Bryan Townley

4/11/13

Sociology 3488

Causes of Racial Segregation

Introduction

Residential racial segregation has been a problem in the United States since this

country's inception. From the times of slavery to Jim Crow laws and into the current era as well,

the spatial separation of population based on race is a dynamic conundrum. Even though

actions such as the Fair Housing Act of 1968 have outlawed housing discrimination, and hostility

between races is on the decline, segregation is still a major problem across the country. In this

paper I will examine aspects of three theoretical perspectives, and further gauge which best

explains the causes behind the persistence of residential racial segregation in the United States.

The first theory I will examine is Robert Merton's notion of manifest and latent functions

and how it relates to certain unintended consequences. Second, I will look at Erving Goffman

and his idea of stigma. Lastly I will examine Peter Blau's ideas concerning intrinsic and extrinsic

rewards. It will be interesting to observe these three theories because they branch very diverse

perspectives. Merton, coming from the structural functionalism camp, will view the causes of

racial segregation very differently than Goffman, coming from a symbolic interaction

perspective. Merton's idea of functions is much more collective-oriented than Goffman's

stigma, which focuses more on the individual. On the other hand, Blau's idea of intrinsic and

extrinsic rewards, while also focusing on the individual, is both rational and nonrational-

focused.

Robert Merton and functions

Robert Merton was critical of prior functionalists' idea that all aspects of society are

functional, and that these functions are positive. Instead, he demonstrated that previous

functionalist ideas were based out of completely abstract ideas and not real observation. Thus,

he created the idea of manifest functions, or the intended goals of an action, and latent

functions, which are unintended consequences of the action. Theses latent functions are

described as still being functional for society, while Merton's idea of dysfunctions are processes

that are not functional and are negative for society. These dysfunctions might still be functional

for some people, while dysfunctional for others. A key strength of this theory comes from the

fact that, while still within a structural functionalist perspective, it takes into account some

ideas of conflict theory, including Merton's notion of dysfunctions. However, Merton's theory

does not take into account the difficulty in some situations of discerning what exactly is

manifest or latent: a guilty person may state that a consequence of their action was unintended

even when it could have been an intentional action all along.

This leads into the question that one could ask within Merton's theory of functions and

dysfunctions: For whom is this something functional? While Merton is not a conflict theorist,

this idea comes more from the conflict side of the argument because it deals with power.

Through this logic, it seems as though what is functional for the mainstream (or majority) of

society would be what is accepted. However, this does not mean that these functions for one

part of society are not dysfunctional for another part. This idea of functions and dysfunctions

creates a system of power in which the groups that a specific item is functional for have a clear

advantage over the group that suffers from the dysfunction. These dysfunctions can also be

classified as manifest or latent. Manifest dysfunctions are recognized and expected items, while

latent dysfunctions are unintended negative consequences.

Municipalities across the United States create zoning codes which regulate how land is

to be used and managed. In some instances, these zoning codes also dictate the density of the

use allowed in certain districts. The manifest function of these zoning laws is to distribute

certain uses over the land in such a manner that creates a functional atmosphere. For example,

zoning was initially created in order to keep polluted factories away from residential

neighborhoods. Nowadays, neighborhoods go so far as to use zoning for economic

development through requiring minimum residential lot sizes. These requirements promote the

construction of homes sitting on large lots which in turn cost more to purchase. This type of

zoning allows those who can afford the house live in the area, but those who cannot are forced

to live elsewhere. However cruel this may seem, it is still a manifest function because it is

functional for the municipality (higher tax revenue from the larger purchase) and it is intended.

In addition, areas of high density and low density often do not come into contact with one

another. Nevertheless, these types of zoning regulations also have a latent dysfunction.

Because, in the United States, some minorities tend to have a lower average income than

Caucasians (Caucasian average income: $51,861; Hispanic: $38,039; African American: $32,584)

they are disproportionately excluded from these areas where zoning calls for minimum lot sizes

(U.S. Census Bureau 2012). This forces these excluded individuals to live in other areas with

similarly excluded people. Hypothesis #1: Therefore, I believe that higher segregation rates will

be seen in areas that enact restrictive zoning codes due to racial exclusion being the zoning's

latent dysfunction.

