The Effect of Racial Group Consciousness on the Political Participation of African Americans and Black Ethnics in Miami-Dade County,Florida

Abstract

This research examines group consciousness among people of African descent in Miami-Dade County, Florida, and its possible impact on their political participation. Using an original survey of over one thousand respondents, the authors question whether African Americans and black ethnics (Africans, Afro-Caribbean Americans, Afro-Cuban Americans, and Haitians) possess a shared group consciousness and, if so, why. Second, does group consciousness or socioeconomic status most influence the political participation of our respondents? The authors find that these groups have a common consciousness because of their skin color, experiences with discrimination, common interests, similar ideological views, and leadership preferences. They also find that while group consciousness has more of an impact on African American political participation, socioeconomic status more heavily influences black ethnics. Last, factors such as age, gender, partisanship, religion, and second-generation citizenship also affect African American and/or black ethnic political participation.

Keywords

group consciousness black political participation race and ethnicity

Our research examines the group consciousness of people of black African descent in Miami-Dade County, Florida, and its possible impact on their political participation. We define group consciousness according to three elements: (1) a common group identification as blacks, (2) a belief that their group is disadvantaged, and (3) an abiding commitment to African American and black ethnic coalitions. This consciousness influences them to engage in political activities that are beneficial to the group as a whole and to them as individuals (Dawson 1994). A small body of black group consciousness research has examined its impact through the usage of a few in-depth interviews (Watters 1999; Rogers 2006; Woldemikael 1989a; Zephir 2004). Using an original survey of over one thousand respondents, we question whether a common group consciousness exists among African Americans and groups that we hereinafter refer to as black ethnics.¹ We then analyze its possible impact on their political participation. Our research adds to the few studies of black group consciousness in the United States by assessing its existence among African Americans and other groups of black African descent.

Our inquiry is twofold. First, do African Americans and black ethnics possess a shared racial group consciousness and, if so, why? Second, does group consciousness or socioeconomic status most influence the political participation of our respondents? We wish to examine these questions without falling prey to “overextrapolation”—erroneously concluding that the group consciousness characteristics of African Americans also apply to black ethnics (McClain et al. 2009, 471). We begin with an overview of the literature assessing the group consciousness levels among blacks, then provide an explanation of the relationship between racial group consciousness and political participation. We end with a summary of our findings and explanation of our research’s significance.

Racial Group Consciousness among People of African Descent

We base our assumption that our black respondents possess a shared racial group consciousness on the minority group thesis, which argues that certain commonalities result in a shared racial group identification and consciousness among people of African descent.² The model also assumes that the similar experiences of immigrant, native-born, and naturalized persons of African descent with discrimination will result in a common racial consciousness and eventually the development of political coalitions (Henry and Munoz 1991; Jennings 1997). According to the model, race is such a powerful force that it unites culturally diverse black groups.

Critics of the minority group model argue that it erroneously assumes racial solidarity among people of African descent without acknowledging their differences. According to one critic, the model fails to acknowledge the influence of class and religion on black political participation (Jackson 1987, 644). Religious and/or middle-class individuals may favor candidates that are unappealing to less religious and/or lower-income voters.

Besides the minority group model, we can also expect some degree of racial group consciousness between African Americans and black ethnics because of their common interests, liberal ideologies, and similar leadership preferences. Scholars have attributed the solidarity among people of color to their similar self-interests, belief that they will benefit from collective action, acknowledgment that each group has some degree of political power, and “specific and identifiable” goals (Carmichael and Hamilton 1967, 79-80). Persons of African descent have many similar interests and goals including their approval of race-based governmental programs, desire to raise their socioeconomic status, similar problems in their neighborhoods, and experience with varying degrees of racial discrimination (Jennings 1997, 10-12). In Miami-Dade County, African Americans and black ethnics have common interests because they “have the worst living conditions, the lowest median income, the largest percentage of families in poverty, the worst housing conditions, and usually double the rate of non-Hispanic white and Hispanic unemployment” (Warren and Moreno 2003, 297).

Despite the literature’s findings of a black group consciousness, numerous conflicts have been found among black groups that dispute these findings. For example, most first-generation Afro-Caribbeans (more specifically within this category, West Indians) emphasize their ethnic and/or home country identity and reject an African American identification (Hacksaw 2005; Rogers 2006). Even when they identify with African Americans, Afro-Caribbeans often lack a strong sense of group consciousness with them (Rogers 2006, 182-83). One case study concludes that African Americans and Afro-Caribbeans in New York City have failed to develop sustainable electoral coalitions despite their similar interests. As a result, most Afro-Caribbean candidates place more of an emphasis on the mobilization of the Afro-Caribbean, rather than the African American, constituency (Rogers 2000, 309). African Americans have resented such attempts by black ethnics to mobilize their ethnic communities separately rather than join alliances with them. They have perceived black ethnic political gains as threats to their political power in some communities (Rogers 2006, 128).

Although Haitians have the same racial group identification as African Americans because of their skin color, they also lack a heightened level of racial group consciousness with them in some cities. According to one study, most Haitian immigrants in an anonymous Midwestern city attribute their absence of a group consciousness with African Americans to three factors. First, they rely on Haitian immigrants, rather than African Americans, for assistance in their assimilation to American culture and thus do not frequently interact with African Americans. Second, they compete with African Americans for low-paying, unskilled jobs. Third, Haitian immigrants do not believe that they experience the same amount of discrimination, especially in the employment sector, as African Americans (Woldemikael 1989b, 224). Each of these factors results in a low or absent occurrence of group consciousness among African Americans and Haitian immigrants in the city under review in Woldemikael’s study.

Strained relationships among Miami’s African American and Haitian population should also lead one to question the validity of the minority group thesis. African American and Haitian working-class individuals began competing for low-income jobs after a rise in the Haitian population during the 1980s (Portes and Stepick 1993, 55). To this end, Stepick (1992, 62) observed, “Rather than considering Haitians as brothers and sisters in solidarity fighting against racism and seeking equality with whites, many black Americans regarded Haitians as unwanted, immigrant competitors for jobs [who are] unaware and unappreciative of the peculiar plight of black Americans.” Class divisions have also resulted in them becoming “increasingly ambivalent toward each other” (Portes and Stepick 1993, 178). In an analysis of black, white, and Cuban politics in Miami, Grenier and Castro (1999, 276) argue, “African Americans do not share a specific linguistic, cultural, or religious background with Haitians, the second-largest black community in Miami, nor do African Americans share the immigrant world view of Haitians and other Caribbean newcomers. Thus, black solidarity in Miami is a difficult proposition.”

