Race, Religious Organizations, and Integration

SO39CH11-Edwards ARI 24 June 2013 14:58

Race, Religious Organizations,and IntegrationKorie L. Edwards,1 Brad Christerson,2

and Michael O. Emerson3

1The Ohio State University, Department of Sociology, Columbus, Ohio 43210;email: [email protected] of Sociology, Biola University, La Mirada, California 90639;email: [email protected] of Sociology, Rice University, Houston, Texas 77005;email: [email protected]

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2013. 39:211–28

First published online as a Review in Advance onMay 24, 2013

The Annual Review of Sociology is online athttp://soc.annualreviews.org

This article’s doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-071312-145636

Copyright c© 2013 by Annual Reviews.All rights reserved

Keywords

racial diversity, religious organizations, interracial, race, churches,congregations

Abstract

We review the bourgeoning literature on multiracial religious orga-nizations. Although scholars have paid attention to racial integrationin congregations since the 1940s, only recently has there been a con-certed focus on this topic. This article—having reviewed the state ofthe field—argues that research on this topic must engage in three vi-tal labors: explore more theory building or theory extension, interactwith the broader field of sociology, and explicate how religious racialdiversity contributes to or dismantles systems of social stratification.We discuss possible paths and approaches for future research on race,religion, and integration.

211

Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


INTRODUCTION

Religious congregations in the United Statesare ubiquitous—currently there are well over300,000. To put that number in context, re-ligious congregations are more common thanSubways, McDonalds, Burger Kings, Wendy’s,Starbucks, Pizza Huts, KFCs, Taco Bells,Domino’s Pizzas, Dunkin’ Donuts, Quiznos,and Dairy Queens combined and multipliedby three. And these congregations representmillions of Americans. In fact, most Americansregularly participate in or visit a congregationin any given year (M.O. Emerson, unpublishedmanuscript).

We also know that religious congregationshave profound and far-reaching effects on racialand ethnic identity, segregation, friendship net-works, racial and ethnic attitudes, and even in-equality (e.g., Emerson & Smith 2000, Yancey1999). As such, we simply cannot and will notfully understand race in the United States with-out understanding race and religion. Indeed,though largely a lone voice for his time, W.E.B.Du Bois declared that segregation in congrega-tions “legitimated racial division by strengthen-ing the conflation of whiteness and godliness”(cited in Blum 2007, p. 16).

However, in recent decades, religiousorganizations have become more invested inaddressing issues of racial division throughmultiracial worship and have thus drawn theattention of scholars. Multiracial congrega-tions are in their infancy and so too are studiesof them. Most studies that have focused ondescribing these organizations or explaininghow they work have used both micro- andmacro-level data. Work in the field so far hasproduced exciting findings, but more needsto be done. Our understanding is still limitedregarding the practices and beliefs that matterfor successful religious racial diversity (indeed,how to conceptualize “successful” is still indebate), and we have much to learn about howmultiracial worship affects attendees’ attitudesand behaviors and the extent to which theseeffects spill over into other areas of attendees’lives. There is limited knowledge about how the

broader society affects multiracial religious or-ganization and even less about how multiracialreligious organizations matter for the broadersociety.

This article—having reviewed the stateof the field—ultimately argues that researchon this topic must make a concerted effortto engage in three vital labors. The first isto explore more theory building (or at leasttheory extension), no matter the methodologyor sample that is used. There has been somemovement in this direction, but researchers ofreligious racial diversity have yet to fully exploitthe intersecting fault lines of race and religionor to carve out new or extend existing theory inthese areas. The second labor is to consistentlyconnect to the broader field of sociology. So far,scholars have almost exclusively focused on thesocial dynamics occurring within racially di-verse religious organizations, making minimalconnections to sociological work on other insti-tutions (e.g., politics or workplaces) or to otherareas of social inquiry (e.g., interracial socialnetworks, immigration patterns, neighborhoodlife, or organizational leadership). The third,which is related to the second, is to explicatehow religious racial diversity contributes toor dismantles systems of social stratification.Sociology’s roots are located in the study ofsocial stratification, and the study of multira-cial religious organizations offers a uniqueopportunity to examine how two of the mostformidable cornerstones of American society—race and religion—matter for this socialphenomenon.

We organize the review by discussing,first, conceptualizations for diversity, currentpatterns of racial diversity in religious orga-nizations, and changes in American diversityand religion. Next, we highlight key findingsand main streams of thought on the topic. Wediscuss some challenges and tensions withinthis body of work. We conclude with a callfor scholars to extend and build theory andconnect work on race, integration, and religionto broader sociological work and macro-levelprocesses.

212 Edwards · Christerson · Emerson

Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


CONCEPTUALIZING DIVERSITYIN RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS

How diversity is conceptualized differs notonly across congregations but also acrossresearchers. The field of diversity and congre-gations is varied, with different assumptionsand divergent theoretical and methodologicalapproaches that lead to debates within the field.Some scholars propose that diversity be con-ceptualized as cultural (Garces-Foley 2008).Others focus on ethnicity (such approaches arejust as interested in Korean-Japanese congre-gations as they are in black-white-Asian con-gregations) (e.g., Marti 2005, 2008a; Stanczak2006). Some scholars employ organizationalapproaches to understand diverse religiouscongregations (e.g., Christerson & Emerson2003, Emerson & Smith 2000), and still otherspoint to the role of social identity (Becker1998; Marti 2005, 2009; Stanczak 2006). Butthis review zeroes in, most specifically, on theimplications of race for diverse congregations.

Undoubtedly, culture, ethnicity, organi-zational characteristics, and social identityall matter for diverse congregations. But, asscholars have noted for decades, the conceptof race is uniquely powerful and is as closelyaligned with US national identity and characteras is immigration. Race, as currently conceivedin the United States, is typically thought tohave several select characteristics that setit apart from ethnicity, culture, and relatedconcepts (Cornell & Hartmann 1988). Inthe United States, race is the classification ofhuman groups as exclusive and discrete, basedon socially selected physical characteristics.Americans believe that these groups have beencreated or have evolved distinctly from oneanother and that one’s race is inherited fromone’s biological parents. The understandingthat race is a distinct, inherited category isso socially “real” that if one’s parents areof different racial groups, one is thought tobe multiracial—the holder of two or moredistinct racial groups within one body (Lee& Bean 2003). Most importantly, the outerphysical markers of race are thought to be

manifestations of people’s inner realities (i.e.,stereotypes), and race is used to rank groupsalong society’s valued resources, from wealthand education to power and prestige. Theseouter physical markers have had a profoundeffect on how people live and interact with oneanother and with broader institutions. Indeed,race arguably remains the most central orga-nizing institution of social life in this country(Bonilla-Silva 2001, Omi & Winant 1994).

DEFINITIONS ANDCONTEMPORARY PATTERNS OFMULTIRACIAL RELIGIOUSORGANIZATIONS IN AMERICA

We can define a multiracial congregation eitherin binary terms or on a continuum. In binaryterms, the most commonly used definition isa congregation in which no one racial group is80% or more of the people (Emerson & Kim2003, Emerson & Woo 2006). This definitionis used because (a) the presence of 20% or moreof racially different others is, research suggests,a point of critical mass, switching minoritypresence from that of tokenism to that ofhaving influence on organizational policies andpractices, and (b) mathematically, this level ofdiversity means that, under the assumption ofrandom contact, the probability of cross-racecontact is 99%. Using this definition, whatpercentage of congregations are multiracial?In 1998, based on the National CongregationsSurvey (NCS), 7.4% of all congregationswere racially mixed (see Figure 1a). As ofthis writing, the most current data sourceto estimate the presence of multiracial con-gregations is the 2010 Faith CommunitiesSurvey, which randomly sampled over 11,000congregations. That survey found raciallymixed congregations, though still rare, becamemore common, with 13.7% of congregationsbeing racially mixed (see Figure 1b).

Substantial variation exists across reli-gious traditions, however. Using the NCS,we can reliably estimate the percentage ofmultiracial congregations for three categories:

www.annualreviews.org • Race, Religion, and Integration 213

Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


Homogeneous92.6%

Racially mixed7.4%

Racial composition ofUS congregations in 1998

Racially mixed13.7%

Homogeneous86.3%

Racial composition ofUS congregations in 2010

a

b

Figure 1Percentage of US congregations that can be definedas racially mixed or homogeneous, according toavailable data from (a) the 1998 NationalCongregations Survey and (b) the 2010 FaithCommunities Survey. A racially mixed congregationis one in which no single racial group representsmore than 80% of the congregation. Adapted fromEmerson & Woo (2006, p. 36).

