Leaning

In or Hunkering Down?
Ethnic Diversity and Civic Engagement

Michael Jones-Correa
Cornell University

National Immigrant Integration Conference (NIIC)

Brooklyn, New York
December 14, 2015

What We Hear

Concerns about diversity and declining

social cohesion
Increasing diversity, driven by immigration,
leads to declining social cohesion and trust

Declining levels of trust in turn are linked to

declines in civic engagement

Our ndings show precisely the opposite

More Contact Leads to Greater Trust

Findings:

Trust increases with frequency of contact and

friendliness of contact in workplaces,

neighborhoods and public spaces

Relative status of contact is not signicantexcept

in models for black respondents

Contact Leads to Trust

(But Lower Contact Leads to Lower Trust)
Findings:


Mexican immigrants experience the least contact
among the four groups
Socially isolated in friendship,
neighborhoods, workplaces and social spaces
Signicantly more likely to say they never
have interactions with other groups
Mexicans are also the least trusting

Lower Contact Leads to Lower Trust

Findings:

Diversity itself isnt leading to lower contact, trust
Findings driven by undocumented status
Contact has an institutional dimension

Trust Leads to Greater Civic Engagement

Findings:

Civic engagement increases with age and
education
Blacks often more civically engaged (than whites)
Trust is signicant across the models (except union
membership)
For all forms of engagement except union
membership, we nd people are more engaged in
Atlanta than Philly

Trust
Mediates Contact and Civic Engagment

Findings:

Trust has a signicant, positive mediating
eect on civic engagement in all three
institutional arenas
(work, neighborhood,
public space).

Take-Aways
To sum up, we nd:

More contact leads to greater trust

Lower levels of contact leads to lower trust
Greater trust leads to greater civic engagement

Contact

Trust

Civic Engagement

What To Do

Increase opportunities for contact to build trust

and engagement

Address the institutional, structural contexts for
contact
Immigrants legal status
Neighborhood vs workplace, public spaces

Thank you!
* * *

Cross-Group Interactions

Frequency Friendship
Percent Indicating No Friends

White
Black
Mexican
Indian

Source: full survey

WH

BL

MX

IND

2
15
32
8

18
3
43
16

62
55
4
49

59
64
72
3

Cross-Group Interactions

Frequency Work Interactions
Percent Indicating Never

White
Black
Mexican
Indian
Source: full survey

WH

BL

MX

IND

0
2
16
3

6
3
28
7

37
34
4
33

37
40
64
10

Cross-Group Interactions

Frequency Neighborh0od Interactions
Percent Indicating Never

White
Black
Mexican
Indian
Source: full survey

WH

BL

MX

IND

3
20
25
8

11
5
34
20

34
40
4
38

40
53
69
12

Cross-Group Interactions

Frequency Public Space Interactions
Percent Indicating Never

White
Black
Mexican
Indian
Source: full survey

WH

BL

MX

IND

3
5
19
6

4
3
27
8

13
21
5
16

17
25
55
7

Reported Levels of Never/Rarely Trust

80"

70"

60"

50"

Blacks"
Mexican"
Indians"
Whites"

40"

30"

20"

10"

0"

Black"

Indian"

Mexican""

White"

Reported Levels of O;en Trust

80"

70"

60"

50"

Blacks""
Mexicans"
Indians""
Whites"

40"

30"

20"

10"

0"

Black"

Indian"

Mexican""

White"