The relationships between African Americans and Afro-Cubans have been even more polarized than those between African Americans and Haitians. Both groups have had tense relationships with white Cubans, but Afro-Cubans are “caught between two communities (Cuban and African American) not exactly fitting into either” (Sawyer 2006, 161-63). Racial and class polarization results in separate educational, employment, residential, and social opportunities for Florida’s Afro-Cuban and white Cuban populations (Grillo 2000, 9). At times, African Americans also ostracize Afro-Cubans because of cultural, language, and religious differences (Grillo 2000, 10-17). Moreover, Miami’s Cuban populace (regardless of their skin color or economic status) generally lacks group solidarity and cohesion (Alberts 2009, 250). An analysis of Afro-Cuban racial identity explains that Afro-Cubans fail to identify with African Americans: “The rhetoric of race in the United States allows for two possibilities: one is either black or white. In fact, there is a distinct African-American culture in the United States that is different from other black cultures” (Gonzalez 2006, 146). Thus, the literature we refer to in this section of our article has had mixed findings. Proponents of the minority group model find a group consciousness among black groups, but others dispute the existence of this consciousness. In this study, we wish to determine whether all people of Black African descent in Miami-Dade County—whether they trace their lineage to the 1800s or are immigrants, permanent residents, or first-, second-, or third-generation Americans—possess a common racial group consciousness. Most importantly, we wish to determine if possessing or lacking a common racial group consciousness has any influence on political participation.

The Impact of Group Consciousness on African American Political Participation

The term group consciousness has been defined in different ways by scholars, but it usually consists of one or more of the following four components: group identification (the individual identifies as a member of a racial minority group), polar affect (prefers interactions with the members of his or her racial group), polar power (compares the group’s status and resources to that of other racial groups), and systemic blame (primarily blames a discriminatory system for his or her racial group’s position; Miller et al. 1981, 500). Consistently, African Americans with lower levels of racial group consciousness have participated in political activities to a lesser extent than those with higher levels (Olsen 1970; Shingles 1981, 86; Verba and Nie 1972; Verba, Nie, and Kim 1978). Also, African Americans with significant group consciousness levels (regardless of their socioeconomic and educational status) utilize the political process as a way to address discrimination and at times have higher participatory rates than whites (Henry and Munoz 1991, 325).

Some analyses discover little or no correlation between group consciousness and black political participation with other factors, such as church membership, having a much greater impact (Tate 1993, 92). Verba, Schlozman, and Brady (1995) find that group consciousness fails to result in increased black political participation when other factors are considered. Finally, the research of Leighley and Vedlitz (1999) questions whether socioeconomic status, psychological resources, social connectedness, group identity or consciousness, and group conflict affect the political participation of Anglos, African Americans, Mexican Americans, and Asian Americans. Although they expect groups with higher rates of consciousness to have higher levels of participation, such is not the case with African Americans and Asian Americans (Leighley and Vedlitz 1999, 1111).

The concept of linked fate is a component of racial group consciousness that explains African American support of various public policies. In Behind the Mule: Race and Class in African-American Politics, Professor Michael C. Dawson (1994, 6, 87) examines the effect of group consciousness among African Americans from lower-, middle-, and upper-class backgrounds and finds a sense of consciousness and “politically homogenous” beliefs among them. Individual African American citizens support certain political and economic policies out of their belief that they benefit from policies that advantage African Americans as a group. Dawson (1994, 148) characterizes this solidarity among African Americans as “linked fate” which implies that “one’s fate is linked to that of the race.” This theory has been used to explain African American class divisions (Cohen 1999), gender relationships (Simien 2006), racial attitudes (Gay 2004), and support for black nationalism (Block 2010; R. A. Brown and Shaw 2002). It has also been used to determine whether African Americans have a linked fate with other racial and ethnic groups (Kaufmann 2003; Sanchez 2008).

Although research on linked fate has mostly explained its impact on the political preferences of African Americans, one might also expect that black ethnics believe that their fates are linked to others of African descent. In the same manner that African and black ethnics possess a common group consciousness despite their differences, they might also possess common perceptions of a linked fate based on the experiences of other heterogeneous groups. For example, many Latinos, despite the differences among the various subgroups, perceive a sense of linked fate because of their disadvantaged economic status, common experiences as immigrants, and other factors (Sanchez 2006; Sanchez and Masuoka 2010, 519; Stokes 2003). Moreover, southern Latino immigrants lack a heightened level of group consciousness with African Americans in urban cities but nevertheless believe that their fate is linked to that of other Latinos (McClain et al. 2006, 571). Perceptions of a linked fate have also resulted in the political mobilization of Asian Americans (Lien 1994; Masuoka 2006) and (women Simien 2005) from diverse backgrounds.

Explanation of Hypotheses

Hypothesis 1: African Americans have a shared racial group consciousness level with Afro-Caribbean Americans, Afro-Cuban Americans, African permanent residents, Haitian Americans, Haitian immigrants, and Haitian permanent residents because of their similar experiences with discrimination, interests, ideologies, and leadership preferences.

Despite the differences among our black respondents, we expect them to have a racial group consciousness because of the minority group model as well as their common interests, ideologies, and leadership preferences noted in the previous section. The research we refer to in earlier sections of this article alludes to the negative stereotypes black groups often have of each other, their competition for job opportunities and political power, and the sojourner (temporary resident) mentality of black immigrants, permanent residents, and naturalized citizens (Woldemikael 1989a; Rogers 2006; Stepick 1992; Waters 1994; Zephir 1996). However, we do not expect these factors to significantly inhibit their level of consciousness.

Hypothesis 2: Group consciousness has a more significant influence on African American, Afro-Caribbean American, Afro-Cuban American, and Haitian American political participation than does socioeconomic status.

Consistently, the extant literature has found that persons with higher educational levels, professional or managerial careers, and higher incomes are more politically involved for a variety of reasons. They have greater access to institutions and organizations that encourage participation, have more frequent interactions with politically active individuals, are more knowledgeable about political issues, and believe that they have an obligation to participate (Leighley 1990; Milbrath and Goel 1977, 92; Verba and Nie 1972; Verba, Nie, and Kim 1978; Verba, Schlozman, and Brady 1995). Although socioeconomic status is an important catalyst for political participation, we expect group consciousness to have a greater influence on African American participation because of the finding that African Americans often participate at higher rates than whites because of their consciousness (Verba and Nie 1972, 156-61). In the second hypothesis, we assess the impact of group consciousness and socioeconomic status on the political participation of only African Americans, Afro-Caribbean Americans, Afro-Cuban Americans, and Haitian Americans and exclude African permanent residents, Haitian immigrants, and Haitian permanent residents because of the inability of immigrants and permanent residents to vote in most American elections.

