wgmk-q“

 

, "‘fiiflr‘rFm

1 TTHZSOUTHMEST f
SPANLSH; SPEAKING MINORlTY: '
A 3wa OF ASSLMILATION
AND BOUNDARY MAINTENANCE '

Thesis for the Degree of M, A.

MICHIGAN STATE UNRVERSITY

' JACQUELYN EDRAEB BASS ~
1970

  

LIBR AR Y
Michigan State

University

  

 

  

   

I!!! I.

WWW;
K: ” '"' 1°:
. +271»
w ‘ "'3‘

FEBQLEZ 2903
1 2.

 

ABSTRACT

THE SOUTIMEST SPANISH-SPEAKING MINORITY:
A STUDY OF ASSIHIIATION AND BOUNDARY MAINTENANCE

by

Jocquolyn D. Bass

Rooont ovonto in oomotion with Negro-whit: rolotiono in the
United Stotoo coll ottontion to problems surrounding tho rolotionshipo
botIoon tho dominant oocioty and other dioodvontogod Iinoritioo. Thin
study roviowo tho various opprooohoo to do-imnt-dnonty rolofiono
and ottonpto to dool with tho oonoopbaol divorgonoo ovidont within the
litoroturo on “smution. A rooont trond towed rooognition of a
minority'o booio ”right to plurality” is onlinod.

If tho right of pooplo who wont to bo difforont (as wall as pro-
tootion from boing trootod o8 difforont ogoinot thoir will) is uphold
u port of tho contemporary voroion of tho Aurioon Crood. than :11 sub-
populotiono should hovo thoir right to o. ohoioo of odoptotion. but tho
position is tohon thot they do not havo idontiool long-range prospects
for the «no nodo or rolotionship; structural-cultural plurolion is
rooliltio for tho )bfioon-Anorioon othnio minority but not for tho ‘
”culturally Luriom" Nogro.

Tho Moxioon-Anorioon ninority is oomidorod in tom of tho

.54

1’

Jacquelyn Bess

factors contributing to its incomplete assindlation and it is hypothe-
sised that this condition is partly attributable to a predilection for
ethnicity on the part of its nenbers. The problem is cast in terms of
concepts of the PAS Model (boundary maintenance-”stoic linkage roughly
corresponding to pluralism-assimilation). and the hypothesis is tested
using data Iron a sample of the Spanish-speaking population in five south-
western states.

A systenatic multivariate analysis is performed using tho nthod of
subgroup oonparisons. Findings are presented in a series of fourfold
contingency tables relating attitudinal and behavioral boundary nainte-
nanoo and relevant sociological variables.

Although the empirical data, as operationally applied to a test of
the research mothesis, do not strongly support the general hypothesis ,
the findings suggest the possibility that there nay be some preference for
contimed ethnic minority identification along the younger, urban Spanish-
speaking respondents with nore years of schooling.

This widely mglectod subpopulaticn deserves considerably more
research attention tron social scientists in view of the urgency of nine-
rity relations as a social problem. The present study clains a contribution
in the area of conceptual "spadework' requisite to neaningml problon state-
nent in future research on assinilation of the Hoxican-Ansrican minority.

THE SOUTHWEST SPANISH-SPEAKING MINORITY:
A STUD! 0F.LSSIHILATION AND BOUNDARY MAINTENANCE

by

Jacquelyn Draeb Bass

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
Department of Sociology

1970

I:

S—‘

1.?“

ACKNWIEDGMENTS

I wish, to express IV gratitude to w chairman. Dr. Charles P.
Leonie for his assistance. I an indebted to him also for permitting
no to use his data and for his guidance in the use of his theoretical
framwork.

W thanks are also extended to the members of w cos-itteo, Dr.
Donald Glastod and Dr. Donton Morrison. for their help with this
thesis and for their interest and encouragement in general.

11

Chapter
1.

2.

3.

6.

TABIE OF CON TENTS

INTRODUCTION: I'CLNORITIES IN THE UNITED STATES
PROBIEMS OF CONCEPTUAL DIVERGENCE
CONCEPTS OF MINORITY RELATIONS: SOME DEFINITIONS
A, The Segregation/Integration.Axis
B, The Separatism/Assimilation AXis
C, Gordon's Sequential Steps, Pluralism/Assimilation
THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO ASSIMIIATION
A MODE OF ADAPTATION FOR THE MEXICAN-AMERICANS
STATEMENT OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SPANISH-SPEAKING MINORITY
THEOETICAL FRAI'IEWORK! PAS MODEL CONCEPTS
TIEORETICAL FORMUIATION OF TIE RESEARCH PROBLEM
I'ETHODOLOGY
OPERATIOI-IALIZATIOI‘I OF TIE VARIABIES
ANALYSIS OF DATA
RESULTS AND FIIEINGS

SUI'R-iARY AND COI-ICLUSIONS

APPENDICES

LIST OF

Appendix A: OPERATIOIMIIZII-EG DETAILS
Appendix B: SUPPLEL-uaNTARY DATA
Appendix c: CONTINGENCY TABLES

REFEREE-JOBS

iii

Page

32
40
N3
N7
N9
61
66

75

78
86
88

101+

Figure
l.

2.

Table
l.

2.

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Schematic Representation of Conceptualizations
of Assimilation Theories

Distribution Spanish-surname Population 5 Southwestern States

Numbers of Minorities in the United States, 1960

Distribution of Spanish-surname, OtherVWhite, and Negro
Populations, Southwest by State

Nativity and Parentage, Spanish-surname Persons,
Southwest by State

‘Within-sample Correlations: Social Distance, N. American
Designation Compared with Race, Religion

Distribution of ReSpondents Giving Positive Evaluation
Present Life, by Extent Intragroup Friendships

Distribution of Responses to Self-anchoring Ladder for
Evaluating Present Life, U.S. as a Nation

Bivariate Distribution, DMD Index Scores by BMB Index Scores

Percentage Distribution of Rankings of Mexico as a Nation

4 Percentage of Spanish-speaking Associates of Five Arenas

BMD by BEE Index Scores, Stratified by.Age
BED by BMB Index Scores, Stratified by Level of Education

BED by BMB Index Scores, Stratified by Size Place of
Residence

END by BMB Index Scores, Stratified by Origin

iv

Page

36

36

51

53

61
62

63

65

65
65

14 0

Al.

A2.

C3.

C4.
C5.

c6.

C7.

C8.

C9.

C10.

C11.

C12.

013.

Summary of 2x2 Contingency Tables, BMD and BEE by
Sociological as Independent/Control Variables

Schematic Pyramiding of Indexes: U.S.-Mexico Linkage Study

Intercorrelations: Linkage Measuring Items also in
BED, Bi-‘ZB Indices

Percentage and Frequency Distributions, Six Variables
Composition of the Sample

Simple Correlations Between the Sociological Variables.
Response Frequencies, Social Distance Attitudes, in Percents

Bivariate Percentage, Frequency Distributions, BED
and SEE by.Age.

Bivariate Distributions BED, BED by Age, Stratified by
Size Place of Residence.

Bivariate Distributions BED, BBB by.Age, Stratified by
Level of Education.

Bivariate Distributions BED, BEE by.Age, Stratified by Origin

Bivariate Percentage, Frequency Distributions, BED and
BBB by Size Place of Residence

Bivariate Distributions BMD, BMB by Size Place of
Residence, Stratified by.Age.

Bivariate Distributions BED, BEE by Size Place of
Residence, Stratified by level of Education

Bivariate Distributions BMD, BMB by Size Place of
Residence, Stratified by Origin

Bivariate Percentage, Frequency Distributions, BED and
BBB by Level of Education

Bivariate Distributions BED, BMB by Level of
Education, Stratified by Age

Bivariate Distributions BED, BMB by Level of Education,
Stratified by Size Place of Residence

Bivariate Distributions BED, BEE by Level of Education,
Stratified by Origin

Bivariate Percentage, Frequency Distributions, BED and BBB
by Origin

70
82

83
85
86
86

87

88

89

9O

91

92

93

95

96

98

99

100

C14. Bivariate Distributions BED, BI-EB by Origin,
Stratified by Age 101

C15. Bivariate Distributions BED, BITE by Origin,
Stratified by Size Place of Residence 102

C16. Sivariate Distributions BI-ZD, 81-18 by Origin,
Stratified by lavel of Education 103

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION: MINORITIES IN THE UNITED STATES

In this country, where most of the two hundred million people who
call.themeelses ”Americans“ can trace their origin to some other nation,
minorities and the problen.of their relation to society are nothing new;
Often.referred to as ”a nation of nations," the United States is charac-
terised.by its heterogeneous population which includes people fron.al-
most overy part of the world - only the halfémillion'who are.Anerican
Indian can be considered indigenous and even this group constitutes a
”minority". Personscin racially defined sub-populations number over
tlentybfour million and some ten.nillion others are members of so-called
“ethnic“ sinorities.

Hhile the number of persons who have experienced.minerity status
throughout American.history has been substantial, a few relatively dis-
tinct sub-populations have occupied much of the nation's attention in
recent years. Table 1 on the page following shows currently available
census counts or estimates or the sise of most of these groups.

2
Table 1. Numbers of Minorities in the United States, 1960.

Negroes 18,848,619"
Hexican-Hispanos 5.139.839"
Puerto-Ricans 892.51?”
American Indians 5106,228"
Japanese ”73,170.,
Chinese 2369084"
Filipinos 181,611”
Java (1965) 5.725.000**"
Catholics (1966) 1+6,86l+,000"""""'I

*SOWI UeSe COM, 1960' subfict Report: W
Pomlation bLRace. Final Report PC(2)-lc.
"Census Bureau estimate for U.S. cited in Minorities Lin
American Society, Charles Harden, 11.1., 1968, p. 7.
“*Sources U.S. Census, 1960, Subject Report: Puerto-
Ricans in the United States. Final Report Pcizi-ln.
""Sourcez 1967 Yearbook of American Churches cited in
The 1968 World Book Year Book, Chicago, 1968, p. #75.
is was its purpose, this table indicates that the Negro population,

followed by the Hexicm-Hispanos, are the two largest of the nation's
ninorities differentiated on bases other than religion. This presentation
suggests several other crucial points which my not be as readily apparent
but will be shown to have important indications both for the ninority in-
volved and for the shady of their problems. Here attention is nerely
called to these points; they will be developed further as the discussion
progresses. First, in this brief list groups are identified in terns of
race, nationality, and religion which indicates that there is no single
basis for ninority identification. Such groups are in fact delineated in
numerous additional ways including language, citisenship, nativity, ”cul-
ture,“ and physical traits. Moreover, new persons are accorded minority
status on more than one basis as in the case of those whose religion is
that which predominates in their nation of origin. (It is for this reason
that Catholics are included in the table even though, numbering nearly a

. fourth of the population. Catholics per se night not be considered a

linority.)

The basis for identification of "a minority" is not as clear as a
tabular presentation would suggest and it follows that there is a great
deal of uncertainty regarding their size and geographical distribution
since estinates vary according to the neans of identification employed.
Accurate and objective identification of an individual neaber of one of
these sub-populations is fully as difficult and further conplicated by
stereotypes and misunderstanding, some of which stone from lack of defi-
nitional consensus on identificational terns along the professionally
interested as well as laynen. Such words as "race,” “culture," and
”ethnic“ are frequently misused and there is considerable disagreeIsnt on
their enct leanings. Even definitions of “minority“ differ. Since this
notion is meaningful only with respect to dominance, "minority” has cone
to apply to whatever population is not ”dosinant". In effect, this as-
signs the minority label to persons in the United States who do not pos-
sess all of the characteristics of doninant group members, nanely whites
who are Anglo-Saxon and Protestant. These considerations have a profound
inpact on the relations between people and make difficult their m and
ilprmut.

PROBLEMS OF COMEPTUAL DIVERGENCE

In addition to lack of consensus on identificational terns and their
application , definitional divergence surrounds nary of the concepts en—
ployed in dealing with dosinant-llnority relations and disagreement exists
on the theoretical relationships of these concepts to one another. Along
social scientists, ”assimilation," ”acculturation,” ”pluralism" and rela-

ted terns have nunerous definitions and isplications: along the general

14.
public the more commonly used ”integration" has various meanings and
connotations.

The context of am shady of minorities can be described only in the
conventional terminology so it becomes imperative to avoid the pitfalls
of comptual inconsistency. To this end, an attempt is made in Figure
l to distinguish four different conceptualisations and place the concepts
into juxtaposition. Following , several definitions for each concept will
be presented to show the basis upon which they were assigned their schema-
tic positions. The purpose of this diagramtic surnary is to clarify
the naning of the terms which must be used in expressing the pri-ry
issues involved in so-called "donnant-mority relations“ so as to re-
duce their anbiguity and overlap and divest them of misleading connota-
tions. Hopefully, these terms are thereby made more useful for the pur-
pose of reviewing some of the “theories of assimilation" contained in the
literahrre, for presenting the general problem under consideration in this
thesis, and for relating the context of the general area of research to
the theoretical franwork in which the investigation is couched.

Il'his schematic (Figure 1) is a comparative representation of major
concepts and the manner in which they are theoretically related according
to four different theoretical approaches in the area of dominant-minority
relations. The first line of the diagram establishes "IN’EGRATION" (in
the popularly-used sense) as a benchmark by which the terms "ACCULTURATION"
and “ASSIJELATION” have been positioned. These are the most widely em-
ployed concepts in the literature despite general acknowledgement of their
anbiguity. Other less canonly used words are placed in the scheme with
reference to these basic terms. It should be made clear that this is
simply an attempt to ”sort out" similar concepts and should not imply that

.nofinocne coauaafisdmm< mo uneducefiaespdoosoo he :oapepscucemom capascnom .« onsmfim

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sundanese: $5me Bunion no coepeoefiecofi
assessor 05 ”28 Sesame Noted 53023.5 mozazmazgl goon mam
can
Aegean so 3535 season Hcsdadsv
MMWMMMV'uIIooccscpcwea huencsob\omcxcfia oafiopmhm Mo newsman wcfihuc>u I I
Asofipceobeddoov
mug—ad ogamwm mBWHnEOU "3ng odgmwm 4% An
Aegean 538:2 ...
Hensposnpm n
egg .a. :oflflufimma coepmeefimma u 5393
eéoflaaoom SEES .w Havens. .m. .. newnmesmpm hm nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn n lemempmempm
153.80% mafia: .m u coepflafimua n 5358
15338353 .3 u HEBHS A u @335
avopoadsoo ommpm coachfiEfimm< n :oavcndvdsood u
u poufiadbcpm n
2895532 fiancee u 2mfl§3a |6
scanneomb< m defipcecwaes< m monpevossocod
m m .aoeefibmmms. ..oneamB§8s. m
m m Sflwcemesl
2025584 dense m zwflgmmm B
u soapeewoenH u
Amsmscmcoo esae>v Heeoauossm u
coascnmopsw acne: u
N 5322283 runaways. "
u use oofiosnoem .coeepmoooc Hedpeemv u
303830.20ch no 533?ch _ ...20Ha<momszfi. u
u spa: 20H9¢moma2H sodpcwcnwonon .
. . Acoapcucaopv
E SE

 

 

6
usage or the indicated polarity of the particular terns shown as extremes
conforms to this system in every case.

Part B of Figure l utilises the terminology most frequently employ-
ed by academicians in dealing with minority relations; it illustrates the
sequential relationship often posited between acculturation and assimila-
tion and further suggests that varying degrees of assimilation is some-
ti-s implied. While parts A and B represent conceptual composites,
part C attempts to portray the scheme developed by Hilton H. Gordon in
which assimilation is conceived as a process occurring in degrees through
seven stages. (4:71) He distinguishes cultural and structural aspects
and argues for ”structural pluralism,“ finding support in Harden and Meyer
who equate this term with their own, ”stabilised acculturation”. (73149)
Part D sketches a few aspects of the theoretical model used in fire pre-
sent study and irflicates the appropriateness of casting a minority rela-
tions problem in this franwork. This part of the schematic presentation
will be given further attention in another chapter.

The vertical lines suggest where these ccmeptualiaations, by state-
ment or implication, seem to concur. Although each set of concepts is
represented as an axis, this does not imply that there is consistency in
their treatment as variables or as aspects of processes. It is hoped that
the following examination of some of the definitions of these terms an!
the theories relating them will help to reveal the significance of the
points brought to light by the diagramtic presentation -- and the
plethora of minority-relations terminology as well.

7
CONCEP'B 0F MINORITY REIATIONS LITERATURE: SOME DEFINITIONS

Part A The Se ation Inte tion Axis:
SEGREGATION:

Segregation is the policy, enforced by custom or law, which
excludes a group from Joint participation. Characteristic forms
are residence, occupation and education. The effect is to mini-
mise association between the races and to restrict the association
that does occur to clearly defined subordinate-superordinate roles.
(leonard Broom) (2:165)

DESEGREGATION I

Desegregation refers to the eldednation of racial criteria
in the operation of public or quasi-public facilities, services
and institutions which the individual is entitled to as a func-
tioning citizen of the community, equal in legal status to all
other citisens. .. the achievement in full of what is
referred to as his 'civil' rights. (Kenneth Clark) (#316)

IN'IEGRATION :

Integration refers to policies that permit Negroes and whites,
for example, access to areas of community life on the basis of
free and equal association. (Broom) (2m96)

A plurality such as .. a society or an invisioned totality
united in a one world community may be said to have integration
if its members carry on or can engage in cooperative activity
or team work. When this is the case the plurality is said to
have functional integration. Also it is usually assumed that
members of pluralities which axe integrated share at least
some values .. there is some consensus on ends and norms.

This latter quality is sometimes called .. moral integration.
(Charles Leona) (6:1)

Integration may be defined as the process of making whole
or entire. Social integration refers this process or its
resultant state to the social system ... constituted by the
dimensions of cultural integration (consistency of normative
patterns with one another )3 normative integration (articula-
tion of normative patterns with motivational processes so
that conformity is achieved); consensual, co-inicative in-
tegration (sharing and transmission of normative patterns
among smmbers of the social system): and functional integra-
tion (interlocking of claims, expectations and overt acts.
(Dictionary of the Social Sciences) (5:657)

Integration presupposes the elimination of hard and fast

barriers in the primary group relations and commnal life of
the various ethnic groups of the nation. It involves easy and

8

fluid mixture of people of diverse racial, religious and nation-
ality backgrounds in social cliques, families, private organi-
sations and intimate friendships. (Milton Gordon) (#:2ué)

Integration as a subjective and individual process in-
volves attitudinal changes and the removal of fears, hatreds,
suspicions, stereotypes and superstitions. (It) involves prob-
lems of personal choice, personal readiness and personal stabi-
lity. (It) deals poignantly with the problems of changing men's
hearts and minis. (Kenneth Clark) (#3246)

The Negro challenge has led to the emergence of the concept
integration in sociological literature in recent years. Its
extensive use can substantially be dated from 1954 as the posi-
tive way to state the negative connotation of desegregation in
the Southern school situation. It arose because of the inade-
quacies of the previously well-established concepts of accultura-
tion and assimilation to describe the placing of Negroes into a
situation alongside whites on equal, at least in formal status,
basis. The concept of integration assumes a pluralistic society.
Integration occurs in the equal association of individuals when
the minority still identifies itself as a minority. In this
way it differs from assimilation. When the individual coopera-
tion between dominants and minorities on the basis of equality
occurs we have the phenomenon of integration. Different from
the experience of other minority persons, "integrated” Negroes
are acculturated at the outset but not assimilated.

