Can We Measure Immigrants' Legal Status? Lessons from Two US Surveys
Can We Measure Immigrants' Legal Status? Lessons from Two US Surveys
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/imre.12059
复制
发表时间：
2014-06-01
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Bean, Frank D.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bachmeier, James D.;Van Hook, Jennifer;Bean, Frank D.
这份研究报告分析了在美国公开调查中提出的法律地位问题的回应率和分配率，以解决人们对移民的合法地位无法可靠衡量的担忧。与这些观点相反，我们发现移民对法律地位问题的无反应率通常并不高于对其他移民相关问题（如出生国家和移民年份）的无反应率。对洛杉矶家庭和社区调查（LAFANS）和收入和项目参与调查（SIPP）这两项调查的进一步研究表明，这些数据来源产生的非法移民人口概况与独立估计的概况相比更为有利。我们还发现，在SIPP的案例中，引入法律地位问题似乎并没有对非法移民受访者随后的调查参与产生明显的寒蝉效应。基于研究结果，我们认为未来的数据收集工作应包括法律地位问题，以：(1)改进移民合并模型；(2)更好地定位同化研究，为政策讨论提供信息。
This research note examines response and allocation rates for legal status questions asked in publicly available U.S. surveys to address worries that the legal status of immigrants cannot be reliably measured. Contrary to such notions, we find that immigrants' non-response rates to questions about legal status are typically not higher than non-response rates to other immigration-related questions, such as country of birth and year of immigration. Further exploration of two particular surveys - the Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (LAFANS) and the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) - reveals that these data sources produce profiles of the unauthorized immigrant population that compare favorably to independently estimated profiles. We also find in the case of the SIPP that the introduction of legal status questions does not appear to have an appreciable chilling effect on the subsequent survey participation of unauthorized immigrant respondents. Based on the results, we conclude that future data collection efforts should include questions about legal status to (1) improve models of immigrant incorporation; and (2) better position assimilation research to inform policy discussions.