In addition, we expect our group consciousness variable to positively and significantly correlate with political activities in addition to voting. The forms of political participation emphasized in our study are attendance at rallies, contacting elected officials, donating funds, attending meetings with elected officials, signing petitions, volunteer activities, and voting participation. These activities reveal the political trust (confidence that the political system can be used to meet one’s needs) and political efficacy (belief that one can effect change by participating in the political process) of our respondents (Shingles 1981, 80). Racial group consciousness influences African Americans to actively participate in “campaigning (persuading others how to vote, working in a campaign, attending political meetings or rallies, contributing money to campaigns, and membership in political clubs) and communal work (efforts to solve community problems by working with others, helping to form groups or organizations and the initiation of personal political contact within the community)” (Shingles 1981, 82). Shingles (1981, 76) refers to these activities as “high-initiative conventional policy behavior” and observes that a strong degree of group consciousness among African Americans results in them having a “political mistrust” and a sense of “internal political efficacy.” In other words, their racial group consciousness leads them to distrust the political system but nevertheless believe it can be used to improve their lives if they participate in it (Shingles 1981, 84).

Data and Method

During the spring of 2010, we selected a systematic telephone sample of 2,389 residents in municipalities with the largest populations of people of Black African descent in Colonut Grove, El Portal, Florida City, Litle Haiti, Miami Gardens, North Miami, and Opa-Locka of Miami-Dade County and with Afro-Cuban respondents in the predominantly Cuban community of Little Havana. To find the sample size for our telephone surveys, we used the “sample size calculator” which allows researchers to determine the sample sizes of the populations under review in their research after determining the confidence level, confidence interval, and respondents’ populations (http://surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm). At a 95 percent confidence level and a confidence interval of +4 for the populations under review in our research, we selected a sample size of 599 African Americans, 594 Haitians, 598 Afro-Caribbeans, and 598 Afro-Cubans. To determine the sample population of the groups for our study, we divide the total population of African Americans in our targeted municipalities (approximately 222,500; factfinder.census.gov) by our confidence interval of four. At a 95 percent confidence level, a confidence interval of ±4, and a total Haitian population of 55,000 in Little Haiti, we selected a sample size of 594 Haitians, 598 Afro-Caribbeans (Afro-Caribbean population of 163,000), and 598 Afro-Cubans (population of 200,000).

In addition, 130 Haitian immigrants, 33 Latinos, 28 Whites, 26 Haitian permanent residents, 22 African permanent residents, and 1 Asian American respondent completed paper surveys. Our results are primarily based on the information we received from our phone surveys; however, we used a mixed sampling method (of probability and convenience sampling methods) to a limited degree because of our usage of the phone and paper surveys. While probability sampling allows one to make inferences from a large random sample from the population, convenience sampling merely involves the selection of individuals who are willing to participate in the study (Teddlie and Yu 2007, 77). Therefore, the results of convenience surveys are less reliable than are those of random surveys. When we first began our research in 2008, we distributed surveys in various areas of Miami-Dade County but later conducted a separate, more comprehensive, and more random telephone survey to ensure the accuracy of our findings. The usage of these kinds of mixed method strategies is commonplace in political science research (Plano Clark and Creswell 2010; Teddlie and Yu 2007). The individuals who agreed to complete the paper surveys in a public area of Little Haiti provided us with some additional insight about the perceptions black immigrants, black permanent residents, and the members of nonblack groups have about African American and black ethnic group consciousness and political participation.

We distinguish immigrants from permanent residents and citizens because of the possibility that the respondent’s legal status may affect his or her views about the usefulness of governmental programs and the importance of political participation. Permanent residents have a legal right to live and work in the United States, and many eventually become citizens. As a result, they benefit from more governmental programs than immigrants. Moreover, their abilities to vote in local and state elections that do not limit voting to U.S. citizens may give them a different perspective on political participation than immigrants have (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 2008, 1). On the other hand, many immigrants reside in the United States only temporarily, fail to become naturalized American citizens, and therefore have less of an interest in electoral politics (Mollenkopf, Ross, and Olson 2001, 41). Their legal status also excludes them from benefiting from most governmental programs. We also question the ethnicity, legal status, generation of citizenship, religion, and socioeconomic status of our respondents because these factors may influence black ethnics and African Americans differently about issues such as racial discrimination and collective action (McClain et al. 2009, 480).

We wish to make accurate inferences from our sample to the general population at a 95 percent confidence level and with a confidence interval of ±4. This means that 95 percent of the general African American population would have selected the same answers as the 599 African American respondents in our sample. To ensure a systematic and representative sample, we first chose a number at random from a telephone directory in each of our targeted communities and conducted interviews in English, Spanish, and Haitian Creole. After selecting our first interviewee, we called every tenth name on our list to ensure that we had a completely random sample in each municipality. The systematic sampling technique is superior to the simple random sampling technique because the latter is more vulnerable to sampling error (Carlson and Hyde 2003, 198-200).

In our study, African Americans, Afro-Caribbeans, Afro-Cubans, and Haitian Americans possess a common group identification when they acknowledge membership in a group of black African descent. For our definition of group identification, we asked our respondents to state the racial group to which they belong. African Americans and Haitians have a similar group identification when they classify themselves as members of a black racial and/or ethnic group (African, Afro-Caribbean, Afro-Cuban, or Haitian) or as African American. In addition, we differentiated between group consciousness—weak, moderate, and strong. Racial and ethnic groups have a strong degree of racial group consciousness when the following occurs: (1) they identify themselves as the members of a group of African descent, (2) they consider themselves to be members of a disadvantaged group that experiences racism, and (3) they believe that they should join coalitions with other black groups to improve their plight. They possess a moderate degree of group consciousness when they have a common group identification and agree on one of the other two criteria. Their racial group consciousness is weak when they possess only a common group identification.

Our definition of racial group consciousness is consistent with that used in other studies. According to most, it consists of three components—group identification, a perception of a shared status as a disadvantaged group, and a belief that collective action is necessary to improve the group’s plight (Jackson 1987, 632; Middleton 2008, 577-78; Shingles 1981, 77; Tate 1993, 90; Verba and Nie 1972, 160-61; Verba, Schlozman, and Brady 1995). Tables 1 and 2 reveal the questions we asked to ascertain the consciousness levels among our interviewees. Our group identification variable and racial group consciousness variables (amount of discrimination experienced, more discrimination from whites, collective action, and linked fate) were combined into one additive index that we label “consciousness.”³

Table 1.