Integration does not have a conson definition among social
scientists. We see no need to use it as Kenneth Clark does to
include the elimination of piejudice which then nkes integra-
tion synorwmous with the tens ”assimilation". (Charles Harden)

(78470352)

Part B, The Seatiyissimilation Axis:

SEPARATE)“

Separatism represents the decision to eschew the structure
of the dominant society in order to retain values which have led
to discrimination in the society from which the group has
separated.

The Black Muslims is the largest and most significant of
the separatists' movements. (It) is anti-integrationist.
(Harden) (7:29.336)

ACCOHODATION I

.. the mmal adjustmnt of groups that retain their own
identity and interests. In an unstable accomodation .. the con-
flicting groups adapt themselves to i-ediate realities despite
existence of unresolved issues. A stable accomodation resolves
the major differences of interest. (Broom) (2331+)

9

Park saw accomodation as a temporary suspension of con-
flict. A subsequent emphasis is contained in the definition
of accomodation by Kimball Young and Raymond Hack: "a condi-
tion, a state of equilibrium between individuals or groups in
which certain working arrangements have been agreed on or
accepted.“ We would stress accepted .. emphasising that
accomodation is a mode of adaptation about which the minority
has no choice. (Harden) (7:436) ‘

HIRGINLLITII

The individual who engages in frequent and sustained pri-
mary contacts across ethnic group lines .. runs the risk of be-
coming what, in standard sociological parlance, has been called
”marginal man" . . the person who stands on the borders of two
alga-a1 worlds but is fully a. member cf’neither. (Gordon)

: . . 4 , '

In the theory of minority adjustment which assumed that
minority groups moved through a series of steps to ultimate
assimilation .. groups were sometimes defined as being in a
nrginal stage. (Marden) (7min

ACCULIURLTION 8

Acculturation refers to a group's taking on elements (be-
liefs, values, practices) from the culture of another group.
(It) has also been used as a synonym for socialization, the ac-
quisition of ways of behaving and valuing by individuals. We
reserve the word for the process of cultural change induced by

contact with foreign cultures. Usually both: cultures are changed.
(Broom) (2.8.189)

Acculturation is one of the sustaining processes whereby
minorities are incorporaud into the dominant culture. The term,
when used to define a process, refers to the changes in indivi-
duals (and. if sharing the same experiences, groups of individuals)
whose primary learning has been in one culture and who take over
traits from another culture.

The process .. takes place on two levels: behavioral versus
attitudinal or external and internal (in contemporary writing on
acculturation). External acculturation is behavior in which
material culture, everyday language and secular roles are acquired.
(Harden) (7:35AM)

The term acculturation is widely accepted among American an-
thropologists as referrirg to those changes set in motion by the
coming together of societies with different cultural traditions.
The term remains somewhat ambiguous but persistent usage gives it
the meaning of cultural assimilation, or replacement of one set
of cultural traits by another, as in reference to individuals in
contact situations as more or less "acculturated”.

10

As defined by Robert Redfield, Ralph Linton and Melville
Berskcvits, as members of the Social Science Research Council,
in 1935: "Acculturation comprehends those phenomena which
result when groups of individuals having different cultures
come into continuous first-hand contact, with subsequent
charges in the original cultural patterns of either or both
mp'e.

(International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences) (9321)

Sociologists and cultural anthropologists have described
the processes and results of ethnic "meetings” under such terms
as “assimilation" and ”acculturation". Sometimes these terms
have been used to mean the same thing; in other usages their
meanings, rather than being identical, have overlapped. Socio-
logists are more likely to use ”assimilation”; anthropologists
have favored ”acculturation” and have given it a narrower but
generally consistent meaning. (Gordon) (4:61)

The process of learning a culture different from the one
in which a person was origirmlly raised is called acculturation.
learning the first culture is sometime called socialization,
sometimu enculturation. Learning other cultures is called ac-
culturation. The process of an outsider's being accepted as a
genuine member of a new social group is called assimilation. One
is acculturated to a culture, assimilated into a society. One

progzgs can occur without the other. (Berelson and Steiner)
(18 )

ASSIHIIATION I

Assimilation is a process in which persons of diverse ethnic
and racial backgrounds come to interact, free of these constraints,
in the life of the larger cosmmnity. Complete assimilation would
mean that no separate social structure based on racial or ethnic
concepts remained. As a concept in American sociology, assimila-
tion has had various meanings. Fairchild (1913) equated (it')%* I
with Americanisation. For some scholars assimilation and secul-
turation are synonymous. _ More often assimilation has included .«
acculturation. According to a widely quoted point of view (Park
and Burgess, 1921): "Assimilation is a process of interpenetra-
tion and. fusion in which persons or groups acquire -the memories,
sentiments and attitudes of other persons or groups and by sharing
their experiences and history are incorporated with them in a com-
mon cultural life.

Assimilation may be distinguished from accomodation, a pro-
cess of compromiu characterised by toleration, and from accul-
turation, cultural change that is initiated by the conjunction of
two or more cultural systems or the transference of individuals
from their original societies and cultural settings to new socio-
cultural environmnts. Assimilation is to be distinguished also
from ama amation or biological fusion.

Comp ete segregation and total assimilation are opposite ends
of a continuum along which W be located varying degrees of
limited desegregation, -'the‘,substantial pluralism found in many

""' , a ' '15.). -

ll

collunities, hypothetical integration which values structural
and cultural differences while insisting on equal life oppor-
tunities, partial assimilation, individual assimilation, and
group assimilation. (9:438)

(International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences)

The ten assimilation literally means the process of be-
coming "alike” ..: as used in sociology it denotes (a) the pro-
cess whereby a group, generally a minority or immigrant group,
is through contact absorbed into the culture of another group:
(b) the result of such absorption. Thus (it) denotes the pro-
cess in which one set of cultural traits is relinquished and a
new one acquired ... the change is gradual and may tales place
in any degree. The concept is distinct from the biological
process of racial merging through interbreeding or amalgamation.
Full assimilation means the incorporation of new members into a
society so that they are not distinguishable from former members.

( While there is little important variation in the socio-
fl logical usage of this concept son scholars, especially in an-
"\ thropology, have used acculturation in a closely related sense.
The process by which a minority group finds a place for itself
C in the wider society may be said to be one both of assisnilation
7 and acculturation. (Dictionary of Social Sciences) (5:38)

WITCH :

Amalgamation is a biological process, the fusion of races
by interbreeding and intermarriage. Assimilation on the other
hand is limited to the fusion of cultures. (Park and Burgess,
1921) (4:63)

Amalgamation is the biological merging of previously dis-
tinct “racial” or ”subracial" stocks. (harden) (7:51)

ABSORPTION :

Total assimilation would involve the disappearance of a
separate (Negro) subcommunity and group identity, ultimately
leading to the absorption of (Negro) genetic strains in the
white race. (Harden) (7:347)

Part C Gordon's Se ntial Ste s Plurali Assimilation:
PIURALISM:

Pluralism denotes the views which hold that political, cul-
tural and social systems may (or should) be conceived as being
constituted from a multiplicity of autonomous but interdependent
groups. (Dictionary of Social Sciences) (5:507)

When we speak of America as a pluralistic society we mean
that there are mam groups which retain differences derivative
from their tradition and so. degree of collective identity.

12

In the case of minority groups, this would include some cul-
tural or pkgsiognoflc traits. (Marden) (7:439)

CULTURAL PIHRAIISM:

Pluralism may be used to denote (besides political forms)
diversities in religious and ethnic groups. An important no-
tion in the United States has been that of cultural pluralism,
”a state of affairs in which each ethnic group maintains in
large measure a separate way of life, with its own customs, its
own supplementary schools, its special organisations and period-
icals and perhaps even its favored secondary languages." (N.
Glaser, 1957) This term was introduced by N. M. Kallen (1956)
although the concept had existed for a long time prior to the
term. (Avery Ieiserson) (5:508)

Cultural pluralism (is) used to describe the model of Ameri-

can society as a composite of groups which have preserved their
own cultural identity. (Gordon) (4:38)

STRUCTURAL PLURALISM:

In the United States acculturation for all groups beyond the
first generation of immigrants, without eliminating all value
conflict, has been massive and decisive, but structural separa-
tion on the basis of race and religion - structural pluralism.
as we have called it -- emerges as the dominant sociological con-
dition. (The term) denotes a situation in which primary group
contacts between mmbers of various ethnic groups are held to a
minim, even though secondary contacts on the Job, on the civic
scene. and in other areas of impersonal contact may abound.
(Gordon) (4:235)

STABIIIZED ACCULNRATIONI

Association in work, in politics and public life do much to
break down ”social distance” between disparate groups. The pub-
lic recognition of the achievement of minority individuals has
enhanced the "respectability“ of minority descent.

"Respectability" means that at least in the secular spheres
of life , acculturation . . has taken place , minority institutional
patterns have modified and become more coherent with dominant
norms. Yet within this frame of acculturation there persists, it
is argued, a preference for intimate associations with people
whose cultural and/or religious and racial heritage is like one's
own. We have called this mode of adaptation stabilised accul-
turation. More recently Hilton 14. Gordon has used the term
structural pluralism. (Harden and Heyer) (7:49)

ASSIHILATION :

Gordon (1964)“ sees the assimilation process and its subpro-
sense as a matter of degree but complete assimilation would
cover 7 variables. This conceptual scheme provides the most

13

satisfactory criteria yet proposed for measuring assimilation
and determining to what extent it is taking place. (Inter-

national Encyclopedia) (9:439)

With regard to the term ”assimilation," particularly there
is a certain amount of confusion, and there is a compelling
need for a rigorous and systematic analysis of the concept . .
which would “break it down” into all the possible relevant
factors or variables which could conceivably be included under
its rubric.

Not only is the assimilation process mainly a matter of
degree, but obviously each of the stages or subprocesses may
take place in varying degrees. For some of the particular
assimilation subprocesses there are existing special terms.
The full list of assimilation subprocesses or variables with
their general names and special names, if arw, is given in the
table.

The Assimilation Variables

SUBPRWESS OR CONDITION: STAGE OF ASSDIIIATION: Sacial Term
1) Change of cultural pat- ' Cultural or behavioral
terns to those of host assimilation (ACCULTURATION)
society _
ZYIarge-scale entrance in- Structural assimilation
to host society cliques
clubs & institutions on

M level-
3 Large-scale inter- Marital assimilation

marri . __LAMAIEAMATIONL
7;) Development of sense of Identificational assimilation
peoplehood based exclu-

sively on host society

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

g) Absence of page» Attitude receptional assimilation
) Absence of discrimina- Behavior receptional assimilation
tion.

 

 

7) Absence of value and Civic assimilation
power conflict.

*Adapted from Table 5. P. 71. (Gordon) (4:61,?0-7I)

 

This collection of opinions about terminology in the area of assimi-
lation speaks for itself. Spelling out the differences and similarities,
‘ the ambiguities, contradictions and biases implied in these definitions
would constitute a study in itself. mumm- note should be taken,
however, of the lack of generality in some of the statements as in
reference to a particular racial minority. It is expected that the posi-
tion assigned the various terms in Figure 1 serves to indicate the

l4
nanings embraced and the posture of objectivity assumed in the present
treatzent. The reader should also be convinced of the advantage accru-
ing to a researcher in the area of assimilation by using PAS Model con-
cepts in achieving clarity, objectivity and flexibility.

THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO ASSIMILATION

Disagreement on the meaning of terms which describe modes of domi-
nut-minority relations extends into the various approaches to this
relationship as expressed in the theoretical connections of these con-
cepts to one another. Some of this lack of accord is evident in the
diversity among the definitions presented above. While detailed analysis
of conceptual divergence is beyond the scope of this paper, a brief
review of the most important assimilation theories, the ways these modes
of adaptation have been viewed, will give perspective to the research
problem to be posed shortly.

Robert E. Park, an early and influential figure, viewed the major
modes of adaptation as patterns of interaction. His "race relations
cycle” of the early twenties (Contact-Competition-Cooperation, occurring
sequentially in this order) was extended to include accomodation and
eventual assimilation, making it applicable to other than racial minori-
ties. This approach "has been criticised for its assumption of the in-
evitability and irreversibility of the process.” (9:438) The basic
terms accomodation, acculturation, assimilation, are also viewed as des-
cribing continuing structured relationships, that is , stabilised forms
of adaptation between dominants and minorities or the goals of minori-
ties in their minority status. (7:436)

To the present day controversy surrounds the notion of assimilation

-- whether it is a condition or a process, an inexorable process or one

15
which can be retarded or hastened, a condition which is inevitable or
is sometime unattainable, and at what point is one “assimilated". In
one way or another the key issues, as suggested by the viewpoints pre-
sented above, seem always to have centered about the question of the in-
evitability of assistilation.

Park believed that minorities and dominants were caught in
the same volutionary process and had no choice. Louis Wirth ..
also saw assimilation as the inevitable outcome and am alter-
natives as temporary delays. Etsioni has challenged the g
Egon assumption of assimilation as the only alternative
choice. In the writings about dominant-minority relations
there is as yet no clear consensus as to which if any senti-
ments and traits may be retained when a person of minority
origin considers himself assisdlated and is accepted. (7:439)

In Amrican historical experience there have been three chief /
”philosophies" or ”ideological tendencies" with regard to assimilation:
Anglo-conformity, the ”mlting Pot Theory,” and Cultural Pluralism.
Arglo—conformity "demanded complete renunciation of the imigrants ' an-
cestral culture in favor of the behavior and values of the Anglo-Samon
core group.“ (4:85) It was assumd that indgrant peoples would be
absorbed, which was largely true as long as ngration was mostly of
Caucasian stock from northern Europe. This ideology contributed to the
entrenchment of the white Anglo-Saxon Protestant ethnic group as domin-
ant. Coupled with this assumption was the belief that some peoples were
”unassimilable ," a notion used as a platform for limitation of Asian
migration. Although Anglo-conformity, in various guises, has probably
been the most prevalent ideology of assimilation, it is accepted as a
realistic expectation today ”only by the most unsophisticated white
Protestants.” (11:125)

At the 1mm of the century a variant on the earlier belief began to

develop: the Melting Pot Theory, which claimed that ”from the merging

16
of the W ethnic heritages a new type of persons -- the American -
would evolve.“ (7:48) This view was somewhat more generous and ideal-
istic in that it envisioned ”the evolving Aserican society not simply
as a slightly modified England but rather as a totally new blend, cul-
turally and biologically, in which the stocks and folkways of Europe
were, figuratively speaking, indiscriminately mixed in the political pot
of the emerging nation and melted together by the fires of American in-
flueme and interaction into a distinctly new type.“ (4:l15) However,
as Gordon points out,

A neglected aspect of this model ... is whether all groups
make an equally influential contribution to the boiling pot.

At one extreme of interpretation ... the melting pot concept

erbraces a view of acculturation which is hardly distinguishable

in nature from that of Anglo-conformity except that the confor-
mity is to be exacted toward a cultural blending to which the
cultures of indgrant groups from Northern and Western Europe

have conceded an earlier contribution. (4: 125)

In contradistinction to the ”melting pot” view was the ideology of
cultural (or ethnic) pluralism "which provides for a measure of group
autonomy for minorities within a unifying social order." (2:459) Early
popularity of this concept was coincident with the heavy migration around
1900 and the developnent of urban nationality subcommnities. Taking a
more appreciative view of the cultural heritage of the innigrant, this
approach to assimilation was not absorption but a "progressively more
tolerant integration of diverse cultural tendencies.” (3:183)

The cultural pluralism approach is criticised as socially invalid
and as "unrealistic": many scholars dismiss the argument of those who
would strive to maintain ethnic identities as ”largely academic.” Each
of these criticisms seems to originate from a too literal interpretation
of the term cultural pluralism. Those who find plural cultures un-

thinkable envision a society threatened by really diverse value systems

17
and increased discrimination. As expressed by Harden and Meyer, ”Cul-
tzrral pluralism, in the visionary sense of the early decades of the
twentieth century, proved incongruent to the effective needs both of
minorities and of the total society, however humanistically appealing
it was as a philosophy.” (7:49)

Most modern critics find cultural pluralism unrealistic. It can be
inferred from their writings that they believe the idea of (literally)
multiple cultures in America to be nonsense because nearly all groups are
to some degree acculturated. They point out that the only truly separa-
tist cosmemities have been small groups who kept their cultures in tact
by geographic or institutional separation (such as the Amish, by choice,
or the Indians, by force): other groups, through interaction, have
acculturated to some degree.

Since few would differ with this, most of the seeming disagreement
may be attributable to lack of consensus on the concept implied by the
term cultural pluralism. A better understanding of this notion (and the
entire problem of minority relations) might be reached by considering the
pluralism-assimilation axis as both a continuum, implying attainment by
degrees, and as two-dimensional (cultural, and structural or social).
This conceptualization gets away from viewing each mode of minority
adaptation as a discrete condition.

Berelson and Steiner make this distinction in asserting that accul-
turation and assimilation can occur separately. They claim that one can
be acculturated (to a culture) without being assimilated (into a society)
- as with the Negroes: or assimilated more than acculturated -- as the
Amish. But, they add, “The latter is more difficult and far less fre-

quent.” (1:655) This is such the same point made by critics of cultural

.... .w r. r m m we. .3. no.

18
pluralism, ie. , taldng on a cultmre occurs more readily than entrance
into a society so ”plural cultures,” taken literally, would imply that
it is very unlikely the groups in question would ever be assimilated
at all.

Gordon makes a fruitful contribution to solving the problem by ex-
amining the nature of cultural pluralism and declaring the term a mis-
nomer. Conceding the success of acculturation, he suggests that ”a more
accurate term for the American situation is structurral pluralism rather
than cultural pluralism, although some of the latter still remins.”
(4:159) According to his analysis, for plural cultures to be maintained,
they must be carried on by subsocieties which provide the framework for
calmnal existence: cultural pluralism cannot exist without the exist-
once of separate subsocieties but, he says, "It is possible for separate
subsocieties to continue their existence even while the cultural differ-

ences between them beco. progressively reduced and even in greater
part eliminated." (4:15)

This viewpoint takes into account an aspect of modes of dominant-
minority relations often neglected by earlier writers, that assimilation
and pluralism are a matter of degree. Gordon warns of the dangers of an
excessive degree but believes that ”structural and cultural pluralism in
noderate degree are not incompatible with American democratic ideals."
(4:239)

Current views of assimilation are the product of these historically
important ideologies and the experiences of minorities under the poli-
cies which evolved from them. As restrictive laws have slowed inigra-
tion and European ethnic peoples have in large smasure been merged into
the dominant population, attention is turned more toward those minority

19

groups which seem to have eluded the supposedly inexorable process of
assisdlation. The persistent visible minorities have not melted as
theorised and the events of recent years indicate that they cannot be
ignored.