Merton's hypothesis test

The article Density Zoning and Class Segregation in U.S. Metropolitan Areas looks at the

effects of municipalities' enacting zoning codes which enable/prohibit the ability to construct

residential units at certain densities. Jonathan Rothwell and Douglas Massey find, consistent

with my hypothesis, that zoning which restricts residential density geographically separates and

isolates housing units of different types, and therefore different economic classes and

ultimately races. They state that "fiscal incentives" were the original intentions, but this type of

zoning has many other possible consequences. The article The Perpetuation of Residential

Racial Segregation in America: Historical Discrimination, Modern Forms of Exclusion, and

Inclusionary Remedies by Marc Seitles examines the historical and contemporary forms of

residential racial segregation in the United States also explains that exclusionary zoning results

in discrimination and segregation. However, he states that municipalities enacting such zoning

laws do so intentionally; that the racial segregation that results is a manifest dysfunction, not

latent. In another of Rothwell and Massey's articles, The Effect of Density Zoning on Racial

Segregation in U.S. Urban Areas, they explicitly state that segregation between Caucasians and

African Americans is a direct result of density zoning. They say that municipalities enact

maximum zoning (that which allows for higher densities), segregation is shown to decrease.

They also posit that this is due to the rising costs associated with housing in areas with lower

density.

However, there are studies which state that exclusionary zoning does not lead to racial

segregation. In Ethnic Preferences and Residential Segregation: Theoretical Explorations Beyond

Detroit, Michael Macy and Arnout van de Rijt contend that institutional practices such as zoning

are not inherent factors in the creation of racial segregation and they may not come into the

equation at all. Instead they argue that in-group racial preferences drive racial residential

segregation (much like what I argue in Blau's section later in this paper). Similarly, as described

in a section the book The Geography of Opportunity: Race and Housing Choice in Metropolitan

America by Camille Zubrinsky Charles, institutional factors enacted by municipalities do not

have as large an effect on racial segregation or integration, and that individual racial

preferences for neighborhood composition actually are larger drivers of segregation. Much like

the previous two sources, Mark Fossett in Ethnic Preferences, Social Distance Dynamics, and

Residential Segregation: Theoretical Explorations Using Simulation Analysis, describes that

segregation can occur even in the absence of formal (manifest) and informal (latent)

discrimination, and is instead driven by racial preferences.

Erving Goffman and stigma

As stated by Erving Goffman, stigma are attributes of an individual which do not allow

that individual to act as a "normal" within society, and could be rejected altogether. In

accordance with Goffman's idea of dramaturgy, the act of the individual with the attribute is

ruined, and the individual thus fails to receive the desired reaction from the audience. A stigma

greatly affects interaction between individuals. Goffman also describes that there are two

different types of stigma: discreditable and discredited. Discreditable stigma is not known to

the audience and forces the individual to constantly monitor how much of their personal

information is displayed during their "act." On the other hand, discredited stigma deals with an

attribute that is completely visible to the audience. The individual can do nothing but try to

save face by reducing the conflict that comes about during interactions. In line with Goffman's

other ideas, this can lead a person into a constant "front stage performance;" one where the

individual is always on guard. It is this discredited stigma that I will elaborate more on

throughout the paper.

A strength of Erving Goffman's idea of stigma is that it deals greatly with individual

interactions, and these interactions allow the stigma to be perpetuated and reaffirmed.

However, Goffman's theory does not fully explain the ways in which a stigma can be reaffirmed

through institutional means. A question one could ask within the terms of Goffman's stigma

theory would be: What power does a stigmatized individual have? The idea of the discredited

stigma is that it greatly constrains what a person can and cannot do. Because of this, the

majority of the power lies in the hands of the audience, who react to the stigmatized person.