Coding of Group Consciousness Variables

Identification as a Member of a Black American or Black Ethnic Group

What is your racial identity? African American (1); Afro-Cuban (2); White (3); Haitian immigrant (4); Haitian Permanent Resident (5); African Permanent Resident (6); Afro-Caribbean (7); Haitian American (8); Hispanic/Latino (9); Asian (10)

Shared Status as a Disadvantaged Group Member

First, do you believe that what happens generally to black people will affect what happens in your life? A lot (4); Some (3); Not very much (2); Not at all (1)

Support of Collective Action as Method to Improve the Group’s Plight

For black ethnics, Should African Americans and the members of your group work together or separately to gain political power? Work together (1); Work separately (0)

For African Americans, Should African Americans work with black ethnics or only work with African Americans to gain political power? Work with black ethnics (1); Work separately (0)

Factors that Influence Group Consciousness: Common Economic and Political Interests

For African Americans, Do you believe that your group and African Americans have similar economic interests? Yes (1); No (0) Similar political interests? Yes (1); No (0)

Similar social interests? Yes (1); No (0)

For black ethnics, Do you believe that your group and African Americans have similar economic interests? Yes (1); No (0) Similar political interests? Yes (1); No (0)

Similar social interests? Yes (1); No (0)

Factors that Influence Group Consciousness: Experience with Discrimination

How much discrimination have you experienced from whites, if any? A lot (4); Some (3); Not very much (2); Not at all (1)

If you have experienced discrimination from whites, have you received more from them than from other blacks? A lot (4); Some (3); Not very much (2); Not at all (1)

For black ethnics, Do African Americans treat you differently (in a disrespectful or discriminatory way) because of your membership in your racial group? Yes (1); No (0)

For African Americans, Do black ethnics treat you differently (in a disrespectful or discriminatory way) because of your membership in your racial group? Yes (1); No (0)

Factors that Influence Group Consciousness: Ideologies

What is your political ideology? Liberal (1); Conservative (2); Moderate (3)

Factors that Influence Group Consciousness: Leadership

For black ethnics, do the members of your group and African Americans usually support the same political candidates? Yes (1); No (0)

Table 2.

Coding of Political Participation Variables

Political Efficacy and Participation

Are you a registered voter? Yes (1); No (0)

What political party do you belong to? Democrat (1); Republican (2); Other (3)

How often do you vote in local, state, and national elections? Always vote (4); Sometimes miss one (3); Rarely vote (2); Never vote (1)

Are you a member of any churches, community, civic, or political organizations? Yes (1); No (0)

Do these churches/organizations mostly consist of African Americans, the members of another black ethnic group, or others? African Americans (1); Haitian Americans (2); Others (3)

How often do you attend political rallies? Quite frequently (4 or 5 times a year) (5); Frequently (2 or 3 times a year) (4); Occasionally (Once a year) (3); Seldom (Once or Twice every few years) (2); Never (1)

How often do you donate funds to candidates or on behalf of political functions? Quite frequently (4 or 5 times a year) (5); Frequently (2 or 3 times a year) (4); Occasionally (Once a year) (3); Seldom (Once or Twice every few years) (2); Never (1)

How often do you volunteer as a campaign worker? Never (1); Quite frequently (4 or 5 times a year) (5); Frequently (2 or 3 times a year) (4); Occasionally (Once a year) (3); Seldom (Once or Twice every few years) (2); Never (1)

How often do you sign petitions on behalf of political or social causes? Never (1); Seldom (Once or Twice every few years) (2); Occasionally (Once a year) (3); Frequently (2 or 3 times a year) (4); Quite frequently (4 or 5 times a year) (5)

How often do you contact your elected or public officials? Quite frequently (4 or 5 times a year) (5); Frequently (2 or 3 times a year) (4); Occasionally (Once a year) (3); Seldom (Once or Twice every few years) (2); Never (1)

How often do you attend town hall or other public meetings with political officials? Quite frequently (4 or 5 times a year) (5); Frequently (2 or 3 times a year) (4); Occasionally (Once a year) (3); Seldom (Once or Twice every few years) (2); Never (1)

General Political Participation Questions

For the members of black ethnic groups that are not African American, do African American politicians care enough about issues of concern to your group? A lot (3); A little (2); Don’t care at all (1)

For African Americans, do African, Afro-Caribbean, Afro-Cuban, and Haitian politicians care enough about issues of concern to African Americans? A lot (3); A little (2); Don’t care at all (1)

Do African Americans have enough political power to improve their social and economic conditions? Yes (1); No (0)

Do African, Afro-Caribbean, Afro-Cuban, and Haitian politicians have enough political power to improve their social and economic conditions? Yes (1); No (0)

Would you prefer to elect an African American, member of your racial group, or white person to represent your community? African American (1); Member of my black ethnic group (2); White (3); Depends of who the person is (4)

If you once lived in another country, did you actively participate in the political arena? Very involved (4); Somewhat involved (3); Rarely participated (2); Never involved (2)

Are you more interested in the politics of your home country or the U.S.? Home country (1); U.S. (2)

Demographic Information

What is your age?

Record the respondent’s gender Female (1); Male (0)

What is your income level? Above $17,000 (1); Below $17,000 (0)

What is the highest level of education that you completed? College degree (6), Some college (5) Technical/vocation (4), High school graduate (3), Some high school (2), 8th grade or less (1)?

Church Attendance

Do you ever attend church? Yes (1); No (0)

How often do you attend church? Quite frequently (4 or 5 times a year) (5); Frequently (2 or 3 times a year) (4); Occasionally (Once a year) (3); Seldom (Once or Twice every few years) (2); Never (1)

Does your church ever sponsor political meetings, voter registration drives, or have politicians speak to church groups? Quite frequently (4 or 5 times a year) (5); Frequently (2 or 3 times a year) (4); Occasionally (Once a year) (3); Seldom (Once or Twice every few years) (2); Never (1)

We primarily utilize an ordinary least squares regression analysis to assess the impact of group consciousness and socioeconomic status on political participation. We use this methodology because it provides a simple and straightforward way to examine the influence our independent variables on our dependent variables (Mannheim and Rich 1995). This methodology is also commonly used to examine survey data in research on group consciousness and political participation (Jackson 1987; Stokes 2003). As shown in Tables 1 and 2, we convert our nominal variables into dummy variables (measured on a 0- to 5-point scale) and then determine their impact on our dependent variable(s).

