You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Race of the Interviewer and Perception of Skin Color: Evidence from the Multi-City Study of Urban Inequality
Mark E. Hill
American Sociological Review
Vol. 67, No. 1 (Feb., 2002), pp. 99-108
Published by: American Sociological Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3088935
Page Count: 10
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
The influence of interviewers' race on skin color classification for white and African American survey respondents is explored using data from the Multi-City Study of Urban Inequality (conducted 1992 to 1994). As hypothesized, bivariate and multivariate results reveal a compelling race-of-the-interviewer effect for both black and white respondents: White interviewers reported the skin tones of black respondents as substantially darker than did black interviewers. In turn, black interviewers categorized the skin tones of white respondents as much lighter than did white interviewers. Results also indicate that interviewers perceived greater variation in the skin tones of same-race respondents than among other-race respondents, suggesting that both black and white Americans exhibit relatively limited ability to carefully distinguish the physical characteristics of other-race persons. Finally, results show that unsuccessful attempts to match interviewers and respondents by race may have the unintended consequence of introducing important attenuating biases into analyses involving skin color. Implications for future research are discussed.
American Sociological Review © 2002 American Sociological Association