The individual, however, does have the power to then judge the audience's reaction, and in

turn try to manage and control the effects of the stigma. This process is much easier (and may

not even occur) for individuals with a discreditable stigma. Those with a discredited stigma

must always be wary of how the "normal audience" will receive them. Since individuals with a

discredited stigma can never completely hide their true nature, they are constrained into

certain roles, and are completely excluded from others. Another question one could ask is: Can

Goffman's notion of stigma be translated to objects? I believe that it can. Just as individuals can

have attributes which greatly affect their ability to interact and be "normal," objects can also

have similar attributes that harm their ability to be utilized. For example, neighborhoods,

communities, or even individual properties can gain a "bad reputation;" a reputation that is not

necessarily based on quantitative facts such as crime statistics or poverty rates, but an overall

feeling portrayed by individuals. This "feeling" plays into the nonrational realm of stigma.

Just as Goffman describes how individuals with a discredited stigma are avoided or are

met with conflict and tension, the same is true for stigmatized objects. Neighborhoods or

communities that illicit a negative "feeling" from individuals are likely to be avoided or looked

down upon. The lack of demand for living in a stigmatized neighborhood drives the living price

down. Therefore, those who have the means to live somewhere other than the stigmatized

neighborhood will likely do so, while those who are unable to afford other housing options are

stuck living in the stigmatized community. Because certain minority races have a lower average

household income than Caucasians (as mentioned in the Merton section), it seems as though

they would be disproportionately affected. Hypothesis #2: Thus, I believe it will be shown that

areas that illicit a negative "feeling" from individuals and gain a "bad reputation," even if this

feeling is not based on quantitative facts, will be areas containing high rates of racial

segregation.

Goffman's hypothesis test

The study Segregation Through the Lens of Housing Unit Transition: What Roles Do the

Prior Residents, the Local Micro-Neighborhood, and the Broader Neighborhood Play? by John

Hipp suggests a manner in which certain neighborhoods or even individual properties receive

certain reputations. He describes how "signals," based on a cursory glance of an area's

attributes, can sway residence buying choices one way or another. These signals represent a

prospective buyer's first impression; they gain a "feel" of the neighborhood based on certain

cues. If enough prospective buyers are signaled negatively, it seems as though this is a manner

in which locales can become stigmatized. However, the study also suggests that areas that are

viewed as unfavorable to some are favorable to others, and that these factors combine to

create racial segregation. Another study, Seeing Disorder: Neighborhood Stigma and the Social

Construction of "Broken Windows" by Robert Sampson and Stephen Raudenbush, explains the

effect that apparent "disorder" has on the perception of a neighborhood. They explain that

individuals believe that this perception of a disorderly neighborhood will breed further disorder

in the area. This creates a self-fulfilling prophecy in which those who are able move away from

the neighborhood. Those who do not have the resources and are unable to move are stuck in

the area, being a possible cause of racial segregation as argued by the authors. In addition, the

article Race, class and the stigma of place: Moving to "opportunity" in Eastern Iowa by Danya

Keene and Mark Padilla, which looks at Chicago natives who moved to Iowa, not only states

that neighborhoods can gain a bad reputation, but just being an inhabitant of one of these

neighborhoods can automatically give an individual a negative reputation. The study specifically

cites Goffman in its explanation: "this negative portrayal may contribute to the construction of

'spoiled identities' among persons who are tainted by the nature of their residence in

stigmatized places" (Keene and Padilla 2010).

However, in the study Long-Term Correlates of High School Racial Composition:

Perpetuation Theory Reexamined, Elizabeth Stearns states that racial segregation is caused by

the environment students experience in school. She explains that the school environment

mirrors future neighborhood and workplace environments for the individual in the future. For

example, if an individual attends a highly segregated school, then their workplace and future

residential area will be similarly segregated. Similarly, the article Evidence on the

Intergenerational Persistence of Residential Segregation by Race by Casey Dawkins dictates

from the perpetuation approach that the rate of segregation of one's neighborhood is similar to

the amount of segregation in their parent's childhood neighborhood. In this sense, segregation

is repeated across generations. The only way that the pattern can then be broken is if an

individual gains more interracial contact at some point in life. It is argued that this interracial

contact will make the individual more racially tolerant and accepting of being in a more

integrated neighborhood. Also contrasting my hypothesis, the article Diversity, Racial Threat

and Metropolitan Housing Segregation shows that segregation is an effect of the reaction of

Caucasians who feel a threat from a minority's presence. Robert DeFina and Lance Hannon

state that when a minority population increases in an area that was originally majority

Caucasian, that area will become highly segregated, reflecting the idea of "white flight."