CatholicReligious tradition

Perc

enta

ges

Non-Christian0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Protestant

Figure 2Percentage of multiracial congregations in theUnited States, by religious tradition, according toavailable data from the 1998 NationalCongregations Survey. Adapted from Emerson &Woo (2006, p. 39).

Protestant, Catholic, and Other Religion (i.e.,non-Christian religions). These, of course, arefar from ideal categories, but even with thesewe see dramatic differences. For Protestants,only 5% of congregations are racially mixed.That figure triples to 15% for Catholics. ForOther Religion, that percentage jumps again toabout 27% (see Figure 2). We discuss possiblereasons for these differences below.

Another approach to studying congrega-tional diversity is to calculate it on a contin-uum. One way to do this is to use the index ofdissimilarity—with scores that range from 0 to1. This index is interpreted as the proportion ofone group or another that would have to strate-gically switch congregations to achieve com-plete integration. Comparing white/nonwhitecongregational segregation, Emerson & Woo(2006) find that for the non-Christian category(an unfortunate and difficult-to-interpretcategory), the index of dissimilarity is 0.75. For


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


Catholicism it is 0.81. Dividing Protestantsinto mainline and conservative, the index ofdissimilarity is 0.85 for mainline Protestantismand 0.91 for conservative Protestantism. Theseare considered extreme levels of segregation. Inurban research, values over 0.60 are consideredto represent highly segregated cities. Thus,all religious traditions measurable from theNCS are highly segregated, particularly Chris-tian traditions, which are hypersegregated(Emerson & Woo 2006). For example, nearlyall whites would have to switch to nonwhitecongregations to eliminate racial segregationbetween congregations.

Diversity can also be measured on a contin-uum using a general heterogeneity index thatprovides the probability that two randomlyselected people in a congregation will be ofdifferent racial groups (Dougherty & Huyser2008). Scores range from 0 (no probability thattwo randomly selected people are of differentracial groups) to 1 (complete probability thattwo randomly selected people are of differentracial groups). Using the NCS data, the mediancongregational diversity is 0.02. To put this fig-ure into context, Emerson & Woo (2006, ch. 2)compare the diversity of the neighborhoods inwhich the congregations reside to the diversityof the congregations themselves. They findthat congregations are only one-tenth asracially diverse as are the neighborhoods inwhich the congregations reside.

Still, despite the persistence of raciallyhomogeneous congregations, we find thatpredominately white congregations are lesswhite than they once were (Chaves 2011, p. 28).In 1998, 20% of church attendees were in all-white congregations. By 2006–2007, that figurehad dropped to 14%. Among Christian con-gregations, this trend was strongest in Catholicchurches but was also evident in Protestantchurches (Chaves 2011, pp. 28–31). Un-doubtedly, the rapid growth of the immigrantpopulation specifically, and populations ofcolor generally, has contributed to this change,as has the growth in racially mixed marriages.

Interestingly, however, the percentage ofpredominately African American, Hispanic, or

Asian congregations that have white membershas not changed. Thus, the change—moreminorities in white congregations, but not viceversa—appears to be in the direction of accessto or assimilation with the dominant culture,which conforms with Edwards’s (2008a) thesisthat for racial diversity to occur in congrega-tions it is the interests of whites that must beserved.

CHANGES IN US DIVERSITYAND RELIGION

Religious congregations have increasingly fo-cused on issues of diversity since the earlytwentieth century. But although religious lead-ers and organizations have for some time pur-sued religious racial integration (see studies byCatchings 1952, Jack 1947, Loescher 1948),only with the Civil Rights Movement of the1960s and the 1965 overhaul of US immi-gration laws did a movement occur towardracially diverse congregations within Americanreligion—one that was largely fueled by con-servative Protestantism.

Out of the Civil Rights Movement emergeda flow of Christians dedicated to what pro-ponents called racial reconciliation, a move-ment centered in conservative Protestant circlesthat promoted social justice, racial equality, andthe building of cross-racial relationships. Theseproponents shared several common character-istics. They were African American, well versedin American-style racialization, willing to asso-ciate with whites, influenced by Martin LutherKing, Jr., and firm believers of the idea thatreconciliation is at the core of Christian life. In-fluenced by their work, the evangelical (largelywhite) men’s movement of the 1990s—PromiseKeepers—adopted racial reconciliation as oneof its seven promises. This brought awarenessto a large contingent of Christians of the im-perative of breaking down racial divisions, al-though it was not entirely clear, at least towhites, how to do so (Emerson & Smith 2000).

The 1965 immigration laws played a sim-ilar role, by eliminating racial restrictions onimmigration and precipitating an astounding


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


growth of both Latino and Asian populationsin the United States. In 1970, Latinos repre-sented 6.4% of the US population; by 2010,that number had grown to 16.3%. In 1970,Asians were less than 1% of the population, butby 2010, they were 4.8% (Humes et al. 2011).Such rapid growth further complicated the im-perative of racial reconciliation for the faithful.Racial reconciliation was no longer just a black-white issue. Religious organizations, across re-ligious traditions, needed to grapple with theserapidly changing demographics.

Beginning around 2000, the messages ofracial diversity and racial reconciliation were in-creasingly conflated and came to be interpretedas Christians needing to worship in racially di-verse congregations. A flow of important bookswere published on multiracial congregations.Internet sites sprung up focusing on helpingpractitioners create and sustain multiracialcongregations. Blogs, Facebook pages, andtweets on multiracial ministry were created.Several parachurch organizations (e.g., Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship, The LeadershipNetwork), denominational bodies (e.g., theEvangelical Lutheran Church in America, theRoman Catholic Church, Southern Baptists,the Christian Reformed Church, the Evangel-ical Covenant, the Evangelical Free Church),and various congregational networks (MosaicAlliance, Mosaix Global Network) explicitlycommitted themselves to the imperative ofdiversity, further encouraging pastors and con-gregations to actualize successful integration.Regional and national conferences on the issuewere also held, and even the national mediacaught on to the movement. For example, inJuly 2009, the PBS television show Religion andEthics Newsweekly aired an episode on “Interra-cial Churches.” And in 2010, Time magazine’scover headline read, “How Megachurches AreHelping Bridge America’s Racial Divide” (VanBiema 2010).

In one generation, American religion hadtransformed from comfortable acceptance ofbeing the nation’s most segregated institutionto becoming agitated by the reality of anincreasingly diverse nation and by religion’s

contributing role in the perpetual segregationof races and ethnicities in this country. Today,congregations and their leaders appear morecommitted than ever to righting the past andhelping to bridge racial division.

FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITHRACIAL DIVERSITY INCONGREGATIONS

Over recent decades, research on multira-cial congregations has increased dramatically(Emerson 2008). The bulk of this literature ex-amines factors associated with racial diversityin religious congregations. However, to under-stand the factors that increase the likelihood ofracial diversity in congregations, we first needto understand why most congregations in factare racially homogeneous.

There are several key reasons that morethan 85% of congregations in America areracially homogeneous. First, congregationsare voluntary organizations in a pluralisticreligious economy (Emerson & Kim 2003,Emerson & Smith 2000, Finke & Stark 1992),providing myriad choices for those seeking acongregation. Because people tend to chooseorganizations composed of people similar tothemselves (McPherson et al. 2001), church at-tendees tend to seek out a congregation wherethe dominant group is racially and culturallysimilar to them (Christerson & Emerson 2003,Emerson & Smith 2000). Second, religiouscongregations in America have historically beenimportant safe havens and sites for politicalmobilization for groups facing discriminationin the larger society (Blau et al. 1998, DeYounget al. 2003, Emerson & Kim 2003). For AfricanAmericans in particular, the church continuesto be an important source of empowerment andidentity formation (Billingsley 1999, Brown &Brown 2003, Pattillo-McCoy 1998). For recentimmigrants, congregations have provided thekinds of social support and social capital criticalfor survival in an unfamiliar and often hostileenvironment (Hirschman 2004, Levitt 2003,Portes & Rumbaut 2006). Diverse congrega-tions cannot play this empowering safe haven


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


role for marginalized groups to the same extentas monoracial ones, and as such, many minoritygroup members will choose monoracial con-gregations (DeYoung et al. 2003). Third, newcongregation members tend to be recruitedfrom the social networks of existing members(Christerson & Emerson 2003, Emerson &Kim 2003). Because social networks in Americatend to be racially homogeneous, monoracialcongregations are likely to remain so, giventhat new recruitment comes from the networksof existing members. Fourth, the membershipdurations of attendees of interracial churcheswho are in the numerical minority are shorterthan those of attendees in the numericalmajority, making it difficult to sustain racialdiversity over time (Scheitle & Dougherty2010). Lastly, neighborhoods in America arehighly segregated by race (Emerson & Kim2003, Massey & Denton 1993). As a result, con-gregations that intentionally want to becomemore diverse may not be able to do so if theyare recruiting primarily from their immediateneighborhoods.