This discussion has dealt sminly with assimilation historically, as
a theoretical concept; current views, as they affect social policy, must
take into account the widespread prejudice and discrimination operative
in the situation. This is the primary reason that assimilation has not
been consu-ated, particularly with respect to racial group. The
structural-culmral separation which prevails is largely due to the pre-
Judice of the majority. The position taken here is in keeping with the
American Creed which holds that all members of American society should
have equal opportunity without experiencing prejudice or discrimination
based on racial, religious or nationality identity or limege.

Protection of minorities from being treated as different against
their will is only half of the problem, however. While the primary goal
of social policy should be direcud toward the total eliflnation of pre-
Judice and discrimination, the problem remaining is how to protect the
right of people who want to be different, who wish to retain the habits,
customs, and traditions of another land. The elimination of discrimina-
tion against minorities should not require the elimination of subgroup
culture and social structure. This plea for the basic ”right to plur-
ality," the there of much current literature, represents an opposite
stand from Victorian notions of total assimilation but is not to be taken

as in favor of unqualified separatism. This statement from Minorities in
American Socigg is representative:

20
The right to retain cultural pluralism or structural plura-
lism based on religion or ethnicityr'and, if racial groups wish
it, race, should not be denied. The qualification is that such
pluralism should incorporate basic identity with the American
value system. All members of the society should be firmly accul-
turated both externally and internally to the basic core of

American values. In short, all should be Americans first and
members of subgroups second. (7x459)

A MODE 0F ADAPTATION FOR THE MEXICAN-MERICANS

In presenting this overview of the various approaches to dominant-
minority relations without reference to am particular group, we have
tried to show what modes of relationship are theoretically available to
a minority given it has the right to make a choice. This review reveals
that assimilation-pluralism has been considered almost exclusively from
the dominant viewpoint; the literature has dealt mainly with aspects of
a group gig assindlated in one way or another, seldom touching on poss-
ible opposition to assimilation except to cite the more extreme separatists
such as the Amish. Recent activities of the Black Muslims has brought
attention to the possibility that minority peoples may have another
goal, or at least the right to their choice of adaptation.

We have tried to show that minority problems are complicated by the
use of ambiguous, value-laden terminology; problems of social, policy have
not been solved by approaching them in terms of broad concepts describ-
ing “modes of relationship" for mority groups in general. The diver-
sity in conceptualization may be a result of the necessity for interpre-
ting terms differently according to their use in reference to particular
groups, even though some have stated definitions of general concepts with
critisisable specificity. What is suggested is that, while every minor-
ity should have a right to choose, they do not have identical prospects
for the same mode of relationship. This 1‘... true of the two largest

21
American subpopulations, the Negro and Mencan-American.*

Few disagree with the assertion that the Negro minority is accul-
mrated; in language, religion and tradition, these people are cultural-
ly American. For this group, a reasonable long-range prospect is not
likely to be structural or cultural pluralism for “an American Negro
subco-unity with no distinctive cultural basis would have only the com-
mon feamre of race as a unifying bond. This would put emphasis on the
very factor that in general social science has been tending to de-
emphasise as having an valid social relevance." (73351)

The same cannot be said of the Mexican-American minority which has
retained a foreign ethnic-language background and whose ranks continue to
be filled by imigration. These people have very real prospects for re-
taining their identity as members of a subgroup along with their identity
as Americans, if they so desire, and there are strong proponents for this
position among them. One of the most prominent is Professor Rafael
Guzman of California State University who is presently involved in a four
year Ford Foundation study of Mexican-Americans. His views were present-
ed recently in a national news magazine as follows:

As with the blacks, the question for those who lead the

Chicanos is whether progress means separatism or assimilation.

Cal State Professor Rafael Guzman warns that the barrio is

potentially as explosive as the black ghetto. He argues for a

new pluralism in the U.S. that means something other than forc-

ing minorities into the established Anglo-Saxon mold; each

group should be free to develop its own culture while contri-

buting to the whole. (10:21)

This "new pluralism" of which Gunman speaks is conceptually that
which Gordon refers to as structural pluralism and Harden and Meyer have

*In 1960 Mexican-Americans were estimated to be 2.89% of the population
of the United States, the Negro nearly 11%. (7.129)

22

called stabilized acculturation. The position assigned these terms in
Figure 1 suggests the essential aspects of this mode of assimilation: it
assumes considerable acculturation and some degree of structural assisti-
lation have occurred. Placement on a continuum implies that this mode
may be, as Harden and Meyer puts it, "a transitional reality to be follow-
ed by complete incorporation of the dominant values and affiliations in-
cluding the private spheres of behavior and sentiment“; not forced or
total assimilation but a solution for a minority group in adjusting to
the dominant society which may be held by some of its members as ideal.
(7:51) The group's level of acculturation is seen as typically gene-
rational -- the child of the immigrant is more acculturated. than his
parents and he socializes his own children to more of the dominant cul-
ture.

Minorities may, however, choose stabilised accultura-

tion and resist complete assimilation as a mode of adaptation.

This may be because they value a specific historic tradition

of which they are a part. Or they may feel that identity with

a group that shares the same cultural tradition gives security.

Or it may be their assessment that even with total acculturation

all barriers to participation in the society will not be lifted

for them. (7837)

While the prejudice of the majority is partly responsible for the
structural-cultural separatism of this ethnic group, we propose to show
that it is brought about in part by a desire to maintain its comunal
identity and subculture. Borrowing Marden's term for describing a mode
of adaptation which, for the Meadow-American minority leaves the choice
between separatism and assimilation to the Chicano himself, the main
subject of consideration in this study is the proposal that ”stabilised
acculturation" is an appropriate approach to integration for the Spanish-

speaking minority of the American Southwest.

1.

2.

3.

23

FOOTNOTES

Berelson, Bernard and Gary Steiner, Human Behavior An Invento of
Scientific Ms, New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1%.
Broom, Ieonard, and Philip Selanick, Sociolo , New York: Harper &
Row, l963.

Burma, John H., Spanish-spam Groug in the United States, Durham:
Duke Univ. Press, 1954.

Gordon, Milton M. . Assimilation in American Life, New York: Oxford
Univ. Press, 1964.

Gould, Julius and William L. Kolb, Dictio of the Social Sciences,
New York: The Free Press, 1964.

Ieomis, Charles P., "In Defense of Integration: For One Nation and
0m World,“ (Unpublished), Fall, 1969. -

Harden, Charles F. and Gladys Meyer, Minorities in Amrican Society,
New York: American Book Co. , 1968.

”Refigion,“ The 1968 World Book Year Book, Chicago: Field Enterprises,
1 .

Sills, Davis L. , ed. , International Encyclogdia of the Social
Sciences, vol. 1, New York: Crowell, Collier 8: Macmillan, 1968.

”m fitfl‘ Strike That Gr." to 1‘ c&u“gn Tim, *9 July 4', 1969!
We ‘21s

Treudley, Mary, ”Book Review: Assimilation in American Life by
Milton M. Gordon,“ Social Forces, 43, p. 125.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, "Population Characteristics of Selected
Ethnic Groups in the Five Southwestern States,” U.S. Census of

Penal—ation: 1&0. Suwamntiw Reports 4 Series PC(Sl)-55,
Washington: 1 e

 

Chapter 2
STATEMENT OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM

Continued identification of the Spanish-speaking subpopulation as
a minority'within the dominant.American society is taken as an indica-
tion that this group has not been completely assimilated. Factors which
tend to retard complete assimilation of a minority population may be
categorized as externally imposed deterrents and self-imposed deterrents
to assimilation. .Externally imposed factors take the form of discrimina-
tory practices (particularly in the areas of education, occupation, and
housing) and prejudice directed against its members. Some evidence that
these externally imposed deterrents are operative in the case of the
MexicaneAmerican minority is presented in these findings:

Educational Discrimination

As reported by the UCLA MexicaneAmerican Study Project, ”In the
Southwest, adult MexicaneAmericans had on the average 7.1 years of school-
ing as against 12.1 for Anglos.” Median attainment of the Spanish
surname group in 1960 ranged from.8.6 years in California to 4.8ryears in
Texas, compared with 12.2 and 10.3 for Anglos.” (5:3)

Relatively low educational attainment, according to Burma, can be
attributed largely to school drop-cut, most often the result of the
language handicap. Language difficulties also contribute to de facto
school segregation. (3:74)

While there are few legal restrictions, discrimination occurs in
subtle forms of inequitable educational opportunities including improper-
ly trained teachers, inferior facilities, lack of interest in enrolling

Mexican children and encouraging attendance, especially of working

21:

25
children. (10:138)
Occupational Discrimination

walter Fogel reports as evidence of labor market discrimination
against.HexicaneAmericans:

(1) Comparison of incomes of MexicaneAmericans and

Anglos who had completed the same number of school years shows

incomes of Mexicaneimericans were 60 to 80 percent those of

Anglos. (2) Disproportionate representation of Hexican-

Americans in low wage occupations; within 6 or 7 major occu-

pational categories, MexicanHAmericans hold inferior jobs to

those in which Anglos are employed. (6:191)

Residential.Discrimination

In 1954, Burma wrote: ”Always in the Southwest ... the Hexican
lives in a segregated section of town. He calls it the barrio or colo-
nia: Anglos call it "betown' or "Spiktown' ... By whatever name it is
known it can be recognised as a distinct and substandard area.” Upwards
of 75 percent of all.MexicaneAmericans live in such a residential enclave
in urban areas. (3:88)

The MexicaneAnerican Study Project reports similar findings on
residential segregation in the urban.Southwest. They point out that
urban residential segregation is significant in itself since about four-
fifths of the MexicaneAmerican group live in cities, and also because it
is associated with many other kinds of separation -- in jobs, schooling,
income, languages, social relations and political participation. Segre-
gated ethnic areas tend to be low-income areas with poor housing, a
pattern reflecting the generally subordinate position of an ethnic group.

(13:3)

0f discrimination in general, Cumberland.writes:

Ugly discriminatory practices, some overt and some covert,
have been characteristic of relations between the dominant and

26

minority groups in the border area. In most of the area

virtually every aspect of the material culture of the

Spanish-speaking is at a lower level than the remainder

of the population. Unlike the Negro in the south, dis-

crimination against the Spanish-speaking is not supported

by law: but the social acceptability of the practice, and

the social unacceptability of non-discriminatory practices,

act as enforcing agents. It has been only in recent years

that there has been any general recognition, even by

thoughtful people, that the practice existed or had any

meaning for society in general. (3:71)

Incomplete assimilation of the Spanish-speaking population is
further explained in terms of self-imposed deterrents, some of which mqy
be categorised as ”involuntary" in that they are essentially self-segre-
gating phenomena, not directly imposed by the dominant society but over
which minority group members have little direct control. This is pri-
marily an analytical distinction, however, since self-imposed factors
functioning in social separation of the group are obviously interrelated
with one another and with the externally imposed factors discussed above.
Important among "involuntary" self-imposed.deterrents tolMexicaneAmerican
assimilation are continued immigration, proximity to the border, endo-
gamous marriage patterns, and retention of Spanish language and Catholic-
ism.

Immigration

Broom observes that one of the reasons the Japanese have assimilated
to a greater degree than the Mexicans is the continual immigration of
Mexicans which causes this group to remain large and in turn re-enforces
ethnicity. (2:500)

Burma describes the probable extent of illegal immigration since l9h0
as exceeding the number entering legally. (3:#h) Census figures indi-
cate that, of the 3,465,000 Spanish-surname persons in the five south-

western states in 1960, 52u,81# were foreign born. (16)

27
Proximity to the Border

Physical proximity provides Opportunity for association with the
mother country and language facility enhances communication: these fac-
tors promote retention of Mexican culture in bordering states. Loomis'
data attest to the permeability of the United States-Mexican border: al-
most three-fifths of the respondents in the southwest sample and almost
one-fourth of the informants in the urban Mexican sample report visiting
across the border. Over a third of the Latinos receive radio or tele-
vision programs from Mexico. (7:7#,l3)

Intermarriage

According to a recent study of Medan-American intermarriage in Los
Angeles County, while marriage patterns are affected by demographic and
social variables, the fundamental factor is social distance. They report
a higher rate of out-group marriage among third generation than first or
second generation Mexicans implying gradual assimilation, but “the major-
ity of Mexican-Americans still tend to marry other Mexican-Americans.
Assimilation through intermarriage is still not iminent.” (12:96)

Language
Charles Harden observes:

The practice of speaking another language in the family or
among close associates may serve as a mode of identification in
both a derogatory sense for the dominant group, or in a sense
of cultural pride for the minority. (10:26)

Burma cites the 19% study by William Altus of English-illiterate
draftees, approximately 48 percent of whom gave Spanish as their mother
tongue although they had been raised in the United States. According to
figures taken by Burma from the 19:0 Census, 36.6 percent of the persons
listing their mother tongue as Spanish were native born of native

parents: of nearly 700,000 Mexicans of foreign or mixed parentage in

28
1940, English was the mother tongue of 7 percent, the lowest percentage
of the 19 mother tongues tabulated. (3:73)

Presently, "in Texas 40% of Chicanos are functionally illiterate

and in Los Angeles only an estimated 25% speak English fluently.” (14:21)
Religion

Loomis points to the integrative function of religion: ”A common
religious heritage ... shared by the vast majority of a society's
members ... tends to bestow a certain degree of integration of the
society.“ He reports Ienski's finding that over eight out of ten white
Catholics (in Detroit) thought friends or relatives would discourage them
from changing their religious faith. (8:184,l99)

Religion as a barrier to out-group marriage among Mexican-Americans
is shown in this excerpt from The American Catholic Peggy:

Catholics form about 30 percent of the populations of

both San Antonio, Texas, and Marquette, Michigan, but the rate

of Catholic interfaith marriage is only about 5 percent in San

Antonio, while in Marquette it is close to 40 percent. (2:418)

The vast majority of the population of Mexico is Catholic: while the
Hemican Catholic church, when transplanted to the United States, loses
some of its fervor and emphasis on supernatural occurrences and emotional
experience, most Mexican-Americans remain nominally Catholic, observing
Catholic rites despite irregular attendance. Even among those who be-
con Protestant, the church reinforces the separateness of the group as
a consequence of. segregation typically existing in southwestern churches
based mainly on language differentiation. (3:81)

0f the 105 respondents in the Southwest Spanish-speaking sample of
the Five Nation Study, nine are reported as non-Catholics. (7:51)

The foregoing discussion has outlined the kinds of externally im-
posed and ”involuntary" or spontaneously self-imposed factors which

29
function in separation of minority populations: some evidence was pre-
sented which shows these kinds of factors to be operative in impeding
assimilation of the Mexican-Americans. On this basis, then, for the
purposes of the present study, it will be assumed that incomplete assi-
milation of the Mexican-American minority into the dominant society is
_i_n all: attributable to deterrents directly imposed upon the group in
the form of prejudice and discrimination, and in at attributable to
"involuntary“ self-imposed deterrents over which members of the minority
have little control.

The issue to which this investigation is specifically directed, how-
ever, is the possibility that, beyond these factors, a voluntary deterrent
to complete assimilation may be functioning among the Mexican-Americans.
Incomplete assimilation of this minority may be £591 attributable to
assimilation impeding behavior which stems from a desire for ethnic
identification on the part of its members. Aspects of this predilection
for ethnicity as a factor contributing to structural-cultural separatism
are included under the rubric of stabilised acculturation discussed in
the previous chapter. Although there seems to be no published study of
the desire to maintain ethnicity as causally contributing to continued
minority identification, the literature contains several references to
this possibility in connection with Mexican-Americans. The following ex-
cerpt from Ruth Tuck's widely quoted work suggests this relationship to
be a distinct possibility:

Self-respecting pride in one's background and origins
strikes a rather new note in American imigrant histories. The
man who changed his name, denied his background, and was ashamed
of the old folks with their accented English and foreign ways is
a comonplace type among other immigrant groups. He is a dis-
tinct rarity among Mexican-Americans. . . .

"AsSimilation: I am tired of that word,” said one of the

30

colonia's leaders. "Fusion is what we want -- the best
of both ways." (15:13“)

Preliminary reports issued by the on-going UCLA HexicaneAmerican
Study Project contain repeated references to the possibility of the pre-
ference for pluralism as, for example, in this statement from the report
of a study of residential segregation: "There is a pervasive controversy
in literature about MexicaneAmericans as to whether their separation
from various aspects of American life is the result of their exclusion or
of their desire to be excluded.” This study investigated as "relatively
conscious cultural factors" two constructs described as follows:

(a) the acceptability of the subpopulation to the dominant
population (or the "taste for discrimination" against a sub-
population).

(b) the cohesiveness of the subpopulation and its desire
for assimilation (or the "taste for segregation" of the sub-
population itself). .Although this concept is not elaborated in
the literature, it would include such matters as the degree of
acculturation of the subpopulation and the extent of the tradi-
tionalist values among its members. It is clearly associated
with "taste for segregation," though analytically distinct.
(13:26:24)

Drawing on Census figures for data the researchers were unable to
find a satisfactory statistical proxy for "taste for discrimination” which
could be used in multiple regression analysis; after rejecting a number
of alternatives to ”express empirically the lack of acculturation of the
MexicaneAmerican population and their presumed propensity for voluntary
segregation" (including percent of Spanish-surname who were foreign born),
they operationalized the concept as traditional familism.measured in
terms of households with five or more persons. Interpreting the propor-
tion of large households as an indicator of acculturation, they found it
to be significantly related to residential segregation although confounded

by correlation with income. (4)

'4-

([1

31
In an earlier study of social change in El Cerrito, New Mexico,
Charles P. leomis uses the term "polite separatism" which is suggestive
of the same phenomenon, as seen in this excerpt from his report:

Polite separatism characterizes the basic nature of bound-
ary maintenance of Spanish-speaking groups in New Mexico. The
evolution of this pattern is complex and has developed over the
my decades of Anglo-Hispano interaction. In a brief space we
can only sketch certain aspects of polite separatism as a bound-
ary maintaining device. Suffice it to say that even before the
annexation of New Mexico by the United States in 1848 and in
ever-accelerating measure thereafter, "invading" Anglos who
generally maintained an exalted belief in their own superiority
pushed their business and other interests in “the Anglo way,"
... Against this aggressive and industrious Anglo enterprise the
natives were unable to compete.

The results of this interaction have been summarised by
Zeleny: 'The average Spanish-American drawing what security he
mods from the family, connmmity and church, as an individual
possesses a serenity, a lack of competitive seal, and a content-
ed enjoyment of leisure and simple pleasures... (They) have col-
untarily remained aloof from social intercourse with the Anglos
in part because of hostile attitudes toward them. '

In terms of the basic cultural and social components of El
Cerrito, the device of polite separatism has been an effective
boundary maintaining device. Social-cultural linkage to the
society outside has not meant that the basic value orientation
and social structure has greatly changed. (9:67-69)

The supposition that such a desire as has been described may exist
and be operative in the relationship between the Mexican-American finer-
ity and the dominant society is basic to the issue under investigation,
via. , that incomplete assimilation of the Spanish-speaking subpopulation
is _i_n_ at a reflection of the members' resistance to total assimilation.
Some aspects of the behavior of the members of this minority which has
the effect of impeding its complete assimilation rests upon a desire to
retain their ethnic structural-cultural identity within the dominant
society. This, the general hypothesis, is tested on the basis of data

drawn from a sample of the southwestern Spanish-speaking population.