When examining the impact of racial group consciousness on political participation, we must control for other variables that possibly may influence an individual’s decision to engage in political participation such as age, citizenship status, gender, partisanship, and religion. We have included the age variable because of the almost universal finding that older persons participate at higher rates than do younger persons (Edwards, Wattenberg, and Lineberry 2008, 290-91). As stated previously, we also consider possible differences in the political participation of immigrants, permanent residents, and first-, second-, and third-generation citizens. We consider the impact of partisanship because Cubans and Haitians are more likely to identify as Republicans than African Americans and because of the possible impact of partisanship on African American participation (Grenier and Castro 1999, 289; Valbrun 2001, 1; Wielhouwer 2000). In addition, we include a religion variable (political church attendance) because African American members of “politicized” churches, which openly address political issues and encourage political involvement, are more likely to engage in various political activities including voting (R. K. Brown and Brown 2003; Calhoun-Brown 1996; Harris 1999; McClerking and McDaniel 2005; Reese and Brown 1995; Tate 1993). Our survey asked respondents whether they attended politicized churches and, if so, how frequently.

Findings and Implications of This Research

We can confirm our first hypothesis that African Americans have a shared racial group consciousness with Afro-Caribbean Americans, Afro-Cuban Americans, African permanent residents, Haitian Americans, Haitian immigrants, and Haitian permanent residents. Our race variable includes these groups and excludes our white, Latino, and Asian respondents. Our analysis finds a statistically significant Pearson’s correlation of .081 between our race and consciousness variables, which confirms the existence of a strong level of racial group consciousness between African Americans and black ethnics (Hacksaw 2005; Zephir 2004).

In our first hypothesis, we attribute this common consciousness to their similar experiences with American discrimination as well as their common interests, ideologies, and leadership preferences. To assess the amount of discrimination our black respondents received from whites, we combine our four discrimination questions in Table 1 into a “discrimination experienced” variable. According to Table 3, we can confirm this component of our first hypothesis because our discrimination experienced, ideology, interests, and leadership variables have a statistically significant relationship with our consciousness variable. Thus, our findings support the minority group model. Many of our immigrant, native-born, and naturalized black respondents have experienced discrimination and share a common skin color, which, in turn, results in a racial group consciousness among them (Henry and Munoz 1991; Jennings 1997). Despite their cultural, linguistic, and other differences, African Americans and black ethnics share a racial group consciousness.

Table 3.

Factors That Influence Racial Group Consciousness

Age	−0.510	(0.073)**
Discrimination experienced	0.074	(0.024)*
Gender	0.831	(2.34)
Ideology	0.249	(0.034)*
Interests	0.906	(0.069)*
Leadership	0.236	(0.057)*
Partisanship	0.138	(0.036)*
Political church attendance	0.448	(0.048)*
Second-generation citizen	0.085	(0.00)*
Socioeconomic status	0.360	(0.161)*
Sojourner	−0.072	(0.029)*
Stereotype	0.092	(0.293)
Constant	4.58	(6.39)
R ²	.817

Note: =2,216. Dependent variable: Consciousness. Includes the African American, Afro-Caribbean American, Afro-Cuban American, African permanent resident, Haitian American, Haitian immigrant, and Haitian permanent resident respondents (referred to in the first hypothesis) who answered our racial group consciousness survey questions.

p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .01.

In addition, our age, partisanship, second-generation citizen, socioeconomic status, and sojourner variables are statistically significant, but not our gender and stereotype variables. We discuss partisanship and socioeconomic status in the next section. Concerning age and second-generation citizenship, we can interpret the negative and significant status of these variables to mean that our younger and second-generation black respondents are more likely to have a shared racial group consciousness—a finding that is consistent with the scholarly literature. For example, first-generation Haitians in Evanston, Illinois, stressed their differences from African Americans, but second-generation younger Haitians assimilated into African American culture, eventually achieving a level of consciousness with them because of their frequent interactions (Woldemikael 1989a, 5). Waters’s (1994, 802) study of second-generation West Indian and Haitian American adolescents in New York City found that most identified as African American and downplayed their West Indian and Haitian ethnic identities because of their desire to assimilate into the African American culture they were surrounded by.

A correlation has been found between political church attendance and black political participation by others who have studied the influence of religion on black political behavior. We also find that political church attendance significantly increases black group consciousness. The correlation between these two variables has not been addressed by scholars but should be in future research. However, we find a negative relationship between our sojourner and consciousness variables. Respondents who identified as sojourners are less likely to possess a common racial group consciousness with our other black respondents. This finding is consistent with the view that sojourners assimilate into American life but fail to develop a strong consciousness with African Americans because of their plans to return to their home countries (Rogers 2006, 147; Zephir 1996, 70). As a result of their plans to return to their homeland, they “do not see the need to transform themselves into Americans or black Americans. They know that they have to adjust to the American way, but adaptation is by no means synonymous with Americanization or black Americanization” (Zephir 1996, 70). We felt it was important to the study to examine not only variables that we believe result in a racial group consciousness but also those that might possibly result in the lack of one.

Moreover, respondents who have experienced discrimination from whites have a high level of racial group consciousness, which again provides support for the minority group model. Those expressing negative stereotypes about African Americans and black ethnics (stereotype variable) did not have a statistically significant racial group consciousness level. According to the literature, black ethnics and African Americans often have derogatory stereotypes about each other. Many black ethnics believe that they have nothing to gain from alliances with African Americans and believe that the latter fail to take advantage of opportunities in America. For example, it has been noted, “To many Haitians, the label Haitian also already carries negative connotations. The label black American will carry additional negative stereotypes and will make it even more difficult for them to improve their social conditions. However, this very same fear triggers a certain sense of solidarity with black Americans and the identification of common interests” (Zephir 1996, 91). African Americans also have negative perceptions of black ethnics with many perceiving them as “too docile, too subservient to white employers, and above all, too foreign to the realities of Black America” (Portes and Stepick 1993, 55). According to the results in Table 3, these negative beliefs have no impact on their racial group consciousness.

Our second hypothesis predicts that racial group consciousness has a more significant influence on African American, Afro-Caribbean American, Afro-Cuban, and Haitian American political participation than does socioeconomic status. According to the results in Table 4, we cannot confirm the second hypothesis. In the table, we combined our education and income variables in a “socioeconomic status” variable and found that it significantly affects only their attendance at rallies and voting. However, the group consciousness variable positively and significantly affects all forms of African American participation. Socioeconomic status affects a greater number of Afro-Caribbean, Afro-Cuban, and Haitian American participatory activities than racial group consciousness because the latter significantly influences only the attendance at rallies and voting of Afro-Caribbean and Haitian Americans and the voting of Afro-Cubans. However, socioeconomic status influences five Afro-Caribbean, three Haitian, and two Afro-Cuban political activities. Finally, both group consciousness and socioeconomic status positively and significantly influences voting for all four of the groups in the second hypothesis.