In spite of these confluent forces drivingcongregations toward racial homogeneity, asmall but growing number of religious congre-gations in America are racially and ethnicallydiverse. As discussed above, 13.7% of US con-gregations are racially mixed (i.e., less than 80%of attendees represent a single ethnic group)(Figure 1b). These more diverse congregationshave attracted the attention of scholars seekingto understand how diverse congregations arepossible given the strong social forces pushingcongregations toward homogeneity. Strong as-sociations between certain internal and exter-nal factors and the racial and ethnic diversity ofcongregations have been identified.

The bulk of the growing literature on re-ligious racial diversity focuses on identifyinginternal predictors of diversity in congrega-tions. The most consistent predictor of reli-gious racial diversity is religious tradition ordenomination. As noted above, non-Christiancongregations are the most diverse; amongChristian congregations, Catholic congrega-tions are the most diverse (see Figure 2).

The next predictor, at least for Christian de-nominations, is historical position on race rela-tions. Christian denominations with a long his-tory of advocating for racial justice are morelikely to have racially diverse congregationsthan are those that lack a sufficient historyof racial justice advocacy (Ammerman 2005,Dudley & Roozen 2001, Hadaway et al. 1984).Of all the Christian traditions and denomi-nations that have advocated for racial justice,Catholicism has demonstrated the most consis-tent support and participation.

Scholars have posited that Catholic congre-gations are more diverse because the CatholicChurch’s centralized governance facilitates aunified stance against racial segregation amongits congregations, something that does not existfor the more autonomous Protestant congre-gations (Dougherty & Huyser 2008). Researchalso finds that Protestant and Catholic diversecongregations have different aims. Accordingto Garces-Foley (2008), even though both tra-ditions often talk about unity, they mean dif-ferent things because they draw on differentmetaphors. For Protestants, unity often meanscreating a new culture or finding what is com-mon across cultures. It also means worshippingtogether, almost always in the same language.Because the Catholic perspective is based onenculturation and hospitality, new immigrantsmust be allowed to live out their religiocul-tural traditions and worship in their own lan-guages. As such, for Catholics, but rarely forProtestants, the maintenance of cultural dis-tinctions within the same congregation is ev-idence of success of religious racial integrationrather than failure.

A third predictor of racial diversity incongregations—in addition to religious tradi-tion or denomination and historical position onrace relations—is whether congregations haveleaders who intentionally and regularly pro-mote diversity (e.g., Christerson et al. 2005,DeYoung et al. 2003, Kramer 1954, Yancey& Emerson 2003). These congregations par-ticipate in several strategies to foster racialdiversity. These include (a) diversifying pas-toral and lay leadership (Christerson et al.


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


2005, DeYoung et al. 2003, Pittman 1945,Yancey & Emerson 2003); (b) fostering smallgroups within the congregation (Ammerman1997, Dougherty 2003, Jenkins 2003), includ-ing racially homogeneous ones (Christersonet al. 2005, Marti 2010); (c) integrating musicgenres in the worship service that incorporatemultiple racial groups (DeYoung et al. 2003,Ganiel 2008, Marti 2012, Yancey 2003); (d ) cre-ating programs that specifically address racialor ethno-cultural issues (Dougherty & Huyser2008, Ganiel 2008, Hadaway et al. 1984);(e) appealing to particularistic experiencesamong racial/ethnic groups to increase diversity(Garces-Foley’s 2007, Marti 2010); and ( f ) re-cruiting “conspicuous” diversity by diversifyingthe leadership, or who is seen “up front” duringworship (Marti 2012). Although all these strate-gies increase the likelihood of diversity, Yancey& Emerson (2003) and Christerson et al. (2005)find that creating a diverse leadership team is ofprimary importance. They specify that the lead-ership not only must represent different racialgroups but also must be empowered to lead inways that are true to their cultural traditions.

Several other internal factors matter forracial diversity in congregations. Congrega-tions that embody a charismatic/Pentecostalworship style are more likely than othersto be diverse (Dougherty & Huyser 2008,Emerson & Woo 2006) because, it is argued,worship that is more experiential (using eas-ily accessible contemporary music, bodily re-sponses, applause, jumping, saying “Amen” andother verbal responses) creates an environ-ment that is more inclusive and participatory(Dougherty & Huyser 2008). Congregationsthat are large and that have been founded re-cently are more likely to have a diverse popu-lation (Dougherty & Huyser 2008). And con-gregations that have high-income and well-educated attendees are more likely to be raciallydiverse than are congregations that do not(Dougherty & Huyser 2008, Emerson & Woo2006, Parker 1968).

In addition to these internal factors, thereare three external factors that researchershave shown are associated with higher levels

of racial diversity in congregations as well:urbanicity, neighborhood racial composition,and geographic reach of a congregation’sreligious marketplace. Congregations in urbanareas are likely to be more diverse than thosein suburban or rural areas (Dougherty 2003,Dougherty & Huyser 2008, Emerson & Woo2006, Hadaway et al. 1984). Findings also showthat congregations located in racially diverseneighborhoods are likely to be more diversethan ones located in racially homogeneousneighborhoods (Ammerman 1997, Becker1998, Emerson & Kim 2003, Emerson & Woo2006, Hadaway et al. 1984, Northwood 1958,Yancey 2003, Wedam 1999). So, congregationsin racially diverse geographic areas, which alsotend to be urban, more easily attract and drawa diverse population than do their counterpartsin racially homogeneous areas. Thus, asEmerson & Kim (2003) assert, the larger thegeographic area from which a congregationdraws its worshippers, all other factors beingequal, the more racially diverse it will be.Congregations that have a wider geographicappeal, particularly if they are located in an ur-ban area, will draw from various communitiesthat likely have residents from many differentracial backgrounds. However, congregationsthat draw primarily from their immediateneighborhood will be diverse to the extent thatthe neighborhood remains diverse over time,which is true of few neighborhoods in America.

The research reviewed above consistentlyshows that, given the right mix of internalstructures and incentives and certain externalconditions, congregations can become raciallydiverse. However, this mix of internal and ex-ternal factors rarely comes together for a singlecongregation, thus making racial segregation inAmerican congregations the continued norm.Moreover, this body of work addresses only asmall number of external factors that matterwhen it comes to racial diversity in religiousorganizations. A host of other external factorsmight affect the capacity of congregations tobecome racially diverse and to sustain thatdiversity, not to mention cross-racial relationsthat might play out in multiracial religious


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


organizations. These factors include, but arenot limited to, the role of immigration policy,immigrant migration patterns, and neighbor-hood characteristics beyond racial compositionsuch as crime rates, family types, socioeco-nomic composition, and social capital. Thesefactors also demand attention in the researchon racially diverse religious organizations.

EXPLANATIONS FOR RELIGIOUSRACIAL DIVERSITY

Why do multiracial churches work? Racial di-versity is quite rare in most social institutionsin the United States, and despite a slight move-ment toward religious racial diversity acrossAmerica, religion remains no exception. So,what explanations do scholars offer for how re-ligious organizations can encourage people tovoluntarily integrate across racial lines?

Broadly speaking, there are two. Themore common of the two explanations relatesto social identity. Religious organizationsdeemphasize racial identities—and the socialadvantages or disadvantages associated withthem—and emphasize an identity congregantshave in common, usually a religious identityor some brand of a multiracial identity, inan effort to generate unity among a diversebody of people. In other words, religiousorganizations elevate the importance of asuperordinate identity that all attendees shareover any subordinate identities of attendees,ones that are particular only to subgroups.