32
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SPANISH-SPEAIENG MINORITY

The population to which the findings of this research may be in-
ferred to apply is uniquely difficult to define. Ieo Grebler, director
of the extensive UCLA study comments,

The study of amr minority population raises a host of ques-
tions concerning its identification. . . In the case of Mexican-
Americans, these problems are compounded by semantics. Every
study of MexicaneAmericans in the United States -- in fact
practically every conversation about or within the group -- be-
gins inevitably with questions of definition. (ll:vi)

The Mexican-Americans are accorded minority status on the basis of
language, nationality, race, and religion. despite the ambiguity of some
of these designations. Ample evidence of this is seen in the changing
Census identification of this population. The 1930 Census attempted to
enumerate the Spanish-speaking people under the heading “Mexican” (de-
fined as people born in Mexico or native born of Mexican born parents)
but this excluded the third or more generation Hispano population and the
designation was abandomd. The 1940 Census reported only on persons of
Spanish mother tongue, meaning those habitually speaking Spanish in the
home. Of this group (in 1940) 428,360 were foreign born: 714,060 were
native white of foreign or mined parentage and 718,980 were native white
of native parentage. (3:36) This produced a total lower than the number
of persons correctly called "Hansen-American" because it excluded those
who were Spanish-speaking in derivation but did not speak the language
in the home. In the 1950 and 1960 Census, persons having Spanish sur-
names (Mexican ancestry but not man ) were distinguished separately
from "other white” in five southwestern states: this excludes those who
anglicised their names and women who intermarried (and exactly comparable

data is unavailable for the nation as a whole).

33
Even the members of the group designate themselves variously as

Latinos, Spanish-speaking Americans, Mexican-Americans, Mexicanos (or
Chicanos) and Hispanos. The latter, although often used by Spanish-
speaking people interchangeably with other terms is used in the litera-
ture about this minority with particular reference to those Spanish-
speaking people who are descended from Spanish-Mexican lineage indigenous
to the area at the time of annexation, some of whose ancestry goes back
to the 16th century. "In view of the general statistical confusion con-
cerning Americans of Latin ancestry, their numbers and proportion are
difficult to establish. It is clear that in New Mexico and southern
Colorado a very large proportion of the Spanish-speaking people derive
from this Hispano lineage as distinct from migrant Mexican lineage: in
Texas and southern California the situation is roughly reversed. (10:49)
The rural Hispanos residing primarily in northern New Mexico constitute
somthing of a minority within a minority: they are often referred to as
"the forgotten people" because they have, in relative isolation, loept
alive the culture of past centuries. In recent times, however, mary
Hispanos have migrated from rural areas to cities, becoming newcomers to
the urban colonia.

These definitional problems have implications beyond the immediate
consequences of inexact enumeration. As already noted, this multiple
basis of identification is reflected both in the prejudice of dominants
and in the self-identification of the Mexican-Americans themselves. If
the Mexican-American leaves the colonia he is still identifiable by his
name and language: even if he speaks English he may still hear a Spanish
surname: if he anglicised his name, he might still be differentiated in

terms of visible plysical traits or religious preference. This entire

3“
configuration of cultural elements or ”ethos,” together with the value
system with shich the Spanish-speaking are typically identified , has
been traditionally associated with the concept of La Rana. literally
"the race,” this is a cultural concept of peoplehood and destiny creating
deep psychic bonds uniting the people of Latin-American descent. La Rana
has this traditional significance for the older Mexican-American: among
the second and third generation youth it is becoming “at best, a rallying
cry betokening a mild fora of cultural nationalists: at worst, it connotes
outright racism." (11!»318) The pervasive problems of minority identifi-
cation have far-reaching implications not evident in a straight-forward
attempt to characterise the population relevant to the present study.

 

 

 

 

Figure 2. Distribution Spanish-surname Population 5 Southwestern States.*

Wine. ‘9“. July 4, 1969, p. 17. Used with permission Tine, Inc. '

 

35
he data used in testing the hypothesis is drawn from a sample of

Spanish-speaking adults residing in Arizona, California, Colorado, New
Mexico and Texas. This region contains about 78 percent of all the
Mexican-Americans in the United States, see Figure 2. As far as can be
ascertained, the Southwest Spanish-surname designation used for the
Census includes all but about ten percent of persons living in the area
who are of Mexican descent. Since few Spanish-surname persons in the
southwest are not of Mexican descent, it is general practice to construe
Census data for "white persons of Spanish-surname" as applying to Mexican-
Amricans in the southwest.

Table 2, following page , shows the distribution of the 1960 south-
west Spanish-surname population over the five states and the proportion
of each state's population included in this designation. For comparison,
the sum percentages are shown for the Negro population in this area.
Table 3 breaks down the Spanish-surname group by nativity and parentage
indicating the preponderance of native born Mexican-Amsricans in each
state.‘ In the southwest as a whole, about 12 percent of the total popu-
lation is Spanish-surname compared with 7.1+ percent Negro, .6 percent
Indian, .6 percent Japanese and .1} percent Chinese. The 1960 Census sets
the total southwest Spanish-surname population at 3.1460399, a 51 percent
increase over 1950: a recent article in 1193 magazine claims the total is
#,617,000 which is probably a reasonable estimate for 1969. In each
state, the Spanish-surname population is primarily urban, as shown in
Table 2. (16)

These statistics tend to corroborate earlier statements regarding the
significance of the relative size of the Mexican-American minority and

*85% of Mexican-Americans are native born: 50% are third generation. (103131)

I. I '0 ‘l

36

.moae .ooeeeo meanness enmeeeasoo .m.a .eopmcdenez. .mn- m om phenom

 

Hanan osechsm hmficmmm mo mnomncm .mvhomcm.poofiesm .ow H «seeped om mo menace .m.: .oeheoms

 

 

 

 

 

mm.em mm.om mm.wa cents a
mmH.mmH amm.~ee 3mm.mea ohm.ane.n waxes
aa.me mo.mm mm.mm canes m
mno.oH www.mm mem.mm~ -e.¢©~ coexo:.zmz
.35. M38 use ass i.“
ewe.n mfia.mn aam.mm« mun.mmn ovenoaoo
mm.mm em.mm m3.ww canes m
Hmm.mm~ mmm.:me eao.omo mmm.om¢.« aesnoefiamo
“0.30 we.ea ms.aa capes a
0mm.em me.so www.mm omm.emfi meouene
:aom poke: no owepcenem nmmausm nwmmmmm
:mwcaom :mfionom mo obfipez e>fipcz mo cbdpez Hopes macaw
{.epepm he pmesspsom .meoeaem osaensnuheaesmm .emepccaem use hvd>dpez .m canes
.o.oo~ «0.00“ mc.ooH
H.0m “.mw m.os a.~H inns adage
m.m m. w.m w.u m.wN coaxex.3cz
5.0 m.“ m.: n.m o.m ovenoeoo
e.mm 5.0: ~.H: o. ”.0 afienoeeeao
«.3 o.m m.m m.m m.e« acoeea<
pmmahpeom .mom oamez .mom .cmmm lionmoz madnhem nmficcnw
apnea tango emosepeom emosepsom eoeemdenom eoeeaaeaom modem

no pzooamm mo ecouaem

..memem an amazeusom

mo pcooaom

.mCOdveaemom onwoz use

33m3p§2£ Sflmfipfifia

.opfie3_Ameeo .osueasmnemeeeam mo noepenfleeuen .m canes

37
its general location in close proadmity to Mexico. The obvious impli-
cations of these facts have already been eluded to: (l) prejudice and
discrimination are more prevalent and severe in areas containing large
proportions of the minority group according to the results of a number
of studies (13515): (2) proximity to the mother country enhances cul-
‘mral links and sustains minority identification.

1.

2.

3.

9.

10.

12.

13.

ll}.

15.

38

FOOTNOTES

Berelson, Bernard and Gary Steiner, Human Behavior an Invento
of Scientific Findi s, New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1%“.
Broom, Ieonard, and Philip Selanick, Sociology, New York: Harper
and Row, 1963.

Bum, John H., S sh-spealdng Grou s in the United States,
Durham: Dulce Univ. Press, 1951+.

Cumberland, Charles C. , ”The United States-Mexican Border: A Selec-
tive Guide to the Literature of the Region," Supplemnt to Rural
Sociolo , 25, 1960.

Fogel, Walter, Education and Income of Mexican-Auricans in the
Southwest, Los Angeles: UCIA, Mexican-American Study Project, 1966.

Fogel, Walter, Mexican-Americans in Southwest Labor Markets, Los
Angeles: UCLA, Mexican-American Stucv Project, 1&7.

Ieomis, Charles P., Zena K. Loomis, and Jeanne Gullahorn, M

of Mexico and the United States, lensing: MSU Agric. Exper. Station
Research Bull. 1966.

Ioomis, Charles P. , Social 3 stems: Es on Their Persistence and
M9 Princeton: Van Nostrand, 1%0.

Icons, Charles P., ”El Cerrito, New Mexico: A Changing Village,"
New Monico Historical Review, 33, 1958, pp. 53-75.

 

Harden, Charles F. and Gladys Meyer, Minorities in American Society,
New York: American Book Co. , 1968.

Mittelbach, Frank and Grace Marshall, The Burden of Povert Los
Angeles: UCLA, Mexican-American Study Project, 1 .

Hittelbach, Frank, Joan W. Moore and Ronald McDaniel, Intergrriggg

of Mexican-Americans , Los Angeles: UCLA Mexican-American Shady
PraJOCt' 1 e

 

Moore, Joan and Frank Mittelbach, Residential Semgation of Minor-
ities in the Urban Southwest, Los Angeles: UCLA Modem-American
Study Project, 1966.

”The fit? Strike That Grew to La Causa," Time, 9n. July it. 1969.
PP. “ e

Tug:é Ruth, Not With The Fist, New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.,
1 .

39

16. U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census of Population: 1360. Subject
Reports. Persons of Spanish Surname. Final Report PC(2)-lB,
Washington: 1963.

Chapter 3
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: PAS MODEL CONCEPTS

"Social change may be defined as alteration in the systemic attri-
butes of society and its sub-systems either through the development of
new systems, the alteration of old ones, or a combination of these two."
(5:165) According to this definition, minority assimilation may be viewb
ed as a process of social change appropriately examined in terms of the
"PAS Model" concepts developed by Charles P. Loomis. This theory of sys-
tematic social change is set forth in detail in Social Systems:.Essayg
on Their Persistence and Changg from.which the following definitions of

concepts basic to the present study have been taken.

Social System

Interaction (of pluralities) which is mutually oriented and mediat-
ed through shared expectations and symbols may be said to constitute a
system. The greater intensity and frequency of specific types of inter-
action* on the part of members as compared with non-members may consti-
tute a characteristic of systems permitting their delineation. (2:6)
American society constitutes a social system.exhibiting an orderly uni-
formity of interaction: likewise the interactions of members of languag
I""This simplified means of delineating social systems requires accurate
use. It has been observed for instance that actors of a given family
whose members are scattered about in an industrial society may retain
solidarity as a family but interact less frequently with family members
than nonemembers on the job and in other places. Because there is a dif-
ference in the type of interaction and resulting bonds among the family
and non-family'members, the phrase 'specific types ....' is important.”

The type of interaction may be determined in terms of intensity, dura-
tion, direction, nature and extent of integration, etc. (3:h)

#0

41
and ethnic groups may be considered systems if the members interact more
with one another than with non-members. (2:6) ”For any system boundary
maintenance of the system itself is important and necessary." (1:13)

Boundary Maintenance

Boundary maintenance is the process whereby the identity of a given
social system is preserved and the characteristic interaction pattern
maintained. Boundary maintenance is facilitated by war, use of dispara-
ging terms, discriminatory practices, ascription of low rank and reluc-
tance to accept members of a group not one's own: boundary maintenance
devices include use of distinctive language, reluctance to change, and
practice of endoganw. The various categories into which these devices
fall suggest their wide array. They may be primarily physical or they may
be primarily social: they may be spontaneously or unconsciously applied
or they may be planned and rationally applied. They may be expressed in
group contraction or they may be reflected in group expansion, as simi-
lar groups find boundary maintenance facilitated by joint effort. The
latter classification obviously has significance for the process of sys-
tem linkage which in may respects is a corollary of boundary mainten-
ance. (3:32)

Systemic Linkage
Systemic linkage is the process by which the elements of at least
two social systems come to be articulated so that in sou ways and on
some occasions they may be viewed as a single system. Whereas the pro-
cess of boundary maintenance refers to the limits set upon intergroup
contact, the process of systemic linkage refers to the organizational

arrangements for group interdependences. While neither extreme actually

42
exists, without boundary maintenance social groups would be indistin-
guishable among a mass of individuals: without systemic linkage an un-
thinkable parochialism.would deny to groups any form of contact outside
their own boundaries.

It is assumed that linkage may be operationalized as a variable
property. Thus a given ethnic plurality might at a given occasion be
completely linked to a mother country, but on another occasion have no
discernible linkage. Complete linkage may be defined as that state of
a system, composed previously of two or more systems, in which actors
of the sub-systems, when paired by sociologically similar status-roles,
exhibit no significant differences with respect to norms, goals, senti-
ments and beliefs. ”Low boundary maintenance is interpreted as high sys-
temic linkage potential.” (2:39)

Desire for Boundary Maintenance

When actors express eagerness to delimit the membership of pertinent
social systems to actors embodying the characteristics of the present
membership, they are assumed to be expressing a desire for boundary main-
tenance. Actors voluntarily carrying on activities which constitute
boundary maintaining devices can be assumed to desire to maintain bound-
aries, thus ”social distance" may be viewed as an indicator of the desire
for boundary maintenance, the inverse of systemic linkage desire. (2:7)
It is possible for boundary maintenance to be a unilateral action on the
part of one of the systems, preventing linkage possibly desired on the
part of the other.

various studies focusing on boundary maintenance/systemic linkage
have demonstrated that the utility of these concepts surpasses that of
the more global and spongelike concept acculturation. This is

43
particularly true if the distinction between social and cultural systems
is maintained (ie., as in Parsons' statement: "A cultural system does
not 'function' except as a part of a concrete action system, it just
'is.'”) (#:55) The term systemic linkage (earlier called social-
cultural linkage) is similar to acculturation in meaning and significance
but for these reasons is a superior analytic tool and further, because
it may'be utilized in terms of behavioral and attitudinal aspects, as
suggested in these defining statements. Figure 1, part D, presented in
the introductory chapter, suggests the flexibility of the systemic link-
age/boundary maintenance conceptualization as described here, and indi-
cates its similarity to the term acculturation.

.A study of the actual and desired linkages between.Mexican and
United States citizens (reported by Loomis, Loomis and Gullahorn in 1966)
which utilizes the concepts defined in this chapter is considered pre-
cedential for employing the model in this study. In the former, the two
nations were viewed as social systems separated by political boundaries
and the investigation centered about systemic linkage, it undertook to
determine what linkages exist and to isolate factors and conditions of
further linkage. The present work deals with systems not physically or
politically separated so that some degree of systemic linkage is assumed:
it is logical therefore to stress the negative side of the dual concepts,

seeking knowledge of factors and conditions that are boundary maintaining.
THEORETICAL FORMULATION OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM

The general research problem.presented in Chapter 2 may now be re-

stated in terms of the theoretical concepts as defined above.

M4.

By'definition: The United States dominant society and the Spanish-
speaking subpopulation are identified as social systems. Identifica-
tion of this ethnic minority as a social system is perpetuated by the
process of boundary maintenance. Boundary maintenance is facilitated
(and systemic linkage retarded) by behavior on the part of members of a
social system.such as ascription of low rank, prejudice and discrimina-
tion directed against the members of another system. Complete systemic
linkage is also prevented by boundary maintaining devices ”spontaneously
or unconsciously applied” by members of the subsystem such as use of dis
tinctive language and preference for endogam. Some evidence of the
nature and extent of these kinds of boundary maintaining activities on
the part of members of the particular social systems under consideration
has been presented. The present study proceeds from.the assumption,
then, that boundary maintenance of the Mexican ethnic group is partly a
consequence of actions directed against its members and is also partly
attributible to involuntary devices spontaneously employed by Mexican-
Americans. The specific hypothesis central to this study follows from
the definition of boundary maintenance desire: members of a social sys-
tem.may also engage voluntarily in activities which constitute boundary
maintaining devices which function to perpetuate the system's identity.
Thus the research hypothesis may be stated as follows: Boundary mainten-
ance behavior is directly related to boundary maintenance desire on the
part of members of the Spanish-speaking population represented by the

sample under consideration.

Boundary maintenance behavior (hypothesised as partly a manifesta-
tion of desire for separation) is indicated.when members of an ethnic

group interact more with one another than with non-members. Boundary

 

 

1&5
maintenance behavior is measured on the basis of the extent to which
primary and secondary group interaction is limited to Spanish-speaking
associates.

Boundary maintenance desire is operationally defined in terms of
attitudes which favor delimiting membership of the system to persons
embodying the characteristics of the present membership, thus "social
distance" is viewed as an indicator of the desire for boundary mainten-
ance.

Details of indices constructed for measuremnt of these variables
on the basis of the foregoing operational definitions appear in the
chapter which follows.

l.

2.

3.

1+6
FOOTNOTES

Loomis, Charles P., ”In Defense of Integration: For One Nation
and One World," (Unpublished), Fall, 1969.

Loomis, Charles P., Zona K. Loomis, and Jeanne Gullahorn, Li es
of Mexico and the United States, E. Lansing: MSU Agric. Exper.
Station Research Bull. , 1966.

Loomis, Charles P., Social Systems: Essays on Their Persistence and
_C_h_a_ng_g, Princeton: Van Nostrand, 1960.

Loomis, Charles P., "Systemic linkage of El Cerrito,” Rural Sociolog,
24: 1959: PP- 5““57-

Loomis, Charles P. , "Toward a Theory of Systemic Social Change ,"
in Irwin T. Sanders, ed., Interprofessional Training Goals for
Technical Assistance Personnel Abroad, New York: Council on
Social Work Education, 1959.

Chapter 4
METHODOLOGY

Data Collection and Sample

The data used to test the hypotheses in this research are taken
from.Phase One of the Five Nation Study (Loomis, et al.) which involved
the United States and Mexico. The study was financed by the Carnegie
Corporation, the U.S. Public Health Service, the Michigan Agricultural
Experiment Station and the Center for International Programs of M.S.U.
under a grant from the Ford Foundation. The present research is based on
data from.the sample drawn to represent the Spanish-speaking population
of southwestern United States. It is defined as an augmented sample of
Spanish-speaking adults in five Southwestern states -- Arizona,
California, Colorado, New Mexico and Texas -- with findings based on 105
personal interviews (one per household), half with urban Spanish-speaking
adults and half with rural and farm.Spanish-speaking adults. (3:1)

The Gallup Organization was responsible for interviewing, coding,
providing marginals, and developing sample plans: fieldwork took place
during the period November 1963, through January 1964, using Spanish-
speaking interviewers and a Spanish language version of the schedule used
with respondents in the general United States population sample.

