skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Search for: All records

Award ID contains: 2051226

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. Abstract American Community Survey (ACS) data have become the workhorse for the empirical analysis of segregation in the U.S.A. during the past decade. The increased frequency the ACS offers over the 10-year Census, which is the main reason for its popularity, comes with an increased level of uncertainty in the published estimates due to the reduced sampling ratio of ACS (1:40 households) relative to the Census (1:6 households). This paper introduces a new approach to integrate ACS data uncertainty into the analysis of segregation. Our method relies on variance replicate estimates for the 5-year ACS and advances over existing approaches by explicitly taking into account the covariance between ACS estimates when developing sampling distributions for segregation indices. We illustrate our approach with a study of comparative segregation dynamics for 29 metropolitan statistical areas in California, using the 2010–2014 and 2015–2019. Our methods yield different results than the simulation technique described by Napierala and Denton (Demography 54(1):285–309, 2017). Taking the ACS estimate covariance into account yields larger error margins than those generated with the simulated approach when the number of census tracts is large and minority percentage is low, and the converse is true when the number of census tracts is small and minority percentage is high. 
    more » « less