Becker (1998) first presented a version ofthis explanation in her ethnographic study oftwo multiracial congregations in Oak Park,Illinois, a racially diverse suburb of Chicago.Becker studied two Christian congregations,one affiliated with conservative Protestantismand the other with liberal Protestantism. Giventhe distinctive historical positions of thesetraditions on race relations and the differencesin their contemporary sociopolitical persua-sions, one might expect these congregationsto address racial diversity in different ways.However, Becker found that this was not thecase. Despite their religious and sociopolitical

differences, the congregations handled reli-gious racial diversity in quite similar ways. Bothdownplayed race and stressed congregants’unity in Christ. Religious, social, and politicalideas or activities that potentially threatenedthe internal unity of the congregation wereavoided. Moreover, race was personalized.As Becker (1998, p. 469) explains, “morallyinformed discourse and action arise from and isexpressive of members’ own life experiences.”Making race about the personal and not thestructural was critical to these churches’ successat building racially diverse congregations.

Other scholars have similarly noted howcongregations emphasize religious identitiesover the meanings and consequences of racialidentities. Marti (2005), in an ethnographicstudy of a congregation affiliated with theSouthern Baptist Convention in Los Angeles,argues that the head pastor was so successful atelevating the importance of attendees’ commonreligious identity that racial differences becameirrelevant among congregants. Marti (2008a,p. 14) later defined this process as “ethnic tran-scendence” whereby “individuals claim a newshared identity” based upon a unique and lo-calized understanding of what it means to bereligious.

Jenkins (2003) and Stanczak (2006) con-ducted ethnographic studies—independent ofone another—of racially diverse congregationsaffiliated with the International Church ofChrist (ICOC). Both authors observed congre-gations that were proud of being racially di-verse, that had high expectations that mem-bers would actively affirm this value, and thatwere similar to the congregations in Becker’s(1998) and Marti’s (2005) studies in that thestructural realities of race were avoided. In theend, the authors of both studies claim that thecongregations’ multiracial identities trumpedthe racial identities of individual members, yetthey offer slightly different reasons for howthese churches were able to do this. Jenkins(2003) focuses on the internal structure of thecongregation, arguing that the congregation’sformal and informal norms regarding cross-racial interaction and racial discourse “limit[ed]


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


organizational and individual ability to confrontand address the complexity of historical andcontemporary racial and ethnic social dynam-ics” (p. 407). Stanczak (2006), however, pro-poses that congregations employ what he calls“strategic ethnicity.” The multiracial identityasserted by church leadership was a means toan end, serving to distinguish their congrega-tions from secular institutions and other re-ligious organizations, broaden their niche inthe religious marketplace, and attract people ofvarying races. This process meant that mem-bers of color, especially, had to reconstructtheir racial selves to accommodate the ICOCcongregations’ brand of diversity, somethingthat Stanczak (2006) notes white members weremuch less inclined to have to do.

Collectively, this line of work suggests thatsome congregations can develop and sustainracial diversity because they minimize theimportance of racial identities and maximizethe importance of a religious or multiracialidentity. The specific ways in which con-gregations enact this strategy varies. Somecongregations highlight the importance ofa superordinate religious identity relative toattendees’ other identities (Becker 1998, Marti2005). Other congregations may highlighttheir unique multiracial identity (Stanczak2006). Still others may connect over a commonnonreligious identity, such as was the case inthe Hollywood multiracial church studied byMarti (2008b), where congregants connectedbecause of a shared identity as artists. In theprocess of establishing a multiracial identity,still others may institute and reinforce clearexpectations guiding interracial interactionand racial discussions ( Jenkins 2003). Yet inthe end, regardless of the specific approachesemployed, racially diverse congregations willsubvert or avoid the structural realities of racefor the everyday lives of their attendees [seealso Pitt’s (2010) critique of the plausibility ofreligion being an effective tool for transcendingracial differences in multiracial congregations].

The second main explanation is that mul-tiracial religious organizations are constrainedby broader racialized structures. This strand

of research does not necessarily contradictwork that uses social identity explanations.Most scholars who point to social identityalso acknowledge that elevating superordinatereligious identities is often done at the cost ofdownplaying race. Thus, this second line ofresearch assumes a different approach to un-derstanding these organizations. Where otherscholars focus on how congregations managethe salience of congregants’ identities, ulti-mately assuming a more micro-level approach,these scholars link processes within multiracialchurches to broader social forces, specificallyracial patterns in society. Race, as a socialstructure, is in one way or another implicatedin how and why multiracial religious organi-zations work—manifesting in the leadershipstructure, conflicts over worship practices, andfriendship networks, among other areas. Con-sequently, multiracial religious organizationscannot be understood apart from the largerracialized context in which they are located.

Drawing from six case studies, Christersonet al. (2005), for example, propose that racestructures nearly every level of church activityin racially diverse religious organizations. Itimpacts congregations’ worship style and struc-ture, friendship networks, attendee turnoverrates, and leadership selection processes. Iteven affects disputes among congregants.Disagreements over church activities fall alongracial lines, and attendees use theologicallyinformed arguments to provide support fortheir racialized positions.

Priest & Priest (2007) focus on the worshippractices and leadership structures of mul-tiracial religious organizations and proposethat these are manifestations of people’s racialand class locations in society. In their studyof a merger of two South Carolina Baptistchurches—one predominately black and theother predominately white—they find that,despite each congregation’s stated intent toshare power after the merger, white leaderscontrolled the worship practices of the newcongregation by drawing upon dominantvalues, in this case the value of higher ed-ucation. By asserting that their advanced


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


degrees made them more qualified than theirAfrican American counterparts, white leaderslaid claim to a supposedly more legitimateauthority over worship and implemented theworship practices they viewed as normative.

Similar processes are evident in Edwards’s(2008b) in-depth study of a Midwestern mul-tiracial congregation. Stories emerging fromthe case study highlight how racialized con-flicts over religious and nonreligious practicesand leadership selection are resolved and howwhite congregants tend to win out in these con-flicts. Her analysis of the 1998 NCS affirmsthese findings. Multiracial congregations, whencompared with both predominately white con-gregations and congregations of color, are moreinclined to participate in the kinds of religiousand extrareligious practices in which predomi-nately white churches participate. Situating herfindings in critical whiteness theory, Edwards(2008b) argues that because whites are accus-tomed to being culturally normative and struc-turally privileged and are unused to address-ing issues of race, multiracial congregations willneed to minimize racial conflict and primarilyaddress the preferences and desires of whites ifthey are to keep whites attending.

As we noted above, most ethnographicstudies of multiracial congregations havefocused on how whites and people of colormanage religious racial diversity, with whitesoften being the ones who are aiming to createa diverse religious space. However, there area handful of studies that specifically examinehow congregations of color make attempts atracial integration. Thus far, the congregationsstudied have been initially predominately Asianaiming to attract non-Asian attendees, and thefindings do not yet suggest any overarchingpatterns. This, we imagine, is due to the limitedwork conducted on these kinds of organiza-tions. Dhingra (2004), for instance, finds thatthe three Korean American churches he studiedavoided discussions of racism and racial in-equality. But Garces-Foley (2007) in her studyof a largely Asian congregation moving towardracial diversity finds that the congregation as-sumed what she refers to as a “color-conscious”

approach, which was intended to encouragemembers to engage the personal and structuralchallenges that accompany race. Thus, thesocial dynamics that govern the structureand culture of multiracial congregations thatoriginate as congregations of color are unclear.

Scholars are expanding our understandingof how and why racial integration in religiousorganizations works. Some point to micro-level processes. Others connect their findingsto macro-level structures. Regardless of whichperspective scholars use to address religiousracial diversity, the field—barring a few notableexceptions—does not attempt, at least in anysubstantive way, to build new or stretch cur-rent social theory or connect to the broaderfield of empirical social scientific knowledge.Most work, whether it relies on social identityperspectives or race explanations, is more in-terested in addressing what is going on withinmultiracial religious organizations than whatthe broader implications of these organizationsare for other institutions and macro-level pro-cesses. This may be in part a result of key chal-lenges and tensions within the field that have yetto be resolved or exploited in a way that couldstrengthen and expand intellectual inquiry—regarding not only religious racial diversity butalso racial stratification and religious change.We turn to these challenges and tensions next.