Design of the Sample
Using the 1960 Census of the Spanish surname population by counties
in.Arisona, California, Colorado, New Mexico and Texas, 30 counties were
drawn with probability of selection proportional to the size of their
combined urban and rural-farm.Spanish surname population. Each county,
so selected, was designated as a sampling area where four interviews
#7

48
would be made with Spanish-speaking respondents who were United States
citizens. In the rural areas, the persons selected were living in
households where the chief wage-earner was a farmer or employed in a
farm occupation.

Within each county the four interviews were distributed between the
urban and rural-farm population in accord with the distribution of the
Spanish surname population. Thus, if the Spanish surname population was
entirely within urban areas of a selected county, all four interviews
would be made in the urban areas. If one-half of the population.was
located in urban areas and one-half in rural-farm.areas, two interviews
would be made in each type of area, and so forth.

Because information about the distribution of the Spanish surname
population was not readily available for blocks within cities or for
specific areas in the rural-farm stratum, all urban areas and rural
areas included in the sample were subdivided into large segments of
roughly equal population size. The necessary number of segments for
each designated county were then drawn at random. Interviewers were
then instructed to determine from local officials where eligible respond-
ents could be found within the boundaries of each assigned segment.
Households selected under this procedure were then contacted. (3:8) The

composition of the sample is shown in Appendix.B.

#9
OPERATIONALIZATION OF THE VARIABLES

Variables of Main Hypothesis: Operational Definitions, Index Construction

Boundary maintenance behavior (hereafter “BMB"), the dependent vari-
able, is operationally defined in terms of intragroup interaction con-
sistent with the assumption that the Spanish-speaking subpopulation, as
a consequence of the process of boundary maintenance, constitutes a
social system. (According to the definition of a social system stated
earlier: ”The interactions of members of language and ethnic groups may
be considered systems if the members interact more with one another than
with non-members.") (6:6) Thus BMB is measured as the extent of con-
tact of respondents with Spanish-speaking associates in five interaction
arenas: among (1) personal acquaintances from church, (2) personal ac-
quaintances in formal organizations, (3) relatives, (4) neighbors and
friends, and (5) work associates. The interview schedule includes two
items in connection with each interaction arena making it possible to
determine the extent to which MOST or SOME associates are Spanish-speak-
ing. An index of BMB based on these ten r63ponses combined by summation
yields measurements ranging from maximum BMB, "all or most associates are
Spanish-speaking in all five arenas" to minimum BMB, "no contacts with
Spanish-speaking.” Details of the recoding procedure and construction
of the BMB Index may be found in.Appendix A.

The independent variable, boundary maintenance desire, is operation-
ally defined as an attitudinal orientation which favors delimiting the
membership of the system to actors embodying the characteristics of the
present membership. BMD is measured as the extent of rejection of

members of the dominant society by ethnic group members (using the Social

50
Distance Scale*) and also in terms of three attitudinal aspects reflect-
ing Spanish-speaking respondents' orientation toward the dominant so-
ciety compared with their ethnic socio-cultural milieu. Measurement of
the dimensions of this attitude is based on the following three components
of the END Index: (1) attitude toward the United States as a nation
(the dominant society) compared with Mexico (the mother country): (2)
attitude, in terms of "friendliness" toward members of the dominant
society, compared with citizens of Mexico, (3) attitude about boundary
maintenance existent between the ethnic subgroup and the dominant
society as social systems. These four components, combined by summation
to form.a compound index, are described separately as follows:

Component #1 -- social distance from.members of the dominant society
(referred to collectively as "Anglos" by the Spanish-speaking): Since
the interview schedule did not include this designation, social dis-
tance in terms of race was used in measuring this aspect of BMD. Four
items afforded respondents the opportunity to express a preference for
rejection of whites as neighbors, as fellow workers, as family members
by marriage, and as citizens of our country. The rationale for the
decision to measure rejection of ”Anglos" in terms of race is based upon
an analysis of responses to this question given by Mexican citizens with
regard to United States citizens, available from.the Linkage Study men-
tioned earlier. The Social Distance Scale included in the interview'
schedule tapped rejection.of "Mexicans" in the version.used in.the United
States and rejection of "North Americans" in the version used in.Mexico,
I"Social distance denotes the degree of sympathetic understanding or in-
timacy felt by one party to a social relationship towards the other party.
The notion that feelings of closeness and nearness in sympathetic feel-

ing are intimately bound up with attitudes of superiority and inferiority
was the basis of Bogardus' Social Distance Scale. (#:653)

51
as well as using race and religion as designations. In order to utilize
this instrument to measure the extent of rejection of non-Mexican
Americans (Anglos) by other Americans who are of Mexican descent, it was
necessary to employ either the religion or race designation. Many of the
Spanish-speaking prefer to reject Protestants from the family relation-
ship: this is shown in the distribution of social distance response fre-
quencies, Appendix B, Table B3.

The decision to use race as the designation was reached after it
was determined that Mexicans tend to reject North Americans more in terms
of race than religion, as evidenced by consistently higher correlations
between ”North.American" and "white" than between "North American" and
”Protestant” (see Table 4). It is reasonable to conclude, therefore,
that social distance from whites may be used as an indication of rejec-
tion of Anglos by'MexicaneAmericans even though there is no consensus
with regard to their differentiation as a minority on the basis of race.
Table 4. ‘Within-sample Correlations: Social Distance, N. American

Designation Compared with Race, Religion.

Reject North-
Americans as:

Relative .74 .84

Neighbor .39 .62

Coworker e 18 e 82

CitiIer e 5"" e 68

Prot. white Prot. white Prot. white Prot. white

 

Reject as: Relative Neighbor Co~worker Citizen
(Urban.Mexico sample: N=1126)

52

Component #2 -- attitude toward the United States as compared with
Mexico: Two self-anchoring ladder items for evaluating each of these
nations as a "place where things are very good/very bad" are used in the
measurement of this aspect. The recoding procedure by which responses
to these items result in a comparative evaluation is detailed in.Appendix
A: in general, it yields scores indicating that Mexico is ranked above
the United States as a nation (maximum contribution to BMD Index), that
they are equally ranked, or that the United States is ranked over Mexico.

Component #3 - attitude regarding boundary maintenance assumed
extant between.the dominant society and the ethnic subpopulation as
social systems: This component is measured through a self-anchoring
ladder item by which the respondent ranks himself as ”a person who is
living the best/worst possible life right now.” It is reasoned that,
since the ethnic subgroup is identifiable as a system, boundary maintens
ance is operative: the assumption that satisfaction (of an ethnic group
member) with his present life reflects a positive attitude toward ex-
isting boundary maintenance is based on examination of the concurrence
of responses to the measuring item with responses to certain other mean-
ingful items.

The wording of the question permits ranking of one's life at zero
(worst possible) through a range to best possible (step 10). .As indi-
cated in Table 5, below, of the 91 Spanish-speaking respondents who
ranked their life as satisfactory-to-best (steps 5-10), the great major-

ity had most of their personal associations within their language group.

53

Table 5. Distribution of Respondents Giving Positive Evaluation
Present Life, by Extent Intragroup Friendships.

*All close friends Spanish-speaking 51
*Most close friends Spanish-speaking 16
*Some close friends Spanish-speaking 13
Most friends, neighbors, coworkers Spanish-speaking 7
*No close friends Spanish-speaking 0
2
_g

Most friends, neighbors, coworkers English-speaking
(No response regarding friendships)

*Based on responses to Item.51: Is your racial or language background
the same as all, most, some, none, of your close friends. Where no
response, Item 46 was used: To which (white English-speaking, Spanish-
speaking) language or racial backgrounds do most of your friends, neigh-
bors and codworkers belong.

It is significant that most of the Spanish-speaking respondents in
fact gave a positive ranking to their present life: of 105, only five
ranked their life near the worst possible (0-2). Forty-two persons
selected medium range steps 3 through 6 (which tends to be a common pat-
tern with ladder items in general); thirty-four used steps 7 and 8, in-
dicating an evaluation of their life as “good,” while twenty-three con-
sidered theirs at or near the best possible (steps 9 and 10).

Since the schedule included the "Who Am I" item, an attempt was made
to explore the concurrence of responses revealing ethnic self-identifica-
tion with self-ranking of the quality of one's life. However, the marg-
inals provided by the Gallup Organization indicate zero frequency with
respect to categories identitying ”any reference to nationality, race,
ethnic or language group” and also for "any reference to a religious
organization.” About 97 percent of the sample gave no response at all to
the question. Of the nine out of 105 Spanish-speaking persons who men-
tioned the United States, eight ranked their life on step 5 or above in
the ladder.

54
Inter-item correlations between this component and the ladder for

evaluation of the United States did not prove useful because top-most
ranking of the United States was nearly constant among the Spanish-
speaking respondents. Some idea of the tendency of these scores to
occur at the same level may be gained from the percentage distribution
shown in Table 6; responses of the U.S. General Public sample (N-l528)
to the two items are presented for comparison.

Table 6. Distribution of Responses to Self-anchoring Ladder Items for
Evaluating Present Life, United States as a Nation.

 

 

Step U.S. General Public Spanish-speaking
Eva]... Life Eval. U.S. Evil. Life Evale UeSe
10 16.0% 45.3% 17.7% 80.9%
9 6.3 15.5 4.7 11.3
8 Zoel 18e8 21.2 5e2
7 14.0 8.2 13.3 1.8
6 114‘02 3.3 11.“ -
5 18.8 4.2 19.0 -
4 5e3 loo he” ‘-
3 203 08 Beo '
2 e7 e2 1e8 '
1 .6 .2 0.0 -
O 1.0 e2 2e0 -
NR . 2.2 1.4 .8
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

In the absence of items designed to determine more directly the
feelings of Spanish-speaking minority persons with respect to closer
association and collaboration of their group with "Anglos," it is con-
tended on the basis of these facts, that satisfaction with one's life
implies an attitude favoring acceptance of conditions which impede
further linkage. Inasmuch as the validity of this component measure may
be still open to question, it should be noted that it represents a very
modest contribution to the total BMD Index. A degree of satisfaction
with one's life ranked at 5 or more is recoded to a score of l, the

55
maximum.increment of this component to the overall measure.

Details of recoding and summation procedures by which the four
components are combined to form the END Index appear in Appendix A to-

gether with item intercorrelations for the indices described above.

The Sociological Variables: Operationalization and Hypotheses

As noted in Chapter 2, a number of interrelated factors contribute
to boundary maintenance. In conjunction.with the testing of the main
hypothesis, four sociological factors, hypothesized to be related to
boundary maintenance behavior and desire in their broader aspects, are
investigated. It is expected that exploration of these key variables
will provide information regarding conditions promoting the association
between behavioral and attitudinal measures of boundary maintenance. The
four independent (and control) variables considered are age, size of
place of residence, level of education and an index of nativity-parent-
age called "origin.”

It will be recalled from the introductory chapter that there is be-
1ieved to be some pressure for what Guzman called "a new pluralismP.
among Mexicanwlmericans, and he warned of the potential explosiveness in
the barrios. Although MexicaneAmerican minority leaders have stimulated
less attention than those working for black civil rights movements,
several incidents have occurred which seem to bear out Guzman's words.
Tijerina's "little war" in New.Mexico in 1966, was looked upon by many
as "humor in the news" but it stemmed from a movement, said to involve
over 20,000 supporters, for establishment of a separate state on former
Spanish grant lands. More recently, the grape boycott has come to be
widely known among Mexican2Americans as la £3333; under the leadership of

Cesar Chavez, it actually represents not only the grape pickers' protest

56
but the wider aspirations of the entire minority. In Los Angeles the
Brown Berets, led by 20 year old David Sanchez, pattern their militant
organization after the Black Panthers. If these examples do portend the
beginning of a MexicaneAmerican activism, and if such a movement were in—
deed directed toward a form of separatism, it might be expected that
active participants would be sociologically similar to the black ghetto
militants -- young, and residents of urban areas.

Educational attainment also is believed to figure in the BMD-BMB
relationship. Many references to findings indicative of the relation of
level of education to prejudice (viz., the effect of better education,
reflected in reduced ethnocentrism and stereotyping, on attitudes) are
contained in the literature. This association, increased tolerance and
acceptance of members of other groups occurring with higher levels of
education, was also noted in Gullahorn's comparative study of social
distance. (5:96) It follows that increased interaction with persons of
ethnic-language backgrounds other than one's own might be expected as
concomitant of more schooling.

The previously mentioned Linkage Study found support for the hypo-
thesis that educational attainment and systemic linkage are directly re-
lated. This expectation was founded in part on the notion that ”in many
ways education as a process of socialization is viewed as a process of
systemic linkage.” (6th?) The close connection between acculturation
and socialization was touched upon earlier in dealing with concept defi-
nitions: socialization is in fact called "enculturation" by some authors
(meaning a process of learning one's first culture as opposed to learning
subsequent cultures). (ls6h6) The relations between acculturation and
systemic linkage and between systemic linkage and boundary maintenance

57
have also been established, so findings pointing to an association be-

tween better education and higher systemic linkage suggest that evi-
dence of lower boundary maintenance should occur with higher educational
attainment in the present analysis.

On this rational foundation, the following hypotheses concerning
boundary maintenance as related to these three sociological variables are
set forth:

H1: Age is inversely related to boundary maintenance.
(Higher BMD and BMB are expected among younger respondents.)

H2: Size of place of residence is directly related to boundary
maintenance.
(Higher BMD and BMB are expected among urban respondents.)

H3: Level of education is inversely related to boundary maintenance.
(Lower BMD and BMB are expected among respondents with more
years of schooling.)

Age, size of place of residence and level of education are operation-
alized in terms of the appropriate interview schedule items. Details of
the recoding procedures by which code values are combined into dichoto-
mous categories for each of these measures are presented in Appendix.A
along with univariat frequency and percentage distributions of responses
for each of the dichotomized sociological variables.

The remaining variable (origin) is,in a sense, an indicator of
ethnicity and as such is fundamental to the broader aspects of assimila-
tion germane to this study. The sample itself is linguistically defined
and represents an ethnically differentiated population characterized (by
Census tabulations) as relatively young and primarily'urban.* Thus
origin is integrally associated with all the variables under consideration

*Median age, 1960, was 19.6 years; 79% of the Spanish surname popula-
tion resides in areas designated hy the Census as urban. (8)

58
here as well as with other factors contributing to boundary maintenance.
is an example, a cultural continuum was operationalized similarly in the
intermarriage study cited earlier, by which Mexican-American individuals
were categorized in a range from highly Mexicanized ("more Mexican") to
highly Americanized ("more American"). It was found that the rate of
outmarriage varied inversely with ethnicity. (7)

It is believed that the index constructed to measure this variable
effectively distinguishes degrees of ethnicity within the Spanish-
speaking sample. In so doing it may shed additional light on the basic
question of incomplete assimilation of the Mexican minority in addition
to the more immediate function of elaborating the relationship between
BHD and BMB. '

Origin is operationally defined in terms of respondents' nativity
and parentage, thus measuring the degree of (Mexican) ethnicity among
the Spanish-speaking persons. The expectation is that those with "more
Mexican” origin would be least inclined to interact with members of
other ethnic groups or to hold attitudes favoring a merging of the minor-
ity and dominant systems and conducive to complete attainment of member-
ship in the other system. The hypothesis regarding origin and boundary
maintenance, based on this rationale, is stated as follows:

E“: Origin is directly related to boundary maintenance.

(Higher BMD and BMB are expected among respondents having
more Mexican nativity-parentage.)

Construction and dichotomization of the Origin Index is explained
in Appendix A. In general, the measure is based upon respondents' place
of birth and rearing with Mexico and/or the Southwest contributing to the
values of the index indicative of ”more Hexican" origin. Further con-

tribution to the index is based upon the number of parents and grandparents

59
coming from Mexico. "Mostly United States" nativity-parentage is indi-

cated by the lower values of the Origin Index, higher values refer to
"mostly Mexican" origin.*

A correlation matrix (Table 82, Appendix) indicates that these vari-
ables are, as expected, all interrelated to some degree, particularly age
and size of place of residence, age and level of education, and level of
education and size of place of residence. (Perhaps superior quality and
accessibility of schools in cities accounts for the educationdurban
connection.) None of these correlation values, however, indicates a
sufficiently strong relationship to assert that the measures are too
highly contaminated to be meaningful with the analytic procedure under-
taken in this study; in fact three of them indicate a fairly weak associ-
ation.

A complete discussion of statistical tests of the hypotheses will be

presented in the following chapter.

*The influence of Mexican grandparents is suggested by Burma's observa-
tion that Spanish-speaking grandparents living in the home encourages
the use of the language by children. He also suggests the importance
of nativity in noting that the proportion of foreign born in an ethnic
group is frequently used as an index of assimilation. (2:12.172)

l.

2.

3.

7.

60
FOOTNOTES

Berelson, Bernard and Gary Steiner, Human Behavior; an Inventory
of Scientific Findingg, New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1961+.

Bunna, John H. , Spanish-speaking_Groups in the United States,
Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1951?.

(The) Gallup Organization, Inc. , "Report to the Department of
Sociology and Anthropology: Michigan State University,” GO/637O
SW, March, 1961+e

Gould, Julius and William L. Kolb, eds., Dictionary of the Social
Sciences, New York: The Free Press, 1961+.

Gullahorn, Jeanne E. and Charles P. Loomis, A Comparison of Social
Distance Attitudes in the United States and Mexico, St. Louis:
Social Science Inst. , Washington Univ. , 1966.

Loomis, Charles P., Zona K. Loomis and Jeanne Gullahorn, Linkages
of Mexico and the United States, E. Lansing: MSU Agric. Exper.
Station Research Bull. . 1966

Mittelbach, Frank, Joan W. Moore and Ronald McDaniel, Intermarriggg
of Norman-Americans, Los Angeles: UCLA Mexican-American Study
Project, 1966.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census of Population: 1260, Subject
Reports, Persons of ngish Surname. Final Report PC(2):lB,
Washington: 1963.

Chapter 5

ANALYSIS OF DATA

To test the main hypothesis that boundary maintenance behavior and
desire are related, the distributions of BMD and BMD Index scores were
cross-classified and measures statistical significance and association

computed. This bivariate distribution is shown below:

Table 7. Bivariate Distribution, BMD Index Scores by BMB Index Scores.

 

 

£3242
(low) 1 2 ' 3 4 i 6 (high)
N _;% N (4%;_1 N %* N _%7’ N %i N 7%
(low) 0 0 0 F4 7.7% 0 0 0 E
1 0 0 1 3 5.8 1 1u.3%0 0 a
gym; 2 2 20% 9 26.Lv%11 21.2 1 1u.3 0 1 100% 2!:
__3 _4 40 10_ 29.Ll_‘11_ 21.2_ 2__ 28.6 __1 100% 9 __ __28_
4 3 30 12 35.3 17 32.7 2 28.6 0 0 3t
(high) 5 1 10 J 8.8l 6 11.5 1 in; 0 o 11

 

108100%_—3h-100%7 |52-100% 7-100% l-lOOfl l-lOO%fi(N-105)
X2-16.6 (25 degrees of freedom): r- -.11 C-.37

The obtained value of chi square is not statistically significant at
an acceptable level FXZ(.9O,25)-l6.5] and the correlation coefficient
indicates that the weak relationship which does appear is opposite the
expected direction. Since the response frequencies are much heavier in
the middle range on both variables, the measuring operations were reviewed
to determine how such distributions might have been produced.