Consistent with the previous two studies, DeFina and Hannon suggest that interracial contact

reduces the perceived threat and the effects of "white flight."

Peter Blau and extrinsic rewards

Peter Blau, from the rational choice camp which dictated that rewards must be greater

than costs, described two different types of rewards: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic rewards

focused on interactions or friendships that are inherently valuable to an individual; they are

enjoyable in and of themselves. Extrinsic rewards on the other hand do not come from means

themselves, but on the ends that can come through association: Extrinsic rewards are

motivated by a rational self interest. Individuals who exude the promise of extrinsic rewards

become "socially attractive." These individuals are those who are desired to be associated with.

Blau's theory of rewards is interesting because it places exchange process in the midst of

individual human interaction. This is could be a strength in that this thought is not covered by

many theories, but it can also be a weakness because it seems as though he is arguing that

there is no true "love;" everything is motivated by selfish interests.

A question one could ask within Blau's version of Rational Choice theory could be: What

power do individuals have in their interactions? In accordance with the idea of extrinsic

rewards, individuals will choose what is in their rational self interest, or what will allow them to

reap the most rewards. Individuals will align themselves with socially attractive people, not to

gain the intrinsic benefits of their company, but to receive rewards down the road. Another

question one could ask is: Who are these socially attractive people? If those looking to

maximize rewards look to socially attractive people in order to maximize benefits, these

attractive people must have some measure of "success." If that is true, then what is success

defined as? It seems apparent that mainstream society deems success through monetary

means: more money is equated with more success and those who have careers with high

salaries are "successful." While this is not a blanket definition of success for everybody, I believe

it is for mainstream society. Because of this idea of success, the extrinsic benefits that one

desires from another's company come in the form of monetary gains. If this is true, the higher

the promise of monetary success, the more socially attractive the person becomes.

But then again, what if the intrinsic rewards of a relationship outweigh the extrinsic

rewards of another relationship? In this case, the individual would be motivated by nonrational

elements, instead of acting in their "rational" self interest. For example, even if a relationship

with an individual promised a certain amount of economic gain, if that relationship brought

with it a certain level of uncomfortability, it might not be chosen. Instead the individual would

choose a relationship that was comfortable or enjoyable, even if it does not satisfy the person's

rational economic interests.

As established above, If individuals seek to gain extrinsic rewards in the form of money,

they will desire to be in the company of those who are monetarily successful. As described in

both the Merton and Goffman sections, Caucasians have a higher average income than that of

certain minority groups. This could lead to the idea that minority groups would seek to live in

the proximity of whites who are "socially attractive" because of the economic success. This idea

would suggest that integration would occur everywhere, as minority groups would be acting in

their rational self interest. However, because racial segregation still exists today, it is obvious

that other factors must come into play. I believe that intrinsic rewards can play a large role in

the perpetuation of segregation. If individuals deem that remaining in their segregated

neighborhood is more intrinsically beneficial, they will forgo a move to another neighborhood

with the promise of extrinsic rewards. These intrinsic rewards could come in the form of a

feeling of acceptance, normalcy, or comfortability that would outweigh any monetary benefit

that could come from living in another area. If the individual would not feel a similar

acceptance or feel as comfortable in the more extrinsically beneficial neighborhood, it will not

be chosen. Hypothesis #3: Through Blau's idea of rewards, I believe that intrinsic benefits such

as acceptance and comfortableness of a neighborhood perpetuate residential racial segregation

in a given area.