CHALLENGES AND TENSIONS

The study of racially diverse religious orga-nizations is a relatively recent area in sociol-ogy. Although studies on multiracial churchessurfaced as early as the 1940s (e.g., Loescher1948, Catchings 1952), from then until the early2000s, when the field expanded rather quickly,there were just a handful of studies on multira-cial congregations. The rapid growth of workon this topic has left some important gaps in ourknowledge about the phenomenon of raciallydiverse congregations, as well as the role ofthese organizations in society at large.

A major gap in the field is in methodology,particularly sampling. Most research is onconservative Protestant congregations, in part


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


because of the highly influential racial recon-ciliation movement of the 1990s highlightedabove. This was an interesting and surprisingsocial phenomenon given conservative Protes-tants’ long history of reinforcing America’sracial hierarchy. Yet despite the novelty of theracial reconciliation movement, it is Catholicand non-Christian religious congregationsthat are the most likely to be racially diverse(Dougherty & Huyser 2008). A handful ofstudies address religious racial diversity in thesetraditions. For instance, Yang & Ebaugh (2001)in their study of immigration and religion inHouston examine a racially diverse Buddhistcongregation composed mainly of Anglos andAsian immigrants. This study and others like itare most interested, however, in exploring therole that religion plays in immigrants’ adapta-tion process in the United States, not religiousracial diversity. There are also studies thatinclude survey-based analyses that control forreligion or Christian tradition (e.g., Dougherty& Huyser 2008, Edwards 2008b, Emerson& Woo 2006), but these studies do notreally grapple with how religion or Christiantradition matter for religious racial diversity.The research so far is disproportionatelybased on studies of conservative Protestantcongregations and is thus telling only a smallpart of the story of religious racial diversity.

A second methodological limitation is thatthere are few studies dealing with religiousracial diversity based upon national-level datadeveloped using probability sampling. Re-searchers have largely relied upon the NCS,a representative, congregational-level survey.Although quite useful when studying compar-isons between racially diverse and racially ho-mogeneous congregations, the NCS is less use-ful when aiming to understand variation acrossdifferent kinds of interracial congregations be-cause it has a relatively small number of in-terracial congregations in the sample (7.4%,of 1,506 congregations in Wave II of the sur-vey) and was not designed to address questionsspecific to racially diverse congregations, suchas what the racial composition is of the pas-toral staff or whether the congregation has a

mission statement that states a commitment toracial or ethnic diversity. Moreover, there isto date no representative, national-level surveyof interracial congregations. There are otherstudies that have used the Lilly Survey of At-titudes and Social Networks, which was con-ducted during 1999 and 2000, and the Portraitsof American Life Study, conducted in 2006.Both studies are national-level surveys of indi-viduals derived from a random sample that wasstratified by race. These are both comprehen-sive studies that include questions relevant tothe area of religious racial diversity, thus allow-ing researchers to explore how religious racialdiversity affects people’s religious and nonre-ligious attitudes and behaviors. Nevertheless,they offer a limited capacity for researchers toaddress questions specifically about variationacross people who attend racially diverse con-gregations. And, finally, none of the surveysmentioned here includes a statistically sufficientnumber of non-Christian congregations, whichare the most likely to be racially diverse.

Another challenge with the field is that itlacks agreement as to why multiracial religiousorganizations are of theoretical and, morebroadly, sociological importance. Many studiesare not clearly rooted in a theoretical frameor are not linked to broader social scientificresearch. For instance, a large, long-standingbody of work in the social psychology literatureexamines how groups foster intergroup unityby promoting and thereby increasing thesalience of a common identity among a diversegroup of people (e.g., Brewer 1991, 1999;Dovidio et al. 2005; Gaertner et al. 1989, 1999;Gaertner & Dovidio 2000; Hehman et al. 2010;Newhall et al. 1993). This is precisely whatmany scholars of racially diverse congregationspropose these organizations are doing, yettheir discussion of this body of work or thetheories developed about this social processis minimal. Thus, the opportunity to expandupon theories of social identity has so far beeninadequately explored.

The field also exhibits a familiar tensionin sociology more broadly between the microlevel and the macro level, or between symbolic


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


interactionist approaches (that emphasize howpeople construct their environment and whothey are in relation to their environment)and structural approaches (that connect theinteractions, behaviors, and views withinsmall group settings to the norms, values,and social patterns in the broader society).There is not a hard-lined dichotomy presentin the literature. Many scholars acknowledgethe potential of macro-level constraints onlocal congregations and that, for instance, theracialization of America or the laws governingimmigration affect congregations and how theynavigate racial diversity (e.g., Becker 1998,Dougherty & Huyser 2008, Garces-Foley2007). Nevertheless, scholars tend toward oneapproach or the other when aiming to explainhow multiracial churches work, and most relyupon micro-level explanations.

This tendency to rely upon micro-level ex-planations may be due in part to methodology.As may already be clear, ethnographies are themost common approach employed by scholarsto explain how and why racial integration incongregations works. Ethnographies are bydefinition conducted at the micro level. Theyare long-term observations of and interactionswith geographically and time-bounded naturalsettings. This approach has its limits. Withethnographies we learn about what is going onin a certain space during a specific time period,but the findings cannot be generalized to othersettings. Nor can they be replicated. Twocongregations may be affiliated with the samedenomination, have nearly the same racialcomposition, and be located in the same neigh-borhood, but there will remain a host of othervariables that affect the goings-on of congrega-tions that simply cannot be duplicated becausethe people who populate congregations andtheir interactions are unique. Not only are find-ings of ethnographic studies not generalizable,but subsequent research cannot test them.

Nevertheless, although ethnographic re-search is not replicable or generalizable, it cando much more than reveal local knowledge orlead to theories about specific, localized set-tings. An in-depth study of a select social setting

allows for an account of how broader social pro-cesses are manifest in everyday settings. Why?Because the macro is reflected in the micro. Putanother way, the micro is the macro up close.

One challenge with many ethnographicstudies of racially diverse congregations is thatthey do not exploit the theoretical potential ofthe data for understanding the macro-level so-cial processes impacting and underlying mul-tiracial worship. Scholars employing ethno-graphic methods would do well to employ anapproach that enables the production and ex-tension of macro-level social theory.

The extended case method offered byBurawoy (1998) offers another approach thatunleashes the capacity of ethnographic exam-ination for theory expansion and developmentand for building bridges between micro-levelsocial processes and the broader social struc-ture. It encourages engagement with a socialsetting and the explication of social processes.But it further proposes that scholars account forpatterns in the everyday by connecting thesepatterns to macro-level structural forces, situatethat social setting within the historical context,and aim to theorize about the processes ob-served. This approach is not unlike that of Mills(1959) in The Sociological Imagination. For schol-ars of racially diverse congregations, this means,at a minimum, that they situate their sites ofstudy within the historical context of multiracialworship in the United States and intellectuallyengage knowledge regarding broader structuralforces that impinge upon these social spaces.

In short, many existing studies of multira-cial churches are relatively narrow, focusingmainly on Christian congregations, particu-larly conservative Protestant ones. This workis also largely descriptive, suggestive, or limitedto localized theory. The field needs to expandbeyond such circumscribed contributions andtheorize about what multiracial congregations,across religions and Christian traditions, tell usabout broader sociological processes. Withoutmore rigorous theory building or testing, thefield cannot make the kinds of contributions tosociology or social science generally that it ispoised to make.


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


CONCLUSION

Research thus far has produced several inter-esting insights regarding racial diversity in reli-gious congregations and the internal dynam-ics of racially diverse religious organizations.We could categorize the conclusions into twotypes: (a) those that explore how religious iden-tities can supersede racial identities, which inturn can allow for the existence and continuedsurvival of multiracial religious congregations;and (b) those that emphasize how the dynam-ics of a racialized society are replicated withinreligious congregations, causing conflicts andinequalities within the congregation. Althoughthis literature is of great interest to practition-ers (especially those who would like to see moreracial integration in the religious congregationsthey lead) and to scholars of religion, the con-tribution of this literature to the larger field ofsociology is less clear.

The discipline of sociology has long beeninterested in race. Its focus has been primar-ily on how racial hierarchies are establishedand reproduced in society as a whole. The dis-cipline has also long been interested in reli-gion as a social phenomenon. Beginning withMarx and Weber, sociologists have examinedthe extent to which religion legitimates and re-produces social inequalities and the extent towhich religion can act as a force for social struc-tural change. The fact (only recently admittedamong sociologists) that religion remains a po-tent macro-social force even in modern societyhas increased the interest in religion among so-cial scientists of all stripes.