Exactly half of the sample scored 3 on the BMD Index in a possible
range 0 through 9. To this index, as detailed in the appendix, the
social distance component could contribute a maximum of n points with
rejection by the respondent of whites from all relationships, but only
3.8% rejected whites as relatives and rejection in other relationships

61

62

was negligible. Component #2, comparative ranking of the nations, could
contribute 2 points; as seen in Table 6, over 80% ranked the United
States at the top (and none below 7) while these same respondents ranked
Mexico across the possible range, (Table 8) so only about a fifth of the
group achieved the l or 2 points for ranking Mexico over or equal to the
United States. The 3 point BMD score must, then, have resulted mostly
from Components #3 and #4: the nearly 70% who ranked friendliness toward
the people of Mexico at 10 scored either 1 or 2 points on this component

by ranking this feeling for people of the United States at 10 or below.

Table 8. Percentage Distribution of Rankings of Mexico as a Nation.

Ranki Ste Percent
top 1

OHNU-PUIOV CD00
I-'

No response

On Component #4, about 88% of the respondents scored 1 point by rank-
ing satisfaction with their life (implied approval of boundary mainten-
ance) at 5 to 10. In general, desire for boundary maintenance, as
measured by the BMD Index, appears to be quite low when judged by the in-
cidence of scores at 3 or below from a potential range zero through nine.

The BMB Index also shows heavier frequencies around the middle.
Examination of the raw data frequencies for the items involved in the
index may help explain this result: as seen earlier, BMB is measured as

in-group interaction with a score of 1 resulting when either MOST or SOME

63
of the respondent's contacts in a given arena are with Spanish-speaking

persons.

Table 9. Percentage of Spanish-speaking Associates in Five Arenas.

Associates' relatives friends church coworkers group
Background:

MOST Spanish-speaking 86.8% 70.9% 67.0% 27.2% 10.5%
SOME Spanish-speaking 2.7 10.2 12.9 10.7 6.4

Most English-speaking 4.5 14.0 22.7 16.5 8.8

No response to item, 3.0 3.4 1.0 49.6 74.2

With five arenas investigated, 86 out of 105 respondents scored 2,
3, or 4 points on this item out of a possible range zero through five.
The heavy frequency of in-group associates among family, friends and in
church groups suggests that the 52 persons scoring 2 or 3 probably had
MOST Spanish-speaking contacts in these arenas while the 34 who scored 4
may have had MOST in these same arenas plus SOME in one of the others.
The high percentage in the “no response” category results from the low
frequency of reSpondents reporting any participation in formal group
activity. Similarly, the proportion of ”no response" regarding co-
workers' backgrounds reflects the fact that half the sample was drawn
from rural areas with a large proportion of farmers and farm laborers;
since farm.work is often family work it seldom involves people of other
backgrounds.

Further importance will be attached to this information as the four
sociological variable dichotomies are introduced to elaborate the con-'
ditions surrounding the relationship of BMD and BMB. To carry out this
part of the analysis, categories of the main variables were collapsed
into ”high" and ”low," dividing the distributions as evenly as possible.
The dotted lines (Table 7) indicate the cutting points.

64

To facilitate making comparisons among the analytic tables using
control variables, the value of Yule's Q statistic was computed as a
measure of association for BMD and BMB as dichotomies, unstratified. The
obtained value, Q- -.1l3, may be compared with the value of Q for each of
the first order partial tables which follow. Tables 10 through 13 ex-
amine the relationship between the main variables with each of the socio-
logical variables held constant. In addition to Q (which can range from
-1. to +1. indicating direction of relationship), the chi square statistic
with Yates' correction for continuity is computed for each table. As an
additional measure of association, the contingency coefficient (adjusted
for use with fourfold tables, by dividing the obtained value by .707, the
maximum value for a 2x2 matrix), is shown for each table. This set of

multivariat tables with these statistics appears below. (1:230)

Table 10. BMD by BMB Index Scores, Stratified by Age.

(YOUNGER) (OLDER)
21121.3. £1112
low high low high
low§_M_l: 5577» 51% lawfigig 58% 64%
(ll) (17) (28) (14) (18) (32)
high .1219; 4573 49% high £11.13. 42% 36%
(9) (16) (25) (10) (10) (20)
(20) (33) (53) (24) (28) (52)

2
xz-eOOO, CI.OI+5, @007 X -e022, C-.268, Q -0125

65
Table 11. BMD by BMB Index Scores, Stratified by Level of Education.

(IESS EDUCATION) (MORE EDUCATION)
5112. in.)
low high low high
low Big: 64% 72% 10W 333?: 47% “4%
(16) (21) (37) ( 9) (14) (23)
high 1.31.9: 36% 28% high 8111: 53% 56%
( 9) ( 8) (17) (10) (18) (28)
(25) (29) (54) (19) (32) (51)
Jig-.135, C-.126, Q--.192 X2-.001, C-.045, Q-.O73

Table 12. BMD by BMB Index Scores, Stratified by Size Place of Residence.

(RURAL) (URBAN)
.5112 1’13.

low high low high

low Big 59% 67.7% low Big 54.5% 48%
(13) (20) (33) (12) (15) (27)

high 11% 41% 33.3% high gig; 45.5% 52%
( 9) (10) (19) (10) (16) (26)
(22) (30) (52) (22) (31) (53)

X2-.O7l, C-.lO9, Q- -.161 X2-.025, C-.093, Q-.123

Table 13. BMD and BMB Index Scores, Stratified by Origin.

(U.S. ORIGIN) (MEXICAN ORIGIN)
231.12 2.19;
low high low high
low in}; 58.6% 58.8% low 1M]: 53% 56%
(17) (20) (37) ( 8) (15) (23)
high _B_M_B_ 41.4% 41.2% high my; 47% 44%
(12) (14) (26) ( 7) (12) (19)
(29) (31+) (63) (15) (27) (42)

2
X .0057, C'e0099, @ -,004 X2-.032, C-e028’ @ -.045

66
RESULTS AND FINDINGS

Although the hypothesized direct relationship of BMD and BMB did not
appear in the initial cross-classification, a very weak relationship in
the expected direction turns up among the younger and better educated:
only among the urban do most respondents with higher boundary maintenance
desire scores also show more interaction with ethnic group members. The
inverse desire-behavior relationship shown in the unstratified table in-
creases in magnitude with less educated, older*, rural respondents. This
could mean either high desire for ethnic separation along with little
ingroup interaction or else mostly Spanish-speaking contacts accompanying
low boundary maintenance desire. The marginals indicate that high
desire/low behavior is the more likely combination since all tables have
greater frequencies in the high category on desire and all but one in
the low category on behavior;

The apparent inverse relationship among older, rural, less educated
people may simply reflect the low frequency of formal group and occupa-
tionally centered interaction and a lack of choice of associates avail-
able to them. Those living in sparsely populated areas or engaged in
farm occupations have little involvement with formal groups or "co-
workers" and their church and neighborhood interaction may be infrequent
and involve whomever is available. This contrasts the urban dweller who
has opportunities for contacts with persons of other backgrounds even
though he may confine his activities to his ethnic group. The foregoing
*The category name "older" refers to persons over 39; it includes 21 in
their forties, 18 in their fifties, 13 over sixty. "Younger" includes

20 in their twenties and 31 in their thirties but, since the sample is
restricted to adults over 21, it includes no teen-age youth.

67
explanation seems born out by the fact that the best indication of the
expected association between high scores on both desire and behavior
occurs among the urban respondents who evidence some preference for main-
taining ethnic group identity and also interact primarily within its
membership.

The result of stratification of BMD and BMB by origin is of interest.
Although not a strong relationship initially, it vanishes when origin is
controlled, an indication that the desire-behavior association depends
upon this factor and that both BMD and BMB are related or origin. This
outcome is important in that it tends to show that the indices are
measuring as expected. The relationship of origin (which reflects
”degree of ethnicity" of ethnic group members) to both attitudinal and
behavioral boundary maintenance is fundamental to the research design.

None of the contingency tables, however, represents a configuration
unlikely to have occurred by chance and, although the control variable
analyses point to interesting avenues for Speculation, there is no evi-
dence on which to base acceptance of the main hypothesis with any accept-
able degree of confidence. Further insight into the problem is gained by
exploration of the effect of the sociological variables on BMD and BMB
individually. The four attributes used as control variables in elaborat-
ing the conditions surrounding the relations of the main analytic concepts
will now be treated as independent and control variables in a systematic
consideration of their relationship to boundary maintenance behavior and
desire.

To test the hypothesis appropriate to this portion of the analysis,
each of the key variables is first cross-classified with BMD and with

BMB and the measures of association and significance computed as

68
described earlier. A third variable is then introduced for the purpose
of interpreting and elaborating the original relationship. The entire
series of fifty-six fourfold tables showing the analysis in detail with
cell frequencies and percentages and marginals appears in Appendix C.
Summary measures computed on each table are presented in Table 14, by
means of which the variation in the dependent variable can be observed.

The effect of size of place of residence upon in-group social in-
teraction among the Spanish-speaking appears again in this part of the
analysis. .All residence-BMB tables show the greatest percentage occurr-
ing in the cell for low BMB/rural except Table #44, the ”more education"
partial. Stratification by age brings the best indication supporting
the explanation for low behavior scores among rural respondents offered
earlier; in Table #37, a .21 percentage difference occurs, with lower
behavior for rural and higher for urban. This age-residence relation-
ship appearing with the behavior measure is consistent with the results
of the sociological variable intercorrelations. Although no value of
”r" is very high, there is a tendency for "younger,f "urban," and ”more
education” to vary together.

Superior quality and accessibility of schools in.urban areas has
been mentioned as possibly responsible for the tie between urban resi-
dence and better education and data from the UCLA MexicansAmerican Study
suggests that educational attainment among younger Spanish surname per-
sons generally exceeds that of the elder. (2) This effect of’youth and
education on.boundary maintenance behavior is reflected in Table #46,
for which the obtained chi square is significant at the 20% level, and
the cell percentages clearly indicate more boundary maintenance behavior
among the relatively younger respondents with more years of schooling.

69

These variables, age and size of place of residence, do not have a
similar effect on desire for boundary maintenance. {Although the Q
values summarized in Table In indicate that the expected direction of
rflfl®MMmeuh(wmgmmmeaumhtmmgmmaofmhflm-
ship between desire and both age and residence is insufficient to support
any conclusion. The inclination of behavior but not desire to respond
to the factors of youtheurbansmore schooling more than their degree of
intercorrelation would seem to dictate is further elaborated by the BMB
partials with education as the independent variable. The strongest evi-
dence of predictive power of any of the four sociological factors with
respect to the main variables occurs in partial Table #7, boundary
maintenance behavior with education as the independent variable and age
held constant. Chi square computed for the younger respondents (Kg-7.8h)
is statistically significant at the .01 level and the (positive) value of
Q is substantial, whereas the initial relationship of education and BMB
disappears in the other partial. It also bears noting that with this
exception, the unstratified behavior-education relationship remains vir-
tually unchanged in the other partials. Clearly, attainment of a
greater number of school years (believed to occur most often among
younger urban respondents) is associated with a greater tendenqy of
Mexican-Americans to interact with others of their ethnic-language back-
ground. Attitudinal boundary maintenance is not similarly related -- in
fact in the corresponding table education with age controlled is un-
related to BMD.

The general picture suggested by these observations is that of the
somewhat younger Spanish-speaking adult for whom, as a city dweller,
schooling tends to be more available, associating mostly with

7O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.333 Sconces .8.“ ocpcsoen o Anne 8038.28 .3?» flex oopsnaco we .moTz

woe. Mom. omoé one. 19ml. owmé ooo.- omo. mi. 23%

o3. mom. ~86 s3. woo. «no. mom... and. 56. .ms

.535

omo... omo. Ho. and. moo. omo. 3c: mom. 89H moo:

ooo. o8. ooo. coo. ooo. ooo. $3. new. mode mom:

.GOHvdofia

one. «2. and. one. do. own; mom... com. com. 2498

moat mod moo. ooo. onm. ~84 o3”. ooo. 8o. gem

.OOGOUHuQm

one. one. oi. :8. ooo. moo. So. ooo. moo. mafia

ooo.- coo. moo. own. «on. 3:. mos. mam. Rm; mosasoewa

.u

go. 3H. ooo. «we. 3m. Roma «mm. So. momé NH: oi. was. ofifiimemzo
o e mm o o Lia o o he a o he
names E mam 538:3 am as 853.com an mam cums. E mzmd

«We. owe. mom.” mmm. mmo. ANN. omniflmam. nos. 59%:

mom.u and. mom. mom.n Hod. mom. meo.u Hmo. moo. .m.=

Bamako

So. H3. coma o2. 8H. «3. ooo.- moo. 3o. moo:

mom... son”. one. new? :3. Rs. oom... one. mod. who:

.Qofldofia

o3. ooo. «moth HS. mom. ems; Rm... :2. mon. 3mm:

9o: amo. ooo. moor moo. ooo. woe? Ho. :8. gm

.00.»anan

mno. moo. Ho. mmm. 9%. «mm. EH? ooo. Ho. mmfio

son. now. mon. Ro. Hmo. ooo. ooo. coo. omo. meozooewc

.0

ad. mmo. Sa. H. one. Sm. Ho. Rio. H8. «S... n3. mum. gas?
a e we o {Me U x m 0 we
ate .3 ea 833:3 3 @m connotes so mam mmc as 83¢

6.33.3 acficcohcoecoccefi 3 acoamcaoaocm en es a: as .335 sccmcficoo new so go .3 .38

71
Spanish-speaking acquaintances. In reporting considerable social in-
teraction among members of his own ethnic group, however, this "typical"
respondent may not necessarily be exhibiting behavior consequent to more
intellectual training. (It is worth noting that the 51 cases included
in the category "more education" include 21 who did not graduate from
high school, yet these are "more" educated in view of the fact that half
of the sample completed only 7 or fewer grade levels.) The education
variable may simply reflect the structured situation in which urban
Mexican-Americans find themselves by attending public schools with de
facto segregation based on language or geographic districting, or at
least they are likely to have experienced a recurrent social situation
wherein other ethnic group members were available to be in contact with.
This would seem to account for much of the effect of level of education
on boundary maintaining behavior. The fact that the initial BMB-
education relationship remains virtually unchanged when stratified by
origin seems to indicate that since it is unaffected by degree of ethni-
city, in-group behavior could be largely a matter of expediency. For
the reasons suggested earlier, rural persons often have less interaction
with anyone outside the family while urban adults surely have more poten-
tial contact, possibly many representing acquaintanceships initiated
during attendance at larger city schools. This line of reasoning is
consistent with the proposition stated in Chapter 2, that Mexican-
American identity is based partly on externally imposed factors and self-
imposed factors not directly under control of the ethnic group members
and that all of these determents to complete assimilation are inter-
related.with the voluntary factors under analysis, ie., extensive inter-

action of ethnic group members with one another.

72

Because of this complex interdependence of behavioral factors, it is
difficult to analytically separate out the antecedents to behavior which
is voluntarily boundary maintaining, beyond attempting to reveal the con-
ditions that seem to facilitate such interaction patterns. A review of
the effects the sociological variables have on the direction of attitudes
with regard to resistance to total assimilation may clarify the findings
about behavioral boundary maintenance.

The comments of the previous paragraph seem to explain the smaller
magnitude of all the summary measures of relationship (in Table lib) be-
tween BMD and the other factors as compared with those involving behavior.
Only two partial tables produce a chi square value which is statistic-
ally significant at the .05 level and both of them indicate greater
boundary maintenance desire with "more Mexican” origin and more years of
education. The initial relationship with BMD of both origin and educa-
tion are affected by stratification on size of place of residence; in
each case specification of the relation indicates an increase in desire
among urban and virtual disappearance of the relationship in the other
partial. While none of the unstratified tables permits acceptance of
the hypotheses regarding BMD, the important association between "more
Mexican" origin and desire to retain ethnic identity is acceptable"
given attainment of at least an 8th grade education. On the other hand,
the expected decrease in boundary maintenance desire with more education
definitely does not occur and that hypothesis is rejected. Although the
age-BMD relation is in the expected direction it is not sufficiently
strong to be conclusive. Unlike the youth-more education effect on BMB,

BMD occurs with youth most strongly among Mexican origin respondentS.

*Decision based on obtained X2-3.986, significant at 5% level.

73
Size of place of residence does not appear to have an effect on BMD

beyond its involvement with other factors. The pattern which seems to
emerge then, is that of a somewhat stronger desire to delimit ethnic
membership among reSpondents with more Mexican parents and grandparents
and/or who are closer to being first generation, who are urban dwellers
and who, perhaps as a consequence of city living, are somewhat better
educated, and possibly somewhat younger.

Although none of the hypotheses involving BMB could be accepted on
the basis of statistical significance of chi square values, the hypo-
thesis of decreased BMB with more education must definitely be rejected,
particularly in view of the strength of direct relationship between these
variables given younger respondents. Overall the pattern of variables
affecting BMB generally follows that of BMD, with more ethnic-reinforc-
ing behavior associated with more education, urban residence, a greater
degree of Mexican ethnicity, and to a lesser extent, relative youth.

The tendency for both major variables to be related to the same factors
when subjected to independent analyses suggests the possibility that BMD
and BMB may be related to each other more strongly than was evident in
the original bivariat table shown on page 61.

74
FOOTNOTES
1. Blalock, Hubert M. . Social Statistics, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.

2. Fogel, Walter, Education and Income of Mexican-Americans in the
Southwest, Los Angeles: UCLA Mexican-American Study Project, 1966.

Chapter 6
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The general hypothesis, that incomplete assimilation of the Mexican-
American population is in part a reflection of its members' preference
for continued ethnic minority identification, cannot be accepted on the
basis of the findings. Strong evidence of a direct relationship between
BMD and BMB was required to support the contention that Spanish-speaking
Southwesterners are in accord with the stand favoring stabilized accul-
turation as the mode of dominant-minority relationship most congenial to
this group. Nonetheless some insight into the attitude and behavior of
these pe0ple has been gained by the exploratory aspects of this analysis.

The generally higher scores on behavioral boundary maintenance (in-
group interaction) were shown as possibly reflecting the extent of
opportunity for social contacts, thus making it difficult to distinguish
between "voluntary" boundary maintaining behavior and that which occurs
spontaneously in response to the situation. The unexpected increase in
BMB with more years of schooling, concomitant with urban residence and
relative youth, seems to bear out this explanation of the variation in
extent of Spanish-speaking contacts. Although the BMB Index had these
shortcomings when.used to operationalize the main dependent variable,
the performance of this measure is generally consistent with the pattern
of behavior which, as discussed in the opening chapter, tends to retard
assimilation and is frequently used as a measure of this phenomenon.

