Relational diversity and neighbourhood cohesion: Unpacking variety, balance and in-group size

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Relational diversity and neighbourhood cohesion : Unpacking variety, balance and in-group size. / Koopmans, Ruud; Schaeffer, Merlin.

In: Social Science Research, Vol. 53, 2015, p. 162-176.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Koopmans, R & Schaeffer, M 2015, 'Relational diversity and neighbourhood cohesion: Unpacking variety, balance and in-group size', Social Science Research, vol. 53, pp. 162-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2015.05.010

APA

Koopmans, R., & Schaeffer, M. (2015). Relational diversity and neighbourhood cohesion: Unpacking variety, balance and in-group size. Social Science Research, 53, 162-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2015.05.010

Vancouver

Koopmans R, Schaeffer M. Relational diversity and neighbourhood cohesion: Unpacking variety, balance and in-group size. Social Science Research. 2015;53:162-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2015.05.010

Author

Koopmans, Ruud ; Schaeffer, Merlin. / Relational diversity and neighbourhood cohesion : Unpacking variety, balance and in-group size. In: Social Science Research. 2015 ; Vol. 53. pp. 162-176.

Bibtex

@article{27c12f5b69464bdf9674c3fb1324742a,
title = "Relational diversity and neighbourhood cohesion: Unpacking variety, balance and in-group size",
abstract = "Ethnic diversity is typically measured by the well-known Hirschman-Herfindahl Index. This paper discusses the merits of an alternative approach, which is in our view better suited to tease out why and how ethnic diversity matters. The approach consists of two elements. First, all existing diversity indices are non-relational. From the viewpoint of theoretical accounts that attribute negative diversity effects to in-group favoritism and out-group threat, it should however matter whether, given a certain level of overall diversity, an individual belongs to a minority group or to the dominant majority. We therefore decompose diversity by distinguishing the in-group share from the diversity of ethnic out-groups. Second, we show how generalized entropy measures can be used to test which of diversity{\textquoteright}s two basic dimensions matters most: the variety of groups, or the unequal distribution (balance) of the population over groups. These measures allow us to test different theoretical explanations against each other, because they imply different expectations regarding the effects of in-group size, out-group variety, and out-group balance. We apply these ideas in an analysis of various social cohesion measures across 55 German localities and show that both in-group size and out-group diversity matter. For the native majority as well as for persons of immigration background, the variety component of diversity seems to be more decisive than has formerly been acknowledged. These findings provide little support for group threat and in-group favoritism as the decisive mechanisms behind negative diversity effects, and are most in line with the predictions of theories that emphasize coordination problems, asymmetric preferences, and network closure.",
author = "Ruud Koopmans and Merlin Schaeffer",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1016/j.ssresearch.2015.05.010",
language = "English",
volume = "53",
pages = "162--176",
journal = "Social Science Research",
issn = "0049-089X",
publisher = "Academic Press",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Relational diversity and neighbourhood cohesion

T2 - Unpacking variety, balance and in-group size

AU - Koopmans, Ruud

AU - Schaeffer, Merlin

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Ethnic diversity is typically measured by the well-known Hirschman-Herfindahl Index. This paper discusses the merits of an alternative approach, which is in our view better suited to tease out why and how ethnic diversity matters. The approach consists of two elements. First, all existing diversity indices are non-relational. From the viewpoint of theoretical accounts that attribute negative diversity effects to in-group favoritism and out-group threat, it should however matter whether, given a certain level of overall diversity, an individual belongs to a minority group or to the dominant majority. We therefore decompose diversity by distinguishing the in-group share from the diversity of ethnic out-groups. Second, we show how generalized entropy measures can be used to test which of diversity’s two basic dimensions matters most: the variety of groups, or the unequal distribution (balance) of the population over groups. These measures allow us to test different theoretical explanations against each other, because they imply different expectations regarding the effects of in-group size, out-group variety, and out-group balance. We apply these ideas in an analysis of various social cohesion measures across 55 German localities and show that both in-group size and out-group diversity matter. For the native majority as well as for persons of immigration background, the variety component of diversity seems to be more decisive than has formerly been acknowledged. These findings provide little support for group threat and in-group favoritism as the decisive mechanisms behind negative diversity effects, and are most in line with the predictions of theories that emphasize coordination problems, asymmetric preferences, and network closure.

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

U2 - 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2015.05.010

DO - 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2015.05.010

M3 - Journal article

VL - 53

SP - 162

EP - 176

JO - Social Science Research

JF - Social Science Research

SN - 0049-089X

ER -

ID: 196004800