We propose that the juncture of race, re-ligion, and social stratification is where re-search on multiracial congregations can makea larger contribution to the discipline of sociol-ogy. In other words, macro-level questions re-garding social stratification—specifically racialstratification—ought to be more rigorouslyengaged: Do multiracial congregations legiti-mate and reproduce racial stratification in soci-ety? Do they represent the potential for socialchange leading to greater racial equality in so-ciety? Do they facilitate the development and

distribution of social capital and other valuableresources to lower status people?

Research has provided some clues—albeitcontradictory ones—to the answers to thesequestions. On the one hand, findings suggestthat most multiracial congregations requirean avoidance of discussions of racism, racialinequality, and politics and that membersdownplay their racial identity in favor of theirreligious identity in order to incorporate mul-tiple racial groups into a single congregation.Similar forms of racial inequality that exist insociety often arise in multiracial congregationsas white leaders and members have an outsizedinfluence on how the congregations are struc-tured and organized. Thus, it appears that, onthe whole, multiracial congregations are notincreasing consciousness of racism and racialinequality. If anything, multiracial congrega-tions are legitimating and reproducing racialinequality rather than challenging it. Indeed,monoracial congregations of color seem tohave more potential for challenging racialinequality, evidenced in the well-documentedrole of African American congregations inpolitical mobilization for greater equality (e.g.,Morris 1984, Pattillo-McCoy 1998) and in therole of immigrant congregations to provide re-sources and social capital that facilitate upwardmobility (Hirschman 2004, Portes & Rumbaut2006, Warner 1993, Warner & Wittner 1998).

On the other hand, however, segregation inreligious organizations can also reinforce whitedominance in society (Emerson & Smith 2000).Monoracial white congregations can and dolegitimate and reinforce white supremacy inmany ways. There is also some evidence in theliterature that diverse congregations, such asthe one Garces-Foley (2007) examined, canbe places where a greater understanding andconsciousness of racism and racial inequalitycan take place. And multiracial congregationstend to have more inclusive attitudes thanmonoracial congregations when it comes tosocioeconomic diversity (Yancey & Kim 2008).Still, there is little evidence that this is the normor that, as a whole, the growth in the numberof multiracial congregations in America has


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


produced anything like a movement for greaterracial equality in the larger society.

If scholars interested in multiracial congre-gations are to make a more significant contri-bution to the field of sociology, they ought toconsider moving beyond micro-level analysesof internal organizational dynamics—focusingon factors related to religious racial diversity orhow religious racial diversity works—to a largerdiscussion regarding macro-level processesthat produce or dismantle racial stratification insociety as a whole. The question of whether thegrowth of multiracial religious organizationsrepresents a potential force for social changetoward greater equality or simply anothersetting where racial hierarchies are reproducedis an urgent and important one as these organi-

zations expand and increase across society. Notonly does the broader social structure affect theinternal dynamics of racially diverse religiousorganizations, but what happens in multiracialcongregations will have a reciprocal effect onthe broader society. There is some evidencethat racial structures are being reproducedin racially diverse congregations (Christersonet al. 2005, Edwards 2008b). Still, more rig-orous theoretical expansion and developmentas well as intellectual engagement with bigquestions about the role of race and religionin macro-level social stratification are needed.There is no better modern social site by whichto understand how religion reinforces racialstratification (or not) than racially diversereligious organizations.

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

The authors are not aware of any affiliations, memberships, funding, or financial holdings thatmight be perceived as affecting the objectivity of this review.

LITERATURE CITED

Ammerman NT. 1997. Congregation and Community. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. PressAmmerman NT. 2005. Pillars of Faith: American Congregations and Their Partners. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. PressBecker PE. 1998. Making inclusive communities: congregations and the “problem” of race. Soc. Probl.

45:451–72Billingsley A. 1999. Mighty Like a River: The Black Church and Social Reform. New York: Oxford Univ. PressBlau JR, Redding K, Land KC. 1998. Ethnocultural cleavages and the growth of church membership in the

United States, 1860–1930. In Sacred Companies: Organizational Aspects of Religion and Religious Aspects ofOrganization, ed. NJ Demerath, PD Hall, T Schmitt, RH Williams, pp. 132–53. New York: OxfordUniv. Press

Blum EJ. 2007. W. E. B. Du Bois: American Prophet. Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. PressBonilla-Silva B. 2001. White Supremacy and Racism in the Post-Civil Rights Era. Boulder, CO: Lynne RiennerBrewer MB. 1991. The social self: on being the same and different at the same time. Personal. Soc. Psychol.

Bull. 17:475–82Brewer MB. 1999. The psychology of prejudice: ingroup love or outgroup hate? J. Soc. Issues 55:429–44Brown RK, Brown RE. 2003. Faith and works: church-based social capital resources and African-American

political activism. Soc. Forces 82:617–41Burawoy M. 1998. The extended case method. Sociol. Theory 16:4–33Catchings LM. 1952. Multiracial activities in southern churches. Phylon 13:54–56Chaves M. 2011. American Religion: Contemporary Trends. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. PressChristerson B, Edwards KL, Emerson MO. 2005. Against All Odds: The Struggle for Racial Integration in

Religious Organizations. New York: NYU PressChristerson B, Emerson MO. 2003. The costs of diversity in religious organizations: an in-depth case study.

Sociol. Relig. 64:163–82


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


Cornell S, Hartmann D. 1988. Mapping the terrain: definitions. In Ethnicity and Race: Making Identities in aChanging World, ed. S Cornell, D Hartmann, pp. 15–37. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge

DeYoung CP, Emerson MO, Yancey GA, Kim KC. 2003. United by Faith: The Multiracial Church as theAnswer to the Race Problem. New York: Oxford Univ. Press

Dhingra P. 2004. “We’re not a Korean American church any more”: dilemmas in constructing a multi-racialchurch identity. Soc. Compass 51:367–79

Dougherty K. 2003. How monochromatic is church membership? Racial-ethnic diversity in religiouscommunity. Sociol. Relig. 64:65–85

Dougherty KD, Huyser KR. 2008. Racially diverse congregations: organizational identity and the accommo-dation of differences. J. Sci. Study Relig. 47(1):23–43

Dovidio JF, Gaertner SL, Hodson G, Houlette M, Johnson KM. 2005. Social inclusion and exclusion:recategorization and the perception of intergroup boundaries. In The Social Psychology of Inclusion andExclusion, ed. D Abrams, JM Marques, MA Hogg, pp. 246–64. Philadelphia: Psychology

Dudley CS, Roozen DA. 2001. Faith Communities Today: A Report on Religion in the United States Today.Hartford, CT: Hartford Inst. Relig. Res.

Edwards KL. 2008a. Bringing race to the center: the importance of race in racially diverse religiousorganizations. J. Sci. Study Relig. 47:5–9

Edwards KL. 2008b. The Elusive Dream: The Power of Race in Multiracial Churches. New York: Oxford Univ.Press

Emerson MO. 2008. Introduction: Why a forum on racially and ethnically diverse congregations? J. Sci.Study Relig. 47:1–4

Emerson MO, Kim KC. 2003. Multiracial congregations: an analysis of their development and a typology.J. Sci. Study Relig. 42:217–27

Emerson MO, Smith C. 2000. Divided By Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America. NewYork: Oxford Univ. Press

Emerson MO, Woo R. 2006. People of the Dream: Multiracial Congregations in the United States. Princeton,NJ: Princeton Univ. Press

Finke R, Stark R. 1992. The Churching of America, 1776–1990: Winners and Losers in Our Religious Economy.New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press

Gaertner SL, Dovidio JF. 2000. Reducing Intergroup Bias: The Common Ingroup Identity Model. Philadelphia:Psychology

Gaertner SL, Dovidio JF, Nier JA, Ward CM, Banker BS. 1999. Across cultural divides: the values of asuperordinate identity. In Cultural Divides: Understanding and Overcoming Group Conflict, ed. DA Prentice,DT Miller, pp. 173–212. New York: Russell Sage Found.