BMD, on the other hand, is not as defensible as an indicator of
attitudes favoring "pluralism". Measuring minority-sustaining behavior
by the extent of in-group association seems to have face validity, but

the direction of the attitude in question was actually determined for
75

76

most respondents on the basis of friendliness toward Mexicans (greater
than or equal to friendliness toward fellow.Americans) and general
satisfaction with one's life. At best, measurement of a subjective
notion of this sort is difficult and often in secondary analyses it is a
matter of operationalizing the variables as accurately as data from an
instrument designed for another study permits. The fact that "desire,”
so measured, did increase with "more Mexican” origin suggests that it
could be getting at the attitude as intended. The rationale for the use
of the ladder ranking life satisfaction, presented earlier, seems no more
implausible than to base pro-ethnicity on warm feelings toward the people
of one's homeland since this may often include friends and relatives,
some living quite near by across an "open" international border. This
is to say that while the BMD Index is probably not a really valid measure,
it cannot be deemed entirely "bad"; in view of this uncertainty, however,
it should probably be considered as the greatest weakness in this study.

Despite the ambiguous nature of the measuring device, the effect of
education with respect to BMD is interesting. It was expected on the
basis of findings of the Linkage Study that education, by reducing preju-
dice and generally producing a more cosmopolitan outlook, would increase
the desire for linkage of the two systems. That study, however, was I
dealing with linkage/boundary maintenance between members of systems
separated not only socio-culturally but by physical and political bound-
aries, quite unlike the focus here, upon the wish of a sub-national group
to remain apart from the dominant society. .Although only speculation,
with better education, minority people may become somewhat more articulate,
less submissive, perhaps gain an increased sense of ethnic identity and

pride through knowledge of their history. Seen in this way, the "desire"

77

in question is not so much conceived as ethnocentrism, and the occurrence
of an opposite effect of more schooling is quite plausible.

Examination of the contingency tables constructed for this analysis
might suggest other meaningful possibilities but further speculation is
precluded by the following admonition: "The analyst should remember
that rather large samples are required to detect complex relationships
reliably and all the little 'jiggles and bounces' in the data are not

grounds for excitement."*

*James.A. Davis and Ann.M. Jacobs, "Tabular Presentation," in Sills,
David L., ed., International Engyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol.
15, New York: Crowell, Collier'& Macmillan, 1968, p. 503.

APPENDIX A

Operationalising Details

78

BOUNDARY MAINTENANCE DESIRE INDEX

Operational Definition:

Extent of rejection of members of dominant society by ethnic group
members; also measured in terms of three attitudinal aspects reflecting
Spanish-speaking respondents' orientation with respect to the dominant
society as compared with their ethnic socio-cultural milieu.

Component #1:, Social Distance Scale

Component #2: Attitude toward dominant society (U.S.) as compared
with attitude toward Mexico.

Component #3: Attitude toward members of dominant society as com-
pared with attitude toward citizens of Mexico in terms of "friendliness."

Component ##3 Attitude about linkage-boundary maintenance between
the dominant society and the Spanish-speaking minority as social systems;
since these can be identified as separate systems it is assumed that
boundary maintenance is operative, hence it can be inferred that satis-
faction with present 1ife implies satisfaction with, or positive attitude
toward boundary maintenance.

Index Construction:

 

Component #1: Social distance from peOple of other system, ie.,
Anglo members of dominant society. Since the schedule did not include
this designation, social distance in terms of race was used as a measure
of this aspect: rejection of whites from each of four relationships.

Interview Schedule items: "Prefer not to have as ....."

Item 9“! eee neighbors
95: ... fellow workers
96: ... family members by marriage
97: ... citizens of our country

 

 

code meaning recode value* recode meaning

1 rejected 1 prefer exclude whites from relationship
2 not rejected 0 do not wish to exclude whites

9 DK, no resp. 0 ”

*These recode values are included in total BMD Index by summation. Social
distance component summed across recode values of items yields range O-h,
higher value contributes to high BMD.

Component #2: Attitude toward U.S. compared to Mexico; self-
anchoring ladder for evaluation of the nation "as the place where things
are very good/very bad.”

Interview schedule items:

A. Item.99a: Attitude toward U.S. as a nation

 

 

code meaning recode value recode meaning
10% most negative 0 ~
0

9,10 most positive 3 high evaluation of U.S. as nation

79

B. Item 99b: Attitude toward Mexico as a nation

 

 

 

code meaning recode value recode meaning
00 most negative 1
1-8 1
9,10 most positive 2 high evaluation of Mexico

Construction, Index Component #2: Comparative evaluation, U.S. and
Mexico. Sum across recode values for two items yielding comparative
scale as follows:

gnnmed recode value recode (for inclusion in BMD Index)*

 

Item A Item B Sum ranking as nation:
0 + l - 1 1 equal
0 + 2 - 2 2 (contributes to higher BMD) Mexico higher
3 + l - 4 0 (lower BMD) U.S. higher
3 + 2 - 5 1 equal

*These recode values included in total BMD Index by summation.

Component #3: Attitude toward people of U.S. compared to people of
Mexico; self-anchoring ladder for ranking feelings of friendliness toward
people e

Interview schedule items:
A. Item 100a: Friendliness toward people of the U.S.

 

 

code meaning recode value recode meaning
00 least friendly 0
1-8 0
9.10 most friendly 3 friendliness toward U.S. people

B. Item lOOb: Friendliness toward people of Mexico

 

 

 

code ‘ meaning recode value recode meaning
00 least friendly 1
1-8 1
9,10 most friendly' 2 friendliness toward Mex. people

Construction, Index.Component #3: Comparative friendliness toward
people of U.S. and Mexico. Sum across recode values for two items yield-
ing comparative scale as follows:

 

 

summed recode value recode (for inclusion in BMD Index)* meaning
Item.A Item.B Sum friendliness:
O + l - 1 1 equal
0 + 2 - 2 2 (contributes to higher BMD) more to Mex.
3 + 1 - # 0 (lower BMD) more to U.S.
3 + 2 - 5 1 equal

*These recode values are included in total BMD Index by summation.

80

Component-#4: Attitude about boundary maintenance extant between
dominant society and ethnic subpopulation as social systems.
Interview schedule item:
Item 8a: Self-anchoring ladder for ranking oneself as "a person
who is living the best/worst possible life right now."

 

 

 

code meaning recode value* recode meaning
0 worst 0 (low BMD) dissatisfied
1-4 0 "
5-9 1 (contributes to high BMD) satisfied
10 best 1 "

*These recode values are included in total BMD Index by summation.

Construction, total Boundary Maintenance Desire Index:
Sum recode values across four components:

Component Range of possible values Interpretation of highest value

 

4¥1 0,1,2,3,4 E;reject whites, all relationships
#2 0,1,2 2-ranks Mexico over U.S. as nation
#3 0.1.2 2-friendlier toward Mexican people
#4 0,1 l-satisfied with present life

Total summed recode values range as follows:

O-low desire for boundary maintenance against dominant society

CD‘QChUx-P’KJNP

9bhigh desire for boundary maintenance against dominant society

81

BOUNDARY MAINTENANCE BEHAVIOR INDEX

Operational Definition:

 

Extent of contact with Spanish-speaking associates in five inter-
action arenas. Contact with Spanish-speaking among:
1. personal acquaintances from church
2. personal acquaintances in formal organizations
3. relatives
4. neighbors and friends
5. work associates

Index Construction:

 

Interview schedule items:
A. "To which language or racial background do MOST of these
people belong?"

Item 29a: church
35a: formal groups
hOa: relatives
h6a: friends and neighbors
76a: work associates

 

 

 

code meaning recode value' recode meaning
2 Spanish-speaking 1 mostly Spanish-speaking
1,3 English-speaking 0 not Spanish-speaking
4-9 mixed; other: no resp. 0 "

B. "Which background (do any others come from)?"
Item.29c: church

35c: formal groups

#00: relatives

46c: friends and neighbors

76c: work associates

 

 

 

code meaning recode value recode meaning
1 Spanish mentioned 1 some Spanish-speaking
0 Spanish not mentioned 0 not Spanish-Speaking
8,9 no response 0 "

Construction, total Boundary Maintenance Behavior Index:

Sum across recode values for ten items yielding a range of possible
scores as follows:

5-contacts with Spanish-speaking in 5 interaction arenas (high BMB)
1+

3
2
l
O=no contacts with Spanish-speaking (low boundary maintenance behavior)

82

Certain of the items incorporated in the BMB and BMD Indices were
utilized in the construction of similar indices for measuring behavioral
and attitudinal linkage between the United States and Mexico in the
study by Loomis, Loomis and Gullahorn. Table A1 lists the items used to
operationalize linkage in that study} those also used in the BMD and BMB
Indices are identified with an asterisk; a double asterisk indicates items
combined to yield comparative evaluations prior to their inclusion in the
desire index in the present work, unlike their treatment in operational-
izing linkage. Table A2, adapted from.the Linkage Study (Table 3, Appen-
dix.A, p. 85), shows correlations between the starred items which are
relevant to the present research.

Table A1. Schematic Pyramiding of Indexes; U.S.-Mexico Linkage Study.*

ITEMS DESIGNED TO MEASURE BEHAVIORAL LINKAGE BETWEEN MEXICO AND U.S.:

D. First-hand Contact:
d1. Have you any Mexican friends?
d2. Have you ever been to Mexico?

E. Contact with Spanish-speaking Mexicans in Interaction.Arenas:
*el. Have you contacts in church with Spanish-speaking?
*e2. Have you contacts in formal groups with Spanish-speaking?
I"e3. Have you contacts among relatives with Spanish-speaking?
*e4. Have you contacts among neighbors with Spanish-speaking?
*e5. Have you contacts among work associates with Sp.-speaking?

F. Second-hand Contact with Mexico:
fl. Have you contacts with Spanish-speaking via relatives?
f2. Have you contacts with Spanish-speaking via close friends?
f3. Have you contacts with Spanish-speaking via your spouse?

ITEMS DESIGNED TO MEASURE DESIRED LINKAGE BETWEEN MEXICO AND U.S.:
G. Attitudes Toward Mexico/U78. and Linkage with, as a Nation:
g1. Our leaders should cooperate.
32. “We should have closer connections.
33. 'WOuld consider moving to Mexico.
“g4. ladder rating Mexico/United States as a nation.
H. Attitude Toward and Linkage with Mexicans/N. Americans as People:
hl. Desire to have more Mexican friends.
**h2. Friendliness toward people of Mexico/U.S.
I. Social Distance from Menace/United States:
*il. Prefer not to have as neighbors, Mexicans/N. Americans.
*12. Prefer not to have as cedworkers, Mexicans/N. Americans.
*13. Prefer not to have as family members, Mexicans/N. Americans.
*ifl. Prefer not to have as citizens, Mexicans/N. Americans.

*Adapted from Table l. Loomis et al.. Linkages of Mexico and the United
StatOS. Ea unSingl MSU Agr. EXP. 31111.. 1966, Pa 90

83

BMB Indice S .

 

Table A2. Intercorrelations; Linkage Measuring Items Also in BMD,

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 g4 h2 il i2 i3 i0
e1 - 17/6 27/68 3076 2E760 -07/07 -02/02 - - -
62 -62 17F1.E;§%’ 09/25 05/05 02/12 - - 05/05 -
e3 01/?)— 0.2/02 04/04 - - -ou/ou -
e4 - 18/13 -06/06 -02/02 - - -o5/o5 -
e5 - 08/08 04/00 - - -1l/ll -
84 - 37/§§ - - ~24/-_1_. -
h2 - - - 02/ 1__._ -
il - - -
i2 - - -
13 - -
i4 - -

Two measures of association are reported for each entry; the correlation
coefficient appears first followed by Gamma for underscored entries,

otherwise Contingency Coefficient.

*Adapted from Table 3, Appendix A.

Decimals omitted.

Loomis C., Linkages..., p. 85

Items identified as el through e5 (in Table A2 above) are BMB Index

components measuring extent of Spanish-speaking contacts in five inter-

action arenas.

Items gh, h2, and il through 14 are BMD Index components

measuring attitudes favoring ethnic group separation.

84

Operatignalization of Sociological variables

1. AGE
Operational definition based on Item 68: "What was your age on
your last birthday? "

 

code :meaning recode recode meaning
00-19 19‘& under - unused; sample all adults
20-39 under 40 years 0 younger

40-80 40 and over 1 older

2. LEVEL OF EDUCATION
Operational definition: number of grades completed
Item 69: "What was the last grade or class you completed in school?"

code nnnning recode recode meaning
0-2 none to 7th 0 less education: lower level
3-8 8th.& beyond 1 more education

3. SIZE OF PLACE OF RESIDENCE
Operational definition: character and population of area in which
respondent resides.
Item 104: "So that the Gallup Organization office can check aw work
in this interview if it wants to, may I have your name and ad-
dress please.” (address coded by Gallup Organization)

 

code nanning recode recode meaning
1 farm resident 0 rural
2 open country 0(non-farm) "
3 places under 2500 0 "

4-12 2500 or more 1 urban

4. ORIGIN

Operational definition: ethnicity as indicated by respondent's
nativity and parentage measured by index based on place of birth,
place of rearing and number of foreign-born parents and grand-
parents.

Interview schedule items:

A. Item 91a: "Where were you born?" (nation)

code meaning recode recode meaning
2 Canada, U.S. N. American nation
3 S. America S. American nation
0,1 China, Africa zero frequency
4,5 Europe ”
6-9 other - "

III-'0

84

B. Item 91b: "Where did you grow up?" (state, identified in region)

 

code meaning recode recode meaning
0 .Ariz., Calif., 1 Southwest

Colo. , N.M. , Texas
9 not in U.S.
1-8 other U.S. region

Mexico*
not reared Mexico or southwest

OF

C. Filter - Item.92a: "Did any of your parents or grandparents
come to this country from another country?" (introduces item
included in index)

Item 92b: "Which ones?" (parents)

 

code meaning recode recode meaning
1 father only 1 1 parent from another country**
2 mother only 1 "
3 both 2 both parents from.another country
8 NA (filtered) 0 both parents American origin

D. Follows from filter question 92a cited above.
Item.92b: ”Which ones?" (grandparents)

 

 

code meaning recode recode meaning

1 1 foreign grandparent l l or 2 grandparents from another country**
2 2 n N 1 N

3 3 ' " ” 2 3 or 4 grandparents from another country
4 4 n n 2 u

5 all in "old" country 2 "

8 NA (filtered) 0 all grandparents of American origin

9 other: DK 0

*Item 91b, "Where did you grow up?" (nation) shows that those not reared in

U.S. were reared in Mexico.

**Item 92b taps specific country from.which parents, grandparents came:
shows that virtually all those not of American origin came from.Mexico.

INDEX CONSTRUCTION: Sum across recode values for four items yielding a
range of possible scores as follows:

O-parentage, nativity mostly U.S.

2
3
1.:
5
6-parentage, nativity mostly Mexican

Table A3.

INDEPENDENT VARIABLE:

85

Percentage and Frequency Distributions, Six Variables

Boundary Maintenance Desire (BMD)

code 1‘ rcent
(low) 1 TO— 9.53
”g 24" "£2. __ __ _ (luv-41.9%)
3 52 .52
4 7 6. 67
5 1 .95
(high) 6 1 .95 (61-58436)

mPENDENT VARIABLE :

 

 

code f rcent
(10') O T 3.81%
1 4 3.81
2 24 22.86
.. g .. .38.. ._ _ Zéagg
. 34 32.
(high) 5 11 10.48
AGE
code _f_ roent
(younger) O 53 5mm
(older) 1 52 49.52
LEVEL OF EDUCATION
code f ngrcent
(1.88) 0 w 510
(more) 1 51 48.5?
SIZE OF PLACE OF RESIDENCE
code _g_ reent
(rural) 0 52 9.5
(urban) 1 53 50.48
ORIGIN INDEX
code _L greent
(U.S. ) 0 0 0. 0
1 33 31.43%
2 8 7.62
_£-_2.2..._§°a9§
13 12.38
5 21 20.00

Boundary Maintenance Behavior (BMB)

_ (so-57.1493)

(45-42-8693)

APPENDIX B

Supplementary Data

86

Table Bi. Composition of the Sample

Total number of interviews: 105

Sex of respondent Race of respondent
Men 52 White 97
Noun 53 Non-white 8
Age of respondent Education of respondent
21 to 29 years 21 College 11
30 to 49 years 52 High School 31
50 years and older 31 Grade School 62
Undesignated 1 Undesignated 1
Size of community Five southwestern states
500,000 and over 13 Arizona 7
50.000 to 499.999 24 California 28
25,000 to 49.999 16 Colorado 7
Under 2500 non-farm 28 New Mexico 11
Under 2500 farm 24 Texas 52

The Gallup Organisation, Report GO/6370 SW, March 1964, p. 9

Table BZ. Simple Correlations Between the Sociological Variables

‘8. 1 e 000

Education -0. 277 1 . 000

Origin -0. 109 O. 140 1 . 000

Sise Residence -0. 314 O. 353 0. 187 1 . 000

Age Education Origin Sise Residence

Response Frequencies, Social Distance Attitudes, in Percents.

Table B3.

 

 

 

 

REJECT AS:

 

N0 Nmmoo
O I O O O 0

EB O\HO\\OU\
H m :nnnm

01“ ON“

2 eeeee

o OQDr-IOOI

U) H

Em N\o:}‘\OCD
e e e e e e
(\lMHNOH-fi

H 41' WWO)

N03CO\Or-i'
HOQHNMI

 

S.W.

0 common

C On
D. $3010 I

MEX
6
.0
.8
.6
.7
.0

S.W.

2
l
l
u.
7
7

 

U.
5
7
l
3

Negroes
Catholics
Protestants
N. Americans

Jews

Whites
Mexicans

(U.S. General Population sample, N-1528; Mexico urban sample, N-1126; Southwest Spanish-speaking

sample , N=105)

87

APPENDIX C

Contingency Tables

AGE

Hypothesis: Age is inversely related to boundary maintenance.

Higher BMD and BMB are expected among younger respondents.

Table 01. Bivariate Percentage, Frequency Distributions, BMD and

BMBbyAge.

