bonnet et al 2016; Hogan and Berry 2011; Lauster and Easterbrook 2011).…”

Section: Audit Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing for Discrimination: Teaching Audit Studies in Quantitative Methods Courses

Ghoshal

2018

Teach Sociol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article demonstrates a method for teaching students to conduct audit studies of discrimination. The assignment can be used in courses on quantitative methods, race, gender, or other topics. Audit studies test for unequal treatment by having otherwise identical pairs of people who vary on a single trait, such as race or gender, apply for the same sets of opportunities, such as apartment vacancies or job openings. Once intricate and expensive to conduct, the online shift of the past 15 years has streamlined the approach, enabling researchers to execute audits via email. I show how to lead students through designing and conducting original audit studies. I present evidence that this approach yields significant engagement, builds students’ abilities, and produces excellent work.

show abstract

“…In the US, congregations are, for the most part, segregated by race and ethnicity, and socio-economic status (for example, 43% of American churches are completely racially homogenous, Dougherty, 2003, Figure 1). They are less welcoming of people from a different background than that of their members (Wright et al, 2015).…”

Section: A Observational Evidence On Giving To Poor and Who Gives mentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Altruism (Always) Good for Society?The Problem of Particularistic Giving in a Diverse Society

Ben‐Ner

2018

Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Altruism is regarded as worth encouragement by public policy. However, altruism is rarely universal, directed at people in general or to the needy in particular. The vast majority of donors give most of the money to organizations that serve people like them in terms of religion, ethnicity, class, culture, etc. Only about one-third of donations go to the needy. This giving pattern: (1) deepens in-group loyalty and out-group enmity and (2) strengthens economically organizations that are in-group oriented. This has a negative effect on intergroup relations, exacerbates fractionalization and polarization in society, and reduces the level of useful cooperation and trust among individuals who belong to different groups, which in turn has negative economic, political and social consequences. Public financial support in the form of tax advantages for charitable donations and the tax advantages enjoyed by nonprofit organizations supported by these donations should be reconsidered.

show abstract

Religion, Race, and Discrimination: A Field Experiment of How American Churches Welcome Newcomers

Abstract: This article reports the results of a nationwide audit study testing how

Cited by 35 publications

References 41 publications

Understanding the “How” and “Why” Aspects of Racial-Ethnic Discrimination: A Multimethod Approach to Audit Studies

Understanding the “How” and “Why” Aspects of Racial-Ethnic Discrimination: A Multimethod Approach to Audit Studies

Testing for Discrimination: Teaching Audit Studies in Quantitative Methods Courses

Is Altruism (Always) Good for Society?The Problem of Particularistic Giving in a Diverse Society

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About