Gaertner SL, Mann J, Murrell A, Dovidio JF. 1989. Reducing intergroup bias: the benefits of recategorization.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 57:239–49

Ganiel G. 2008. Is the multiracial congregation an answer to the problem of race? Comparative perspectivesfrom South Africa and the USA. J. Relig. Afr. 38:263–83

Garces-Foley K. 2007. Crossing the Ethnic Divide: The Multiethnic Church on a Mission. New York: OxfordUniv. Press

Garces-Foley K. 2008. Comparing Catholic and Evangelical integration efforts. J. Sci. Study Relig. 47:17–22Hadaway CK, Hackett DG, Miller JF. 1984. The most segregated institution: correlates of interracial church

participation. Rev. Relig. Res. 25:204–19Hehman E, Mania E, Gaertner SL. 2010. Where the division lies: common ingroup identity moderates the

cross-race effect. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 46:445–48Hirschman C. 2004. The role of religion in the origins and adaptation of immigrant groups in the United

States. Int. Migr. Rev. 38(3):1206–33Humes KR, Jones NA, Ramirez RR. 2011. Overview of race and Hispanic origin: 2010. US Census Briefs

C2101BR-02, US Census Bur., Washington, DC. http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdf

Jack HA. 1947. The emergence of the interracial church. Soc. Action 13:1Jenkins KE. 2003. Intimate diversity: the presentation of multiculturalism and multiracialism in a high-

boundary religious movement. J. Sci. Study Relig. 42:393–409


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdf

http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdf


Kramer A. 1954. Racial integration in three Protestant denominations. J. Educ. Sociol. 28:59–68Lee J, Bean FD. 2003. Beyond black and white: remaking race in America. Contexts 2:26–33Levitt P. 2003. You know, Abraham was really the first immigrant: religion and transnational migration. Int.

Migr. Rev. 37(3):847–73Loescher FS. 1948. The Protestant Church and the Negro: A Pattern of Segregation. Westport, CT: Negro Univ.

PressMarti G. 2005. A Mosaic of Believers: Diversity and Innovation in a Multiethnic Church. Bloomington: Indiana

Univ. PressMarti G. 2008a. Fluid ethnicity and ethnic transcendence in multiracial churches. J. Sci. Study Relig. 47:11–16Marti G. 2008b. Hollywood Faith: Holiness, Prosperity and Ambition in a Los Angeles Church. New Brunswick,

NJ: Rutgers Univ. PressMarti G. 2009. Affinity, identity, and transcendence: the experience of religious racial integration in diverse

congregations. J. Sci. Study Relig. 48(1):53–68Marti G. 2010. The religious racial integration of African Americans into diverse churches. J. Sci. Study Relig.

49(2):201–17Marti G. 2012. Worship Across the Racial Divide: Religious Music and the Multiracial Congregation. New York:

Oxford Univ. PressMassey D, Denton M. 1993. American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard Univ. PressMcPherson JM, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM. 2001. Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annu. Rev.

Sociol. 27:415–44Mills CW. 1959. The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford Univ. PressMorris A. 1984. The Origins of the Civil Rights Movement: Black Communities Organizing for Change. New York:

Free PressNewhall AM, Miller N, Holtz R, Brewer M. 1993. Cross-cutting category membership with role assignment:

a means of reducing intergroup bias. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 32:125–46Northwood LK. 1958. Ecological and attitudinal factors in church desegregation. Soc. Probl. 6(2):150–63Omi M, Winant H. 1994. Racial Formation in the United States: From the 1960s to the 1990s. New York:

RoutledgeParker JH. 1968. The interaction of Negroes and whites in an integrated church setting. Soc. Forces 46:359–66Pattillo-McCoy M. 1998. Church culture as a strategy of action in the black community. Am. Sociol. Rev.

63:767–84Pitt R. 2010. Fear of a black pulpit? Real racial transcendence versus cultural assimilation in multiracial

churches. J. Sci. Study Relig. 49:218–23Pittman RH. 1945. Building a multiracial church. Sociol. Soc. Res. 29:297–303Portes A, Rumbaut R. 2006. Immigrant America. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. PressPriest KB, Priest RJ. 2007. Divergent worship practices in the Sunday morning hour: analysis of a “multiracial”

church merger attempt. In This Side of Heaven: Race, Ethnicity, and Christian Faith, ed. RJ Priest, ALNieves, pp. 275–93. New York: Oxford Univ. Press

Scheitle CP, Dougherty KD. 2010. Race, diversity and membership duration in religious congregations.Sociol. Inq. 80:405–23

Stanczak G. 2006. Strategic ethnicity: the construction of multi-racial/multi-ethnic religious community.Ethn. Racial Stud. 29:856–81

Van Biema D. 2010. The color of faith. Time, Jan. 11, pp. 38–41Warner RS. 1993. Work in progress toward a new paradigm for the sociological study of religion in the

United States. Am. J. Sociol. 98:1044–93Warner RS, Wittner JG, eds. 1998. Gatherings in Diaspora: Religious Communities and the New Immigration.

Philadelphia, PA: Temple Univ. PressWedam E. 1999. Ethno-racial diversity within Indianapolis congregations. Res. Notes 2(4). http://hdl.

handle.net/2450/3635Yang F, Ebaugh HR. 2001. Religion and ethnicity among new immigrants: the impact of majority/minority

status in home and host countries. J. Sci. Study Relig. 40:367–78


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

http://hdl.handle.net/2450/3635

http://hdl.handle.net/2450/3635


Yancey G. 1999. An examination of the effects of residential and church integration on racial attitudes ofwhites. Sociol. Perspect. 42:279–304

Yancey G. 2003. One Body, One Spirit: Principles of Successful Multiracial Churches. Downers Grove, IL: IVP PressYancey G, Emerson M. 2003. Integrated Sundays: an exploratory study into the formation of multiracial

churches. Sociol. Focus 36:111–27Yancey G, Kim YJ. 2008. Racial diversity, gender inequality, and SES diversity in Christian congregations:

exploring the connections of racism, sexism, and classism in multiracial and nonmultiracial churches.J. Sci. Study Relig. 47:103–11


Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

SO39-FrontMatter ARI 5 June 2013 17:48

Annual Reviewof Sociology

Volume 39, 2013Contents

FrontispieceCharles Tilly � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � xiv

Prefatory Chapter

Formations and Formalisms: Charles Tilly and the Paradoxof the ActorJohn Krinsky and Ann Mische � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 1

Theory and Methods

The Principles of Experimental Design and Their Applicationin SociologyMichelle Jackson and D.R. Cox � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �27

The New Sociology of MoralitySteven Hitlin and Stephen Vaisey � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �51

Social Processes

Social Scientific Inquiry Into Genocide and Mass Killing:From Unitary Outcome to Complex ProcessesPeter B. Owens, Yang Su, and David A. Snow � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �69

Interest-Oriented ActionLyn Spillman and Michael Strand � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �85

Drugs, Violence, and the StateBryan R. Roberts and Yu Chen � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 105

Healthcare Systems in Comparative Perspective: Classification,Convergence, Institutions, Inequalities, and Five Missed TurnsJason Beckfield, Sigrun Olafsdottir, and Benjamin Sosnaud � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 127

Institutions and Culture

Multiculturalism and Immigration: A Contested Fieldin Cross-National ComparisonRuud Koopmans � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 147

Sociology of Fashion: Order and ChangePatrik Aspers and Frederic Godart � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 171

v

Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


Religion, Nationalism, and Violence: An Integrated ApproachPhilip S. Gorski and Gulay Turkmen-Dervisoglu � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 193

Formal Organizations

Race, Religious Organizations, and IntegrationKorie L. Edwards, Brad Christerson, and Michael O. Emerson � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 211

Political and Economic Sociology

An Environmental Sociology for the Twenty-First CenturyDavid N. Pellow and Hollie Nyseth Brehm � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 229

Economic Institutions and the State: Insights from Economic HistoryHenning Hillmann � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 251

Differentiation and Stratification

Demographic Change and Parent-Child Relationships in AdulthoodJudith A. Seltzer and Suzanne M. Bianchi � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 275

Individual and Society

Gender and CrimeCandace Kruttschnitt � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 291

White-Collar Crime: A Review of Recent Developments andPromising Directions for Future ResearchSally S. Simpson � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 309

From Social Structure to Gene Regulation, and Back: A CriticalIntroduction to Environmental Epigenetics for SociologyHannah Landecker and Aaron Panofsky � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 333

Racial Formation in Perspective: Connecting Individuals, Institutions,and Power RelationsAliya Saperstein, Andrew M. Penner, and Ryan Light � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 359

The Critical Sociology of Race and Sport: The First Fifty YearsBen Carrington � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 379

Demography

The Causal Effects of Father AbsenceSara McLanahan, Laura Tach, and Daniel Schneider � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 399

International Migration and Familial Change in Communitiesof Origin: Transformation and ResistancePatricia Arias � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 429

Trends and Variation in Assortative Mating: Causes and ConsequencesChristine R. Schwartz � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 451

vi Contents

Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.


