Statistical and Perceived Diversity and Their Impacts on Neighborhood Social Cohesion in Germany, France and the Netherlands

Koopmans, Ruud; Schaeffer, Merlin

doi:10.31235/osf.io/64p3z

Cited by 29 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Both strategies have been used in those, relatively few, studies that do not disregard members of minority groups altogether. Some of these studies report a weaker (Putnam, 2007;Stolle et al, 2008; similarly an earlier analysis of the data used in this paper, see Koopmans and Schaeffer, 2016), others no significant relation between diversity and social cohesion measures among minority members (Bakker & Dekker, 2012;Fieldhouse & Cutts, 2010). But while such analyses acknowledge the possibility of effect heterogeneity between majority and minority respondents, they still disregard another ambiguity of diversity indices.…”

Section: In-group Share and Relational Out-group Entropy Or Why Intesupporting

confidence: 53%

“…Williamson, 2015;Dinesen & Sønderskov, forthcoming), as (field) experimental treatments (e.g. Habyarimana, 2007;Koopmans & Veit, 2014a), or via cognitive perceptions of diversity (Koopmans & Schaeffer 2016). Most of these studies question the dominant view that feelings of group threat are the dominant force behind negative diversity effects.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Again a truly diverse situation would be most problematic, because here the network would be maximally clustered. Some recent studies provide evidence of the relevance of these culture-based mechanisms also for the European and US American context (Koopmans & Veit, 2014a;Williamson, 2015;Koopmans & Schaeffer, 2016). In summary, all these culture-related obstacles (asymmetrically distributed preferences, coordination problems, and clustered networks) should find their climax in the limit case in which each person in a given context belongs to a different ethnic group with its own unique language, values, and isolated social network.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Relational Diversity and Neighbourhood Cohesion. Unpacking Variety, Balance and In-Group Size

Koopmans¹,

Schaeffer²

2017

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ethnic diversity is typically measured by the well-known Hirschman-Herfindahl Index. This paper discusses the merits of an alternative approach, which is in our view better suited to tease out why and how ethnic diversity matters. The approach consists of two elements. First, all existing diversity indices are nonrelational. From the viewpoint of theoretical accounts that attribute negative diversity effects to in-group favoritism and out-group threat, it should however matter whether, given a certain level of overall diversity, an individual belongs to a minority group or to the dominant majority. We therefore decompose diversity by distinguishing the in-group share from the diversity of ethnic out-groups. Second, we show how generalized entropy measures can be used to test which of diversity's two basic dimensions matters most: the variety of groups, or the unequal distribution (balance) of the population over groups. These measures allow us to test different theoretical explanations against each other, because they imply different expectations regarding the effects of in-group size, out-group variety, and balance. We apply these ideas in an analysis of various social cohesion measures across 55 German localities and show that both in-group size and out-group diversity matter. For the native majority as well as for persons of immigration background, the variety component of diversity seems to be more decisive than has formerly been acknowledged. These findings provide little support for group threat and in-group favoritism as the decisive mechanisms behind negative diversity effects, and are most in line with the predictions of theories that emphasize coordination problems, asymmetric preferences, and network closure.

show abstract

Section: In-group Share and Relational Out-group Entropy Or Why Intesupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Relational Diversity and Neighbourhood Cohesion. Unpacking Variety, Balance and In-Group Size

Koopmans¹,

Schaeffer²

2017

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We next consider fractionalizationthe presence of various differences within society. The general expectation is that cleavages in society bring with them reduced social cohesion, because of ingroup/out-group thinking, asymmetric preferences and problems of coordination (Koopmans and Schaeffer, 2016). This will in turn reduce tolerance.…”

Section: Fractionalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Roots of tolerance among second-generation immigrants

Berggren

Ljunge

Nilsson

2019

Journal of Institutional Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tolerance – respecting individual choice and differences among people – is a prominent feature of modern European culture. That immigrants embrace this kind of liberal value is arguably important for integration, a central policy goal. We provide a rigorous study of what factors in the ancestral countries of second-generation immigrants – including formal and informal institutions – predict their level of tolerance towards gay people. Using the epidemiological method allows us to rule out reverse causality. Out of the 46 factors examined, one emerges as very robust: a Muslim ancestral background. Tolerance towards gay people is lower the larger the share of Muslims in the country from which the parents emigrated. An instrumental-variable analysis shows that the main mechanism is not through the individual being a Muslim, but through the individual being highly religious. Two additional attitudes among people in the ancestral country (valuing children being tolerant and respectful, and valuing children taking responsibility), as well as impartial institutions in the ancestral country, predict higher individual tolerance. Our findings thus point to an important role for both formal- and informal-institutional background factors in shaping tolerance.

show abstract

“…At the individual -level, studies demonstrate how inter-group mixing can be experienced both positively and negatively, and that while the former reduces prejudice the latter can increase it (Islam and Hewstone 1993 ; Pettigrew 1998 ; Paolini et al 2010 ; Barlow et al 2012 ). However, discussion or measurement of contact-quality has been almost entirely absent from the literature exploring the role of contact in the contextual out-group exposure/prejudice relationship ( although see Koopmans and Veit ( 2014 ) and Koopmans and Schaeffer ( 2015 ) who examined local cohesion outcomes). Instead, studies into the contextual-effects of diversity either test the role of positive, intimate measures of contact (e.g.…”

Section: Theoretical and Analytical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethnic Diversity, Inter-group Attitudes and Countervailing Pathways of Positive and Negative Inter-group Contact: An Analysis Across Workplaces and Neighbourhoods

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study advances the current literature investigating the relationship between contextual out-group exposure, inter-group attitudes and the role of inter-group contact. Firstly, it introduces the concept of contact-valence into this relationship; that is, whether contact is experienced positively or negatively. Secondly, it presents a comparative analysis of how processes of out-group exposure and frequency of (valenced) contact affect prejudice across both neighbourhoods and workplaces. Applying path analysis modelling to a nationally-representative sample of white British individuals in England, we demonstrate, across both contexts, that increasing out-group exposure is associated with higher rates of both positively- and negatively-valenced contact. This results in exposure exhibiting both positive and negative indirect associations with prejudice via more frequent inter-group mixing. These countervailing contact-pathways help explain how out-group exposure is associated with inter-group attitudes. In neighbourhoods, increasing numbers of individuals experiencing positive-contact suppress an otherwise negative effect of neighbourhood diversity (driven partly by increasing numbers of individuals reporting negative contact). Across workplaces the effect differs such that increasing numbers of individuals experiencing negative-contact suppress an otherwise positive effect of workplace diversity (driven largely by increasing numbers of individuals experiencing positive contact).

show abstract

Statistical and Perceived Diversity and Their Impacts on Neighborhood Social Cohesion in Germany, France and the Netherlands

Cited by 29 publications

References 19 publications

Relational Diversity and Neighbourhood Cohesion. Unpacking Variety, Balance and In-Group Size

Relational Diversity and Neighbourhood Cohesion. Unpacking Variety, Balance and In-Group Size

Roots of tolerance among second-generation immigrants

Ethnic Diversity, Inter-group Attitudes and Countervailing Pathways of Positive and Negative Inter-group Contact: An Analysis Across Workplaces and Neighbourhoods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About