Table 4.

Effect of Group Consciousness on Political Participation

	Attendance at rallies		Contacting officials		Donating funds		Meeting officials		Signing petitions		Volunteer activities		Voting participation
African Americans
Age	0.030	(0.00)**	0.010	(0.00)**	0.019	(0.00)**	0.008	(0.00)	0.011	(0.00)*	0.011	(0.00)*	0.176	(0.08)*
Consciousness	0.163	(0.02)**	0.034	(0.01)**	0.141	(0.02)**	0.034	(0.01)**	171	(1.1)*	0.036	(0.01)**	0.123	(0.03)**
Gender	0.249	(0.15)*	0.022	(0.12)*	0.039	(0.14)*	0.024	(0.11)*	0.179	(0.13)**	0.029	(0.15)**	0.013	(0.01)*
Partisanship	0.004	(0.00)	0.004	(0.00)*	0.013	(0.00)**	0.004	(0.00)*	0.002	(0.00)**	0.013	(0.00)**	0.038	(0.03)**
Political church	0.007	(0.00)	0.001	(0.062)	−0.009	(0.01)	−0.014	(0.06)	0.002	(0.00)	0.017	(0.01)	0.014	(0.10)*
Socioeconomic status	0.061	(0.07)*	0.207	(0.05)	0.125	(0.07)	0.172	(0.06)	0.135	(0.05)	0.201	(0.07)	0.645	(0.26)*
Constant	0.161		5.334		2.953		5.384		5.181		2.694		−7.378
R ²	.934		.095		.941		.074		.079		.931		.291
Afro-Caribbean Americans
Age	0.005	(0.00)	0.009	(0.00)	0.012	(0.00)**	0.009	(0.00)**	0.022	(0.18)	0.008	(0.00)**	0.033	(0.00)**
Consciousness	0.012	(0.00)**	0.001	(0.00)	0.008	(0.00)	0.005	(0.00)	0.000	(0.00)	0.005	(0.00)	0.971	(0.01)**
Gender	0.196	(0.07)**	0.108	(0.03)**	0.026	(0.06)**	0.108	(0.03)**	0.015	(3.4)	0.009	(0.03)*	0.022	(0.09)
Partisanship	0.001	(0.00)	0.002	(0.00)	0.001	(0.00)	0.002	(0.00)	0.034	(0.04)	0.002	(0.00)	0.011	(0.00)
Political church	0.122	(0.08)	−0.112	(0.037)	−0.024	(0.06)	−0.112	(0.03)	0.116	(3.8)	−0.127	(0.04)	−0.629	(0.10)
Second generation	0.006	(0.00)	0.009	(0.00)**	0.004	(0.00)	0.013	(0.00)**	0.292	(0.08)**	0.013	(0.02)**	0.020	(0.00)**
Socioeconomic status	0.199	(0.13)	0.495	(0.05)**	0.361	(0.10)**	0.495	(0.05)**	0.023	(0.01)	0.047	(0.06)**	1.03	(0.16)**
Constant	3.642		0.943		2.665		0.943		16.1004		1.043		2.007
R ²	.275		.402		.330		.402		.076		.326		.601
Afro-Cuban Americans
Age	0.061	(0.03)*	0.050	(0.03)	0.064	(0.03)*	0.051	(0.03)	0.044	(0.03)	0.053	(0.04)*	0.111	(0.03)**
Consciousness	0.003	(0.00)	0.000	(0.05)	0.002	(0.00)	0.002	(0.00)	0.001	(0.00)	0.002	(0.00)	0.017	(0.00)**
Gender	0.474	(0.67)	1.283	(0.66)	0.959	(0.46)	1.240	(0.65)	1.250	(0.67)	0.999	(0.67)	0.574	(0.64)
Partisanship	0.251	(0.04)	0.249	(0.03)	0.257	(0.04)	0.252	(0.03)	0.256	(0.03)	0.268	(0.03)	0.240	(0.03)
Political church	−0.001	(0.029)	0.008	(0.053)	0.025	(0.012)	0.017	(0.053)	0.010	(0.006)	0.002	(0.013)	0.023	(0.013)
Second generation	0.265	(0.03)	0.278	(0.03)**	0.266	(0.03)**	0.280	(0.035)	0.283	(0.03)**	0.275	(0.03)**	0.250	(0.03)**
Socioeconomic status	0.011	(0.05)	0.021	(0.05)	0.004	(0.05)	0.018	(0.05)	0.012	(0.05)	0.001	(0.05)*	0.063	(0.05)**
Constant	7.985		9.101		8.232		1.884		8.576		6.710		3.931
R ²	.390		.429		.391		.442		.416		.402		.856
Haitian Americans
Age	0.007	(0.00)**	0.006	(0.024)*	0.001	(0.00)*	0.028	(0.02)	0.004	(0.00)	0.018	(0.00)**	0.039	(0.042)**
Consciousness	0.013	(0.00)*	0.005	(0.044)	0.005	(0.00)	0.004	(0.04)	0.001	(0.00)	0.001	(0.01)	0.006	(0.076)**
Gender	0.021	(0.09)**	0.387	(0.755)	0.062	(0.13)*	0.287	(0.76)*	0.037	(0.07)	0.156	(0.16)**	0.529	(1.318)
Partisanship	0.004	(0.00)	0.010	(0.017)	0.001	(0.00)	0.011	(0.01)	0.002	(0.00)	0.004	(0.00)	0.258	(0.030)
Political church	0.005	(0.004)	0.000	(0.001)	0.003	(0.001)	0.000	(0.001)	0.000	(0.001)	0.002	(0.005)	0.002	(0.008)
Registered Voters	0.234	(0.04)**	0.007	(0.04)	0.004	(0.00)**	0.030	(0.05)	−0.033	(0.07)	0.022	(0.01)	0.004	(0.07)
Second generation	0.009	(0.00)*	0.028	(0.01)*	0.004	(0.00)*	0.009	(0.02)	−0.006	(0.03)*	0.026	(0.02)	0.104	(0.04)*
Socioeconomic status	0.210	(0.04)	0.437	(0.328)	0.008	(0.05)	0.310	(0.33)	0.164	(0.03)**	0.288	(0.07)**	0.098	(0.572)**
Constant	0.960		7.705		1.783		8.120		5.597		6.034		4.960
R²	.251		.010		.025		.009		.125		.168		.277

Note: = 2,038. Includes the African American, Afro-Caribbean, Afro-Cuban and Haitian American respondents (referred to in the second hypothesis) who answered our political participation and group consciousness questions.

p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .01.