Blau's hypothesis test

In the article Metropolitan Heterogeneity and Minority Neighborhood Attainment,

Jeremy Pais, Scott South, and Kyle Crowder study the barriers that different racial groups face

when moving into areas. They find that even when minority groups have the ability to afford a

move into any neighborhood they so desire, they still, on average, move into neighborhoods

that are "less white." This seems to back up the notion that intrinsic rewards are at play. Much

in the same way, in the article Inter-neighborhood Migration and Spatial Assimilation in a

Multi-ethnic World: Comparing Latinos, Blacks and Anglos, Scott South, Kyle Crowder, and

Jeremy Pais find that minority individuals are much more likely to move into a neighborhood

comprised of predominantly their own race, rather than a different race. In addition, the study

Learning Apart, Living Apart: How the Racial and Ethnic Segregation of Schools and Colleges

Perpetuates Residential Segregation by Pat Rubio Goldsmith states that individuals become

used to the environments they are raised in, and that individuals are predisposed to be guided

towards similar environments throughout life, simply based on familiarity.

However, there is some literature which stands in contradiction to my hypothesis. In

Perpetuation Theory and the Long-Term Effects of School Desegregation, Amy Stuart Wells and

Robert Crain describe a "self selection bias" in which minority individuals would choose to

attend a desegregated school, in order to have success in a "white world." They state that these

individuals would be motivated by a rational self interest: trying to gain access to traditionally

"white" jobs, or what they deem as being "successful." In addition, the study Recent Evidence

on the Continuing Causes of Black-White Residential Segregation by Casey Dawkins suggests

that while there is evidence to suggests that minorities self-segregate, it is not as great as the

percentage of Caucasians who decide to self-segregate. Instead, it is posited that for minorities,

a greater amount of individuals desire to live in neighborhoods which are majority white,

contrasting my hypothesis. Also, the article Attitudes on Residential Integration: Perceived

Status Differences, Mere In-Group Preference, or Racial Prejudice? by Lawrence Bobo and

Camille Zubrinsky states that the effects of minority in-group preference (wanting to live with

one's own race) are negligible, also showing difference from my hypothesis.

Strengths and Weaknesses: Hypothesis #1

Based on the evidence received, my first hypothesis that municipalities that enact forms

of exclusionary zoning will be more racially segregated appears strong. The three studies I

examined describe how zoning regulations which prohibit the construction of high density

residential units restrict access for those individuals who cannot afford to live in such low

density areas. The studies describe that lower density units are usually associated with higher

costs, which helps municipalities gain more tax revenue. While this is a manifest function of

certain types of zoning, the studies describe how zoning creates a cost restriction which

disproportionately affects several minority groups who cannot move to the area; a latent

dysfunction.

The evidence I found against my first hypothesis appeared to be much weaker than the

evidence I found for it. All three studies did not seem to deny the fact that racial segregation

could be a consequence of zoning laws; they could only state that it isn't the only factor that

plays into it. The studies mainly described that segregation is instead driven more so by racial

preferences, both on the part of Caucasians and minority groups. These arguments are more in

favor of my third hypothesis. However, a potential weakness of my first hypothesis is that it

does not take into account minority individuals who can afford to live in areas of low density

housing. For example, if average household incomes for minorities continues to trend upward,

and a greater share of those populations have the ability to purchase low density housing, the

latent dysfunctions of zoning would cease to exist. In this case, if racial segregation still

occurred in the area, other factors must be at play.

Strengths and Weaknesses: Hypothesis #2

It appears as though my second hypothesis, that neighborhoods with negative

perceptions will show high rates of segregation is strong based on the fact that I could not find

evidence that directly showed that a neighborhood with a negative perception did not cause

racial segregation. The evidence that I used in favor of my hypothesis directly dealt with how

perceptions of neighborhoods dictate residential patterns. The first two studies described how

individuals received cues from the neighborhood upon cursory glance. If these cues give the

feeling of "disorder," it is likely that the individual could believe that crime occurs in the area,

even if, based on quantitative data, crime actually does not occur. This is how neighborhoods

become stigmatized (the last study even going so far as to quote Goffman), as many

homebuyers avoid the area. As described above, this lack of demand drives prices down,

ultimately leading to a concentration of low income homebuyers, and ultimate a racially

segregated area. In the article Race, class and the stigma of place, it is further stated that

stigmatized neighborhoods can also imprint this stigma on its inhabitants.