#58

#62

(AGE)

usaayas: ‘2l92:

low 37% “7%
(20) (2b)

high 63% 53%
(33) (28)
(53) (52)

xii-.1456, C-.124. W "e’172

(AGE)

IEEEEEE: .2l92:

low 53% 62%
(28) (32)

high 10% 38%
(25) (20)
(53) (52)

Xz-le94, C-.119. Q "e1?6

(44)

(61)
(105)

(60)

(#5)
(105)

89

Anmv
Ammv

Amwv

Ammv
Aamv

Ammv

mom.- .0
Away

Am v
man

“"00
mam

.330

 

mum... no
Away

Am v
mom

Am v
mon

.330

 

Andamav

$3.10 33.4%
Annv
Away

men gonna:
Away

me: see
mummmmn

$2.5 sou-NM
Anny

ANNV
mam .3333

a:
Km 5

a

awe

3*

Amnv
Away

Anny

Away
Aonv

Ammv

03.10 £3.30 .Soiww

Aenv

Ange
man

Aamv
awn

.330

 

Away
Am 0

“am gonna:
Audi

mae and
muummmn

03.: no £3.10 .30.!NM

flamv

Aaav
men

Anew
me:

.330

 

Agmv

Away
Anav

mam «came:
as v

man sea
a

..8.3.& 0. .25 2.8 3 0.335..“ ..3 .3 as .93 30333.3 stigma

mua

3*

.No can—ea

9O

Aamv
Ammv

Ammv

Aamv
Amnv

Amav

we..- no 5?". gait

 

“mav Anny
Amv éfiv

“an “50 swan
Aaav Away

Rae men 3ea
.330 Mada

:mo.- no .nme..0 .eao..~a

 

Amav Anny
Aaav Aamv

as as an
an v Amav

men men eea
.330 a

azoaaaopnu umng

.qeapeeeea_ue a.>.a_an e.aua».e¢m ..u4.an mam .azm .qeaaenaeaean_.p.aegeam .no .anea

:ae

Aemv
Amav

Ammv

Aemv
Aamv

ammv

nmeio 88.6 63.7%

39 83
Anav A: 0

man now nmaa
aamv away

nu... mom 8a

 

9030 ”a

a: .e .33 Jaima

39 88
Anav Amav

men “8 swan
Aaav Am V

“on me: eea

 

.330 a

A zen—”Hag mums

m¢*

nae

91

“Nev
Amav

Ammv

Si
Aamv

Anav

m8... .0 68:6 .m8...~a

Away

Am V
we:

Aoav

 

panda

Aaav

“Hay
me:

Anav
men

muummmu

own... no .mamfo .m3.n~a

“may

Aoav
men

Am v
ma:

novao

 

Aemv

Andy
was

A“ V
mom

muummmw

A ~30on 233v

Ana:
mmm

..ea
men

swan
mum

sea
on*

Ahoy
Ammv

Aunv

Anmv
Aemv

Ammv

~m~.n no .awa.nu .aao.n~a

aenv

Away
mmn

ANNV
mme

mafiao

 

Aomv
Aaav

ma: sud:
Amav

man :03
muummmn

«so... no £860 .moo.n~a

AamV

Away
mnm

Aeav
as.

90130

 

flame

aeav

m~.nm emae
R:

«as... 3ea
ma

AZHono 5.8

.538 .3 333.com ..wa .3 ea .93 Ben—33.8 3.33am

a:*

mN*

.3 0.33.

92

SIZE OF PLACE OF RESIDENCE

Methods: Size of place of residence is directly relsted to
boundery maintenance. Higher BMD and BMB ere expected among urban

respondents.

Teble CS. Bivariate Percentage. Frequency Distributions, BMD and
BMB by Size Place of Residence.

#60 (SIZE OF PLACE OF RESIDENCE)
53.3; 2.129.
'10. 1+2.3% u1.5%
(22) (22) (Mt)
211);
high 57.7% 58.5%
(30) (31) (61)
(52) (53) (105)
x2-.o11. c-.177. Q--016
#64 (3sz 0? PLACE OF RESIDENCE)
M “_rbg
low 63% 51$
(33) (27) (60)
1392
high 37% W
(19) (26) (#5)
(52) (53) (105

x2-1.206, c-.011 . o-.252

93

Away
Aomv

Amnv

Anny
“may

Aamv

 

38...”. .80.:0 .n8.u~u

Amnv “any
Au v “may nuan
man man
Addy “nay
mac awe 20H
mammm mmmmm

2.... ..a 58:0 Jain”

Amdv Aamv
Ad v “adv
mom awn amen
Am v Amdv
mom *3: sea
gunk: mummm
Ammauov

mm*

o~$

Anny
Anny

Ammv

Anny
Anmv

Aomv

8.5 6&3 .Rnguwm

Anny Awnv
Away Am V

mam mnm amen
Away “may

am: new and
...... ......

55 $85 68......“

Anny Away
Away Andv
“he mam amen
Annv Au V
man “an and
mummm. mmmmm
Ammuzpowv

mm*

mm*

33 F 8.35m .23623 no 8.8 83 3 ea .93 Boflfigua 833.8 .8 can:

maa.lo .nmo.lc .amo.INM

 

Away

Am v
mon

Aw v
mon

Henna

 

nmdn

and

uma.la .oNH.Io .NH«.IMN

Anny Anmv
Ammv Aomv
mun
Ammv Amnv
mm:
a.n.s
Anmv Anny
Amnv AmNV
“we
Amnv ANHV
“an
mammm

Away

Am v
mom

Aonaeosnu mmng
.nofieouem do H25 .3 3835.,“ .853...” do 8.2 3am .3 GE .95 Boflfigofl 8.233 .8 3.3

swan

30H

Anny
Auav

Anny

Aanv
Ammv

Ammv

~m*

smo..o .o:o.uo .moo.1~x

Away Away
A» v Anny
man «an .33
mam
A~nv Anne
“no use .3
mammm mama” «3*
mu~.u no .ama.uo .wn¢.nwu
Away Away
8 v A 5
ma: mom guns
mmm.
Acnv Away
“mm mm: and
sunny Hanan ”ac

AZOHadoDQH.mmmHV

95

Amsv
Aoav

Ammv

Amav
Aumv

Annv

amino .monfo .ommél N

a
Aomv Awnv
Anny An V

man Em awed
huge “adv

me: “do so”
can? ..melmflm

 

mum.uo .mmo.no .nu~.n~u

 

Amwv Aonv
Away Aa V

mom men .93
Am v A“ v

man m3 :3
=.nnu mummm

AZHono nan—H33

os$

m1

Anov
Amwv

Amnv

Ammv
Anny

Ammv

32:5 68:6 .Nmoimx

2.3 $9
3 :3.
A“... A... 3
Amfiv Ammv
new «no sea
mafia... Ideas."

NON... no .23....0 .RN.INN

:8 $3
Annv Away
me: man amen
“adv Anny
fin mm: .2
...... ......

AZHGHmo 5.5

an.»

53.

.ndwdho ha 255m .eonevduqm Ho e013 25m Kb 83 .Qmm enough—Eng («card-ban .mo 933..

LEVEL OF EDUCATION
hpothesis: Level of educetion is inversely related to bonndery

nintensnoe. Lover BMD and BMB are expected with fever years schooling.

Teble C9. Bivariate Percentage, Frequency Distributions, BMD and BMB
by Level of Education.

#57 (IEVEL 0F mucmon )
1222:: Aisha:
low 46% 37%
(25) (19) (#4)
BMD

high 514% 63%
(29) (32) (51)

(54) (51) (105)
Xz-.5¢b7. C-e129' @018“

#61 (mm OF EDUCATION)
loner higgr
low 68% 16%
(37) (23) (60)
m
high 32% 55%
(17) (28) (45)
(54) (51) (105)

124.955. c-.3!t7. o-Mz

AmmV
AomV

AmmV

ANmV
AmmV

AsaV

ago..o .moo.uo .noo.amx

 

 

Aan AsmV

Au V AmnV

mm.mn m~.mm an“:

AnnV Aan

an.sm mo.fio and
.ouve once” .ouve need

NNN.IO .mau.lo .NNN.I N

 

 

m

AmHV AanV

AnHV AuaV
«do mon amen

Am V AmnV
man man sea

.oupo open .onve need
AmmnaoV

.ow< an uofludusgpm .nodoeosvm no Hosuq h: mam .nzm usodunndua.dnvopeanupam .oso .anea

Hfi$

m$

AmmV
Aan

AmmV

AnnV
AmnV

AomV

omu.uo .mnm.uo .saw.54mm

Aan AomV
A EV 3 V
“so mow a»!
ANHV AoHV
mum m8 .3
dummmlmmmm .qmmmulmmmm

$2.0 33...". 68$“

 

 

Aan AomV
Aan ANHV
mam “do no“:
AunV Am V
can ms: and
.ouvo one: .onve wood
Ammgaxmu

m$

98

3.5 info fins-mu $9... $33 .30.de

 

 

 

 

RS 39 $3 $3 83 $9
$3 SNV G V 33 3 V 33
fin mum nwE mom fin Ami
film ”film.
2.8 RC 33 RC 8 V RNV
m? fie 3H can “3 3H
.260 one: Jove nee." mm.‘ j .023 enea 3*
Safe 83:6 rang-Nu 93.. ..a $3.6 .39-ax
ARV GS 83 33 $3 $0
ARV RNV 8 V 88 8 V CNV
m3 mi 62 mew mew 52
and gum
ANNV Am: 83 ANNV 2. V 33
men mom .3” mi mg and
a .023 eedd: m3 31 j 9*
253 3.355

.8533m no 8.3 33 P v.55... .nofleosom ca 1.3 3 ea .ea Bofifigus 3325s .30 Ana.

99

AmaV
Ade

AmmV

Asz
AmmV

AmflV

moa.no .mm~.no .mno.«nux

 

 

 

 

AgaV AmfiV
AmaV Am V
msm mun Am“:
adfiV Ade
mo: mso nod
.osvo ohoa .oavo anH
~n0.na .mna.uo .nmm.nn~x
AaaV AmHV
AodV Am V
gas ma: swan
Am V AofiV
udm new and
.oavo opoa .oavo «Qua

AZHuHmo z<UHNmEV

.namduo 5: vofludaaaam .:0flu¢ouum no Hypoq an mam .nxm .aoaagndupuannop.dngpam .mfio .anue

n$

AmoV
AmNV

AmmV

Ame
AamV

AomV

mm:;no .nan.uo .m«o.mn~x

23 GS
AmfiV AVHV

awn «Hm swan
AmflV Aan

ma: mac and

 

 

.0560 open .qavo «nod

mom.. .0 .H:~.no .mmm.uuw

ABNV Aan

AmaV AHNV
_ mm: man an“;

AadV AmHV
fin mm: 2:

 

 

.ouuo cues .9560 anH

AZHchO .m.DV

~*

«*

100

ORIGIN

Methods: Origin is directly rehted to bonndnry nintenenoe.
Higher BMD and BMB are expected with more Hansen netivity-perentege.

Table 613. Bivariate Peroentege. Frequency Distributions, BMD and
BMB by Origin.

#59 (ORIGIN)

lore U.S. nore Max.

low "6% 35%
(29) (15) (M)
£3.19.
high 54% 65%
(3a) (27) (61)
(63) (42) (105)
xZ-.717. c-.055, q-.211
+63 (ORIGIN)
nore U.S. more Hex.
, low 59% 53%
(37) (23) (60)
ggg
high mat usfi
(26) (19) (#5)
(63) (#2) (105)

112-.040, c-.1u1 . q-.081

mmafo .wmafo 6:...NN 9.0.: no 3.30:6 .moofum

33 8: 39 ARV $3 88
SNV 8 V a: $3 33 33
3 man flu. m3 a? swan
main. gm
$9 83 RS 83 RS 33
m3 m3 sod man mm“ :3”
guano 33: n o .mS N3 mute .Hez mun—o .m5 3
m Sofa 68...". Jain” $9.0 .mmufo .nmmfuu
ARV 83 39 RS SNV RNV
83 SC 85 ARV 2.: $3
mom mam £3 .3. man :93
mmm film.
33 6 V 8: SNV 2. V ADV
mi as .5 “an a? 8H
ammo 33: :flflo .ms 2+ 3 3 X
EMSOV A585

63 3 voflflzsm .5350 3 ea dam aegis-3 8.238 .io can...“

102

Aan
AomV

AmmV

AmmV
AVmV

ANNV

mmfl.no .Nna.uo .mm«.u«u

AmNV AuNV
AnaV AmuV
msm $3: nuda
mum
ANVV Aan
mm: “mm 20H
amudho .Hoz 5330 .m5 . m2
was.uo .om~.uo .mnm.anwx
AmNV ABNV
AmHV AmHV
§ *2 :22
mmm
Aw V AaaV
mam mun 23..
ammo “we: 3&0 .mé cg
AzdebV

AmnV
AmfiV

AmmV

ANmV
AomV

ANNV

50”.- a .noH.-o .nao..uu

AwHV AonV

Am V AanV
Em “an

AdHV A-V

. mam mam

mflflo .5: Mania .3.

a:

30H

mac... :0 .hNofo .wmofwm

AVVV Aan
a V 23
“on man
As V AmeV
me: an:
mmumMMIamumw mmummmnqmdm
Aqqman

Ami

33..

3*

a:

.éoufié no 812 33 .3 355m .538 3 ea .2. 30333.3 83.58 .30 3.3

ruin? i

103

33
88

RNV

:3
ARV

33

Ref no 685 .Ro...~x $9.0 63...". .80.an

38 CS 33 8: 33
R: Ana 2.: G V 23
mi men .93 man mom nmfl
mam Ham
EV as 2.9 Q: RNV
m3 m3 :3 fine “a 5
ammflo 38: :flflo .9: 9% «mute 53: nflflo .ms mi
Sofa £9.30 .80.?mx «am... no $2.1”. 633mg"
33 ARV $3 $3 33
83 RC 83 8 V CNV
a2. m3 smug m3 man :93
am am
3 V $3 RNV 83 R:
*3. awn :3 *3 mm: 23
3 j 8* $3 3 n2
. Azoaépam 5on 289325 83V

£03.83 no H23 E 82383 .538 .3 ea .93 .coflfigng 3:23am

.wau QHDQH

LIST 01" REFERENCES

 

2.

3.

9.

10.

ll.

12.

13.

LIST OF REFERENCES

Barron, Milton, "Book Review: Assimilation in American Life, by}
Milton Gordon," American Sociological Review, 29, 1964, pp. 93940.

Beegle, J. Allen, Harold F. Goldsmith and Charles P. Loomis,
"Demographic Characteristics of the United States-Mexican Border,"

Berelson, Bernard and Gary Steiner, Human Behavior; andfilrnventory of
Scientific Findings, New York: Harcourt, Brace 8: World, 196’).

Blalock, Hubert M. , Social Statistics, New York: McGraw Hill, 1960.

 

Broom, Leonard and Philip Selznick, Sociolo , New York: Harper
and Row, 1963.

Burma, John 3., Spanish-speaking Groups in the United States, Durham:
Duke Univ., 19611? ,

Champion, David J. , "Book Review: Assimilation in American Life by
Milton Gordon," American Journal of Sociology, 70, 1965, pp. 492-3.

Cumberland, Charles C. , "The United States-Mexican Border: A
Selective Guide to the literature of the Region,” Supplement to
Rural Sociolo , 25, 1960.

Davis, James and Ann Jacobs, "Tabular Presentation,” in David L.
Sills, ed. , International Englclgpedia of the Social Sciences,
vol. 15, New York: Crowell, Collier & Macmillan, 1968, pp. 1197-508.

Fogel, Walter,Education and Income of Mesdcan-Americans in the South-
west, Los Angeles: UCLA. Mexican-American Study Project, 1966.

Fogel, Walter, Mexican-Americans in Southwest Labor Markets, Los
Angeles: UCIA Mexican-American Study Project, 1967.

Gordon, Milton M. , Assimilation in American Life:the Role of Race J
Raligion, and National Origins, New York: Oxford Univ. , 1961+.

Gould, Julius and William L. Kolb, eds. , Dictionarx of the Social
Sciences, New York: Free Press, 1964.

101+

l#.

15.

l6.

17.

18.

19.

20.

22.

23.

21+.

25.

26.

27.

28.

295

105

Gullahorn, Jeanne E. and Charles P. Loomis, A Comparison of Social
Distance Attitudes in the United States and Mexico, St. Louis:
Washington Univ. , 196?.

Hays, William.L., Statistics, New York: Holt, Rinehart.& Winston,
1963.

Hyman, Herbert, Survey Design and: Analysis, Glencoe: Free Press,
1955.

Ioomis, Charles P. , "El Cerrito, New Mexico: A Changing Village,"
New Mexico ngtorical Review, 33, 1958, pp. 53-75.

 

, "In Defense of Integration: For One Nation and One
World," (Unpublished), 1969.

, "In Praise of Conflict and its Resolution," American
Sociological Review, 32, 1967, pp. 875-890.

, Social Systems: Essays on Thai}; Persistence and C_h_agge,
Princeton: Van Nostrand, 1960.

_________, "Systemic Linkage of El Cerrito," Rural Sociology. 24,
1959! PP: 54"57e

, "Toward a Theory of Systemic Social Change," in Irwin ‘1‘.
Sanders, ed. , Interprofessional Training Goals for lgchnical
Assistance Personnel Abroad, New York: Council on Social Work
Education, 1959.

Loomis, Charles P., Zona K. Loomis and Jeanne Gullahorn, Linkages
of Mexico and the United States, E. Lansing: MSU Agric. Exper.
Station Research Bull. , 1966.

Loomis, Charles P. and Julian Samara, "Prejudice and Religious
Activity in Mexico and the United States -- A Note ," Sociolgical
M, 26, 1965, pp. 212-216.

Marden, Charles F. and Gladys Meyer, Minorities in American Society,
New York: American Book Co. , 1968.

Mittelbach, Frank and Grace Marshall, The Bleren of Poverty, Los
Angeles: UCLA Mexican-American Study Project, 1966.

 

Mittelbach, Frank and Joan W. Moore, Intermarrigge of Mexican-
Americans, Los Angeles: UCLA Mexican-American Study Project, 1966.

 

Moore, Joan and Frank Mittelbach. Residential Segregation of
Minorities in the Urban Southwest, Los Angeles: UCLA Mexican-
American Study Project, 1966.

 

Sills, David L. , ed. , International Encgclopgdia of the Social
Sciences, vol. 1, New York: Crowell, Collier & Macmillan, 1968.

30-

31.

32.

33.

39.

360‘

37.

39.

40.

106

t- .

The Gallup Organization, Inc., "Report to the Department of Sociol-
ogy and Anthropology: Michigan State University," GO/637O SW,
March , 1964e

"The Little Strike That Grew to La Causa," Time, 9“, July'h, 1969,
PP. 16‘210

The 1968 World Book'Year Book, Chicago: Field Enterprises, 1968.

Treudley, Mary, "Book Review: Assimilation in.American Life by
Milton Gordon," Social Forces, 43, 1964, pp. 125-6.

Tug:é Ruth, Not'With the Fist, New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co.,
1 .

 

Tucker, Charles and Robert Turley, "A Manual for the Analyzed Data
from the United States and Mexico," E. Lansing: MSU Center for
International Programs, 1964. (mimeo)

U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census of Population: l960, Subject
Reports. Persons of Spanish Surname. Final Report PC?2)-1B,
washington: 1963.

 

, "Population Characteristics of Selected Ethnic Groups in

the Five Southwestern States,” U.S. Census of Population: 1960.

Supplementary Reports, Series PC(Sl)-55,‘Washington: 1963.

, U.S. Census of Population: 1960, Subject Reports. Non-

white Population by Race. Final Report PC(2)-lC,‘Washingtonr—l963.

, U.S. Census of Population: 1960, Subject Reports.
Puerto-Ricans in the United States. Final Report PC(2)-1D,
‘Washington: 1963.

Zelditch, Morris, A Basic Course in Sociological Statistics, New
York: Hem HOlt & COe 9 1959.

.-( 2 3 1939

"WNW!“MET » "