Because of our previous observations about age and second-generation citizenship, we are not surprised that these variables have a positive and significant impact on most of the political participatory activities of our respondents. Gender also heavily influences African American, Afro-Caribbean American, and Haitian American participation. Few scholarly works have examined the impact of gender on African American and black ethnic political participation. Our analysis finds that African American women are more likely to vote and engage in all forms of political participation than African American men. Nealy (2009, 244) also found that African American women, regardless of their marital status, incomes, and educational levels, voted at higher rates than did African American men. From 1968 to 1992 in presidential elections, they not only had higher voter turnouts than African American men but also were more loyal supporters of Democratic candidates (Nealy 2009, 216). Other research found a more vigorous rate of participation among black women in political activities with the exception of voting (Tate 1993; Calhoun-Brown 1996). However, our finding is contrary to that of Simien (2006, 109), who found that black men have higher rates of participation in political campaigning, protest activities, and voting than do black women. Our gender variables also positively and significantly correlate with many of the participatory activities of our Afro-Caribbean and Haitian American respondents. Men dominate politics and government in the home countries of these women, but Afro-Caribbean and Haitian women are now actively participating in many American political activities (Robnett 1999; Valbrun 2003).

Moreover, partisanship heavily influences African American participation. The impact of partisan identification on African American participation has been documented in the literature (Jenkins, Jacobs, and Agnone 2003; Minkoff 1997; Wielhouwer 2000). For example, in a study of social movements, Minkoff (1997) found that a Democratic Party advantage in Congress had a significant impact on Black political activity—in particular, political protest. Likewise, Jenkins, Jacobs, and Agnone (2003) found that the strength of northern Democrats during the cold war period facilitated the expansion of African American political protest. One of the reasons why Democratic Party affiliation serves as such a significant factor in predicting African American political behavior is because, as Wielhouwer (2000) notes, African Americans constitute one of the party’s most loyal and cohesive components. This loyalty reached its apex during the civil rights movement of the 1960s and helped African Americans forge a degree of power within the party (see Harris, 2006). Thus, partisanship has always influenced African American political participation. Like Bartels (2000, 35), we see that it continues to influence American (viz., African American) political participation.

Finally, we find a statistically significant relationship between African American attendance of political churches and voting, but not with other political activities. This confirms a small body of research detailing the impact of religion (particularly membership in churches that address political issues) on black voting (R. K. Brown and Brown 2003; Tate 1993). Political church attendance has no measurable impact on any of the political activities of Afro-Caribbeans, Afro-Cubans, and Haitians, however.

Conclusion

We can conclude that racial group consciousness has a major influence on black political participation as other research has alluded. Our research discovers, first, that African Americans share a group consciousness with other black groups because of their similar experiences with discrimination, common interests, parallel ideologies, and preferences for the same leaders.

Second, racial group consciousness has more of an impact on African American political participation than socioeconomic status, but the latter more heavily influences Afro-Caribbean, Afro-Cuban, and Haitian American participation. Other factors such as age, gender, generation of citizenship, partisanship, and political church attendance also affect the political activities of African Americans, Afro-Caribbeans, Afro-Cubans, and Haitian Americans, but to varying degrees. It remains to be seen whether African Americans and black ethnic groups will be able to use their consciousness to develop electoral coalitions and thus increase black representation in Miami-Dade County where they traditionally have been marginalized by Anglo and white Cuban majorities. However, they possess the potential to increase their representation if their populations increase and they transform their group consciousness into viable political coalitions.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared that they had no conflicts of interests with respect to their authorship or the publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article:The authors received funding from the Department of Political Science Summer Research Fund at the University of Florida, the University of Florida College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Humanities Enhancement Grant, and a grant from the U.S. Senator Bob Graham Center for Public Service at the University of Florida.

Notes

References

Alberts

Heike C.

2009. “The Missing Evidence for Ethnic Solidarity among Cubans in Miami.” Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies 7:250-66.

Bartels

Larry M.

2000. “Partisanship and Voting Behavior, 1952–1996.” American Journal of Political Science 44:35-50.

Block

Ray

Jr.

2010. “What About Disillusionment? Exploring the Pathways to Black Nationalism.” Political Behavior 32:1-25.

Brown

R. Khari

Brown

Ronald E.

2003. “Faith and Works: Church Based Social Capital Resources and African American Political Activism.” Social Forces 82:617-41.

Brown

Robert A.

Shaw

Todd C.

2002. “Separate Nations: Two Attitudinal Dimensions of Black Nationalism.” Journal of Politics 64:22-44.

Calhoun-Brown

Allison

. 1996. “African American Churches and Political Mobilization.” Journal of Politics 58: 935-53.

Carlson

James M.

Hyde

Mark S.

2003. Doing Empirical Political Research. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Carmichael

Stokely

Hamilton

Charles V.

1967. Black Power: The Politics of Liberation in America. New York: Random House.

Cohen

Cathy

. 1999. The Boundaries of Blackness: AIDS and the Breakdown of Black Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

10.

Dawson

Michael

. 1994. Behind the Mule: Race and Class in African-American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

11.

Edwards

George C.

III Wattenberg

Martin P.

Lineberry

Robert L.

2008. Government in America: People, Politics, and Policy. New York: Longman.

12.

Gay

Claudine

. 2004. “Putting Race in Context: Identifying the Environmental Determinants of Black Racial Attitudes.” American Political Science Review 98:547-62.

13.

Gonzalez

Michelle A.

2006. Afro-Cuban Theology: Religion, Race, Culture, and Identity. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.

14.

Grenier

Guillermo J.

Castro

Max J.

1999. “Triadic Politics: Ethnicity, Race, and Politics in Miami, 1959–1998.” Pacific Historical Review 68:273-92.

15.

Grillo

Evelio

. 2000. Black Cuban, Black American: A Memoir. Houston, TX: Arte Publico.

16.

Hacksaw

Alana

. 2005. “The Multiple Meanings of Race and Ethnicity: Understanding the Political Relevance of Ethnic Distinctiveness and Racial Group Interests Among Second-Generation West Indians.” Prepared for the Summer Institute on International Migration, University of California, Irvine.

17.

Harris

Fredrick C.

1999. Something Within: Religion in African-American Political Activism. New York: Oxford University Press.

18.

Harris

Frederick C.

Sinclair-Chapman

Valeria

McKenzie

Brian D.

2006. Countervailing Forces in African-American Civic Activism, 1973-1994. New York: Cambridge University Press.

19.

Henry

Charles P.

Munoz

Carlos

Jr.

1991. “Ideological and Interest links in California rainbow politics.” In Racial and Ethnic Politics in California, edited by Byran

O. Jackson

Michael

B. Preston

323-338. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

20.