I believe that the main weakness of my second hypothesis is that it assumes that

housing prices will always be driven down when the perception of the neighborhood is

negative. The hypothesis also assumes that low income individuals have no other choice but to

live in stigmatized areas. Finally, the second hypothesis, like the first and the third, takes into

account the income disparities between Caucasians and minorities. Therefore, it should be

obvious that my hypothesis should not be a blanket statement used in absolutely all situations.

Strengths and Weaknesses: Hypothesis #3

I believe that the evidence given in Metropolitan Heterogeneity and Minority

Neighborhood Attainment provides much backing to my third hypothesis. In the study it is

found that even when income restrictions for minorities are taken out of the picture, minorities

still choose to live within their own racial group. This seemingly proves that intrinsic rewards

are definitely at play. This notion is augmented by another study, Learning Apart, Living Apart

which states that individuals become comfortable within a certain atmosphere and feel

accepted within it. A move to another environment would not be as intrinsically rewarding. My

third hypothesis was also boosted by the fact that some of the other studies I used to

contradict my other hypotheses seemingly backed it up by stating when racial preference is

examined, both Caucasians and minority races tend to have in-group preferences.

Much like in the first hypothesis, the evidence found in contradiction seemingly cannot

deny that the connection posed in my hypothesis exists and has an effect on segregation. Two

of the three contradictive studies I examined specifically stated that minority in-group

preferences did exist, however they stated that the effects are negligible. Instead, they posited

that minorities would rather live in closer proximity to Caucasians due to extrinsic benefits such

as social networks that could be established or access to better education. However, it seems as

though current evidence suggesting this idea is few and far between.

Synthesis and Conclusion

Based on the evidence that I have gathered, it is apparent that all three of my

hypotheses and the theories behind them have some weight in explaining the causes of racial

segregation. Simply based on the hypothesis tests and the evidence gathered, it appears that

my second hypothesis is the strongest because contradicting studies could not be found. The

only way to run counter to my hypothesis was to consider studies which did not even mention

or take into account the perception or reputation of a neighborhood. My first hypothesis was

also very convincing because even the studies that stated that the impact of zoning on racial

segregation was negligible could not deny the fact that it did have an effect. Much was the

same for the third hypothesis, where even the contradicting evidence could not deny that in-

group racial preferences cause racial segregation. Because of the breadth of evidence that was

covered in the paper across all three hypotheses, and the fact that all hypotheses appear to be

strong, I think it could easily be said that one hypothesis or theory on its own does not explain

the entire picture of racial segregation.

For instance, I believe that Goffman's theory of stigma and Merton's theory of functions

and dysfunctions greatly complement each other. Exclusionary practices in zoning lead to the

creation of pockets of wealth and pockets of poverty, as a latent dysfunction. Once perceptions

of these areas are formed by individuals, they can become stigmatized in certain ways.

Individuals who have the resources to avoid these stigmatized areas do so, while those who do

not have the means must remain in place or move to similar areas. This is where Blau's theory

of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards comes into play. Individuals living in neighborhoods, either

with negative or positive perceptions, become accustomed to their home surroundings. By

staying with the familiar, individuals gain intrinsic rewards such as a level of comfortableness

and a sense of belonging. Even if economic barriers in moving to another neighborhood did not

exist, the intrinsic benefits of staying with what is comfortable outweigh the extrinsic rewards

that a move to a better-perceived neighborhood would offer. In this manner, all three

hypotheses and theories complement each other to describe the causes of racial segregation.

However, since I stated that exclusionary zoning practices were the first step in the

process, I believe it could be considered the most important factor in the racial segregation that

is seen in the United States today. While zoning may be used by municipalities to increase their

tax revenue, its manifest function, it undoubtedly has the latent dysfunction of excluding

certain individuals. This also shows that Robert Merton's theory of functions and dysfunctions

can be a very powerful theory, in that it makes one critically evaluate not only the intended

consequences of an action, but also those which are unintended. Because of this, I believe that

the idea of manifest and latent functions and dysfunctions could be used to explain many of the

other social ills in today's world. While it is obvious that some problems are the result of bad

intentions, Merton's theory simply demonstrates that even actions with benign or benevolent

intentions can have cruel consequences.