Gender and International Migration: Contributions andCross-FertilizationsGioconda Herrera � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 471

LGBT Sexuality and Families at the Start of the Twenty-First CenturyMignon R. Moore and Michael Stambolis-Ruhstorfer � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 491

Urban and Rural Community Sociology

Housing: Commodity versus RightMary Pattillo � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 509

Indexes

Cumulative Index of Contributing Authors, Volumes 30–39 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 533

Cumulative Index of Article Titles, Volumes 30–39 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 537

Errata

An online log of corrections to Annual Review of Sociology articles may be found athttp://soc.annualreviews.org/errata.shtml

Contents vii

Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

AnnuAl Reviewsit’s about time. Your time. it’s time well spent.

AnnuAl Reviews | Connect with Our expertsTel: 800.523.8635 (us/can) | Tel: 650.493.4400 | Fax: 650.424.0910 | Email: [email protected]

New From Annual Reviews:Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational BehaviorVolume 1 • March 2014 • Online & In Print • http://orgpsych.annualreviews.org

Editor: Frederick P. Morgeson, The Eli Broad College of Business, Michigan State UniversityThe Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior is devoted to publishing reviews of the industrial and organizational psychology, human resource management, and organizational behavior literature. Topics for review include motivation, selection, teams, training and development, leadership, job performance, strategic HR, cross-cultural issues, work attitudes, entrepreneurship, affect and emotion, organizational change and development, gender and diversity, statistics and research methodologies, and other emerging topics.

Complimentary online access to the first volume will be available until March 2015.TAble oF CoNTeNTs:•An Ounce of Prevention Is Worth a Pound of Cure: Improving

Research Quality Before Data Collection, Herman Aguinis, Robert J. Vandenberg

•Burnout and Work Engagement: The JD-R Approach, Arnold B. Bakker, Evangelia Demerouti, Ana Isabel Sanz-Vergel

•Compassion at Work, Jane E. Dutton, Kristina M. Workman, Ashley E. Hardin

•ConstructivelyManagingConflictinOrganizations, Dean Tjosvold, Alfred S.H. Wong, Nancy Yi Feng Chen

•Coworkers Behaving Badly: The Impact of Coworker Deviant Behavior upon Individual Employees, Sandra L. Robinson, Wei Wang, Christian Kiewitz

•Delineating and Reviewing the Role of Newcomer Capital in Organizational Socialization, Talya N. Bauer, Berrin Erdogan

•Emotional Intelligence in Organizations, Stéphane Côté•Employee Voice and Silence, Elizabeth W. Morrison• Intercultural Competence, Kwok Leung, Soon Ang,

Mei Ling Tan•Learning in the Twenty-First-Century Workplace,

Raymond A. Noe, Alena D.M. Clarke, Howard J. Klein•Pay Dispersion, Jason D. Shaw•Personality and Cognitive Ability as Predictors of Effective

Performance at Work, Neal Schmitt

•Perspectives on Power in Organizations, Cameron Anderson, Sebastien Brion

•Psychological Safety: The History, Renaissance, and Future of an Interpersonal Construct, Amy C. Edmondson, Zhike Lei

•Research on Workplace Creativity: A Review and Redirection, Jing Zhou, Inga J. Hoever

•Talent Management: Conceptual Approaches and Practical Challenges, Peter Cappelli, JR Keller

•The Contemporary Career: A Work–Home Perspective, Jeffrey H. Greenhaus, Ellen Ernst Kossek

•The Fascinating Psychological Microfoundations of Strategy and Competitive Advantage, Robert E. Ployhart, Donald Hale, Jr.

•The Psychology of Entrepreneurship, Michael Frese, Michael M. Gielnik

•The Story of Why We Stay: A Review of Job Embeddedness, Thomas William Lee, Tyler C. Burch, Terence R. Mitchell

•What Was, What Is, and What May Be in OP/OB, Lyman W. Porter, Benjamin Schneider

•Where Global and Virtual Meet: The Value of Examining the Intersection of These Elements in Twenty-First-Century Teams, Cristina B. Gibson, Laura Huang, Bradley L. Kirkman, Debra L. Shapiro

•Work–Family Boundary Dynamics, Tammy D. Allen, Eunae Cho, Laurenz L. Meier

Access this and all other Annual Reviews journals via your institution at www.annualreviews.org.

Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

AnnuAl Reviewsit’s about time. Your time. it’s time well spent.

AnnuAl Reviews | Connect with Our expertsTel: 800.523.8635 (us/can) | Tel: 650.493.4400 | Fax: 650.424.0910 | Email: [email protected]

New From Annual Reviews:

Annual Review of Statistics and Its ApplicationVolume 1 • Online January 2014 • http://statistics.annualreviews.org

Editor: Stephen E. Fienberg, Carnegie Mellon UniversityAssociate Editors: Nancy Reid, University of Toronto

Stephen M. Stigler, University of ChicagoThe Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application aims to inform statisticians and quantitative methodologists, as well as all scientists and users of statistics about major methodological advances and the computational tools that allow for their implementation. It will include developments in the field of statistics, including theoretical statistical underpinnings of new methodology, as well as developments in specific application domains such as biostatistics and bioinformatics, economics, machine learning, psychology, sociology, and aspects of the physical sciences.

Complimentary online access to the first volume will be available until January 2015. table of contents:•What Is Statistics? Stephen E. Fienberg•A Systematic Statistical Approach to Evaluating Evidence

from Observational Studies, David Madigan, Paul E. Stang, Jesse A. Berlin, Martijn Schuemie, J. Marc Overhage, Marc A. Suchard, Bill Dumouchel, Abraham G. Hartzema, Patrick B. Ryan

•The Role of Statistics in the Discovery of a Higgs Boson, David A. van Dyk

•Brain Imaging Analysis, F. DuBois Bowman•Statistics and Climate, Peter Guttorp•Climate Simulators and Climate Projections,

Jonathan Rougier, Michael Goldstein•Probabilistic Forecasting, Tilmann Gneiting,

Matthias Katzfuss•Bayesian Computational Tools, Christian P. Robert•Bayesian Computation Via Markov Chain Monte Carlo,

Radu V. Craiu, Jeffrey S. Rosenthal•Build, Compute, Critique, Repeat: Data Analysis with Latent

Variable Models, David M. Blei•Structured Regularizers for High-Dimensional Problems:

Statistical and Computational Issues, Martin J. Wainwright

•High-Dimensional Statistics with a View Toward Applications in Biology, Peter Bühlmann, Markus Kalisch, Lukas Meier

•Next-Generation Statistical Genetics: Modeling, Penalization, and Optimization in High-Dimensional Data, Kenneth Lange, Jeanette C. Papp, Janet S. Sinsheimer, Eric M. Sobel

•Breaking Bad: Two Decades of Life-Course Data Analysis in Criminology, Developmental Psychology, and Beyond, Elena A. Erosheva, Ross L. Matsueda, Donatello Telesca

•Event History Analysis, Niels Keiding•StatisticalEvaluationofForensicDNAProfileEvidence,

Christopher D. Steele, David J. Balding•Using League Table Rankings in Public Policy Formation:

Statistical Issues, Harvey Goldstein•Statistical Ecology, Ruth King•Estimating the Number of Species in Microbial Diversity

Studies, John Bunge, Amy Willis, Fiona Walsh•Dynamic Treatment Regimes, Bibhas Chakraborty,

Susan A. Murphy•Statistics and Related Topics in Single-Molecule Biophysics,

Hong Qian, S.C. Kou•Statistics and Quantitative Risk Management for Banking

and Insurance, Paul Embrechts, Marius Hofert

Access this and all other Annual Reviews journals via your institution at www.annualreviews.org.

Ann

u. R

ev. S

ocio

l. 20

13.3

9:21

1-22

8. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om w

ww

.ann

ualr

evie

ws.

org

by B

iola

Uni

vers

ity o

n 11

/12/

14. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

Race, Religious Organizations, and Integration

Documents