Jackson

Byran O.

1987. “The Effects of Racial Group Consciousness on Political Mobilization in American Cities.” Western Research Quarterly 40:631-46.

21.

Jenkins

J. Craig

Jacobs

David

Agnone

Jon

. 2003. “Political Opportunities and African-American Protest, 1948–1997.” American Journal of Sociology 109:277-303.

22.

Jennings

James

. 1997. “Introduction: New Challenges for Black Activism in the United States.” In Race and Politics: New Challenges and Responses for Black Activism, edited by James

Jennings

1-18. London: Verso Press.

23.

Kaufmann

Karen

. 2003. “Cracks in the Rainbow: Group Commonality as a Basis for Latino and African-American Political Coalitions.” Political Research Quarterly 56:199-210.

24.

Leighley

Jan

. 1990. “Social Interaction and Contextual Influences on Political Participation.” American Politics Quarterly 18:459-75.

25.

Leighley

Jan E.

Vedlitz

Arnold

. 1999. “Race, Ethnicity, and Political Participation: Competing Models and Contrasting Explanations.” Journal of Politics 61:1092-1114.

26.

Lien

Pei-te

. 1994. “Ethnicity and Political Participation: A Comparison between Asian and Mexican Americans.” Political Behavior 16:237-64.

27.

Mannheim

Jarol B.

Rich

Richard C.

1995. Empirical Political Analysis: Research Methods in Political Science. New York: Longman.

28.

Masuoka

Natalie

. 2006. “Together They Become One: Examining the Predictors of Panethnic Group Consciousness Among Asian Americans and Latinos.” Social Science Quarterly 87:993-1011.

29.

McClain

Paula D.

Carew

Jessica Johnson

Eugene

Walton

Jr. Watts

Candis S.

2009. “Group Membership, Group Identity and Group Consciousness: Evolving Racial Identity in American Politics.” Annual Review of Political Science 12 (June): 471-485.

30.

McClain

Paula D.

Carter

Niambi M.

DeFrancescoSoto

Victoria M.

Lyle

Monique L.

Grynaviski

Jeffrey D.

Nunnally

Shayla C.

Scotto

Thomas J.

Kendrick

J. Alan

Lackey

Gerald F.

and Kendra Davenport Cotton 2006. “Racial Distancing in a Southern City: Latino Immigrants’ Views of Black Americans.” Journal of Politics 68:571-84.

31.

McClerking

Harwood K.

McDaniel

Eric L.

2005. “Belonging and Doing: Political Churches and Black Political Participation.” Political Psychology 26:721-33.

32.

McCormick

Joseph P.

Franklin

Sekou

. 2000. “Expressions of Racial Consciousness in the African American Community: Data from the Million Man March.” In Black and Multiracial Politics in America, edited by Alex-Assensoh

Yvette M.

Hanks

Lawrence J.

315-36. New York: New York University Press.

33.

Middleton

Richard T.

IV . 2008. “Institutions, Inculcation, and Black Racial Identity: Pigmentocracy vs. the Rule of Hypodescent.” Social Identities 14:567-85.

34.

Milbrath

Lester W.

Goel

M. L.

1977. Political Participation: How and Why Do People Get Involved in Politics? 2nd ed. Chicago: Rand McNally.

35.

Miller

Arthur

Gurin

Patricia

Gurin

Gerald

Malanchuk

Oksama

. 1981. “Group Consciousness and Political Participation.” American Journal of Political Science 25:494-511.

36.

Minkoff

Debra C.

1997. “The Sequencing of Social Movements.” American Sociological Review 62:779-99.

37.

Mollenkopf

John Hull

Timothy

Ross

David

Olson

. 2001. “Immigrant Political Participation in New York and Los Angeles.” In Governing American Cities: Inter-ethnic Coalitions, Competition, and Conflict, edited by Jones-Correa

Michael

17-70. New York: Russell Sage.

38.

Nealy

Lisa Nikol

. 2009. African American Women Voters: Racializing Religiosity, Political Consciousness and Progressive Political Action in U.S. Presidential Elections from 1964 to 2008. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

39.

Olsen

Marvin

. 1970. “Social and Political Participation of Blacks.” American Sociological Review 35:682-96.

40.

Vickie

Plano Clark

Creswell

John W.

2010. The Mixed Methods Reader. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

41.

Portes

Alejandro

Stepick

Alex

. 1993. City on the Edge: The Transformation of Miami. Berkeley: University of California Press.

42.

Reese

Laura

Brown

Ronald E.

1995. “The Effects of Religious Messages on Racial Identity and System Blame among African Americans.” Journal of Politics 57:24-43.

43.

Robnett

Belinda

. 1999. “African-American and Afro-Caribbean Women’s Political Struggles: Navigating Courses through White Male Supremacist Societies.” Journal of Women’s History 11:203-9.

44.

Rogers

Reuel R.

2000. “Afro-Caribbean Immigrants, African Americans, and the Politics of Group Identity.” In Black and Multiracial Politics in America, edited by Alex-Assensoh

Yvette M.

Hanks

Lawrence J.

15-59. New York: New York University Press.

45.

Rogers

Reuel R.

2006. Afro-Caribbean Immigrants and the Politics of Incorporation: Ethnicity, Exception, or Exit. New York: Cambridge University Press.

46.

Sanchez

Gabriel R.

2006. “The Role of Group Consciousness in Political Participation among Latinos in the United States.” American Politics Research 34:427-50.

47.

Sanchez

Gabriel R.

2008. “Latino Group Consciousness and Perceptions of Commonality with African Americans.” Social Science Quarterly 89:428-44.

48.

Sanchez

Gabriel R.

Masuoka

Natalie

. 2010. “Brown-Utility Heuristic? The Presence and Contributing Factors of Latino Linked Fate.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 32:519-31.

49.

Sawyer

Mark

. 2006. Racial Politics in Post-Revolutionary Cuba. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

50.

Shingles

Richard D.

1981. “Black Consciousness and Political Participation: The Missing Link.” American Political Science Review 75:76-91.

51.

Simien

Evelyn M.

2005. “Race, Gender, and Linked Fate.” Journal of Black Studies 9:267-89.

52.

Simien

Evelyn M.

2006. Black Feminist Voices in Politics. Albany: State University of New York Press.

53.

Stepick

Alex

III.

1992. “The Refugees Nobody Wants: Haitians in Miami.” In Miami Now! Immigration, Ethnicity, and Social Change, edited by Grenier

Guillermo J.

Alex

Stepick

III 57-82. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.

54.

Stokes

Atiya Kai

. 2003. “Latino Group Consciousness and Political Participation