Works Cited

Bobo, Lawrence and Zubrinsky, Camille. "Attitudes on Residential Integration: Perceived Status

Differences, Mere In-Group Preference, or Racial Prejudice?" Social Forces 74.3 (1996):

883-909. Electronic.

Crain, Robert and Stuart Wells, Amy. "Perpetuation Theory and the Long-Term Effects of School

Desegregation." Review of Educational Research 64.4 (1994): 531-555. Electronic.

Crowder, Kyle, Pais, Jeremy, and South, Scott. "Inter-neighborhood Migration and Spatial

Assiilation in a Multi-ethnic World: Comparing Latinos, Blacks and Anglos." Social Forces

87.1 (2008): 415-444. Electronic.

Crowder, Kyle, Pais, Jeremy, and South, Scott. "Metropolitan Heterogeneity and Minority

Neighborhood Attainment: Spatial Assimilation or Place Stratification?" Social Problems

59.2 (2012): 258-281. Electronic.

Dawkins, Casey. "Evidence on the Intergenerational Persistence of Residential Segregation by

Race." Urban Studies 42.3 (2005): 545-555. Electronic.

Dawkins, Casey. "Recent Evidence on the Continuing Causes of Black-White Residential

Segregation." Journal of Urban Affairs 26.3 (2004): 379-400. Electronic.

DeFina, Robert and Hannon, Lance. "Diversity, Racial Threat and Metropolitan Housing

Segregation." Social Forces 88.1 (2009): 373-394. Electronic.

Fossett, Mark. "Ethnic Preferences, Social Distance Dynamics, and Residential Segregation:

Theoretical Explorations Using Simulation Analysis." Journal of Mathematical Sociology

30 (2006): 185-274. Electronic.

Hipp, John. "Segregation Through the Lens of Housing Unit Transition: What Roles Do the Prior

Residents, the Local Micro-Neighborhood, and the Broader Neighborhood Play?"

Demography 49 (2012): 1285-1306. Electronic.

Kenne, Danya and Padilla, Mark. "Race, class and the stigma of place: Moving to 'opportunity' in

Eastern Iowa." Health & Place 16 (2010): 1216-1223. Electronic.

Macy, Michael and van de Rijt, Arnout. "Ethnic Preferences and Residential Segregation:

Theoretical Explorations Beyond Detroit." Journal of Mathematical Sociology 30 (2006):

275-288. Electronic.

Massey, Douglas and Rothwell, Jonathan. "Density Zoning and Class Segregation in U.S.

Metropolitan Areas." Social Science Quarterly 91.1 (2010): 1123-1143. Electronic.

Massey, Douglas and Rothwell, Jonathan. "The Effect of Density Zoning in U.S. Urban Areas."

Urban Affairs Review 44.6 (2009): 779-806. Electronic.

Raudenbush, Stephen and Sampson, Robert. "Seeing Disorder: Neighborhood Stigma and the

Social Construction of 'Broken Windows.'" Social Psychology Quarterly 67.4 (2004): 319-

342. Electronic.

Rubio Goldsmith, Pat. "Learning Apart, Living Apart: How the Racial and Ethnic Segregation of

Schools and Colleges Perpetuates Residential Segregation." Teachers College Record

112.6 (2010): 1602-1630. Electronic.

Seitles, Marc. "The Perpetuation of Residential Racial Segregation in America: Historical

Discrimination, Modern Forms of Exclusion, and Inclusionary Remedies." Journal of Land

Use & Environmental Law 14.1 (1996). Electronic.

de Souza Briggs, Xavier (editor). The Geography of Opportunity: Race and Housing Choice in

Metropolitan America. Brookings Institution Press, 2005. Electronic.

Stearns, Elizabeth. "Long-Term Correaltes of High School Racial Composition: Perpetuation

Theory Reexamined." Teachers College Record 112.6 (2010): 1654-1678. Electronic.

United States. Census Bureau. "Table 691. Money Income of Households-Median Income by

Race and Hispanic Origin, in Current and Constant (2009) Dollars: 1980 to 2009."

Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2012. Washington: US Census Bureau, 2012.

Electronic. 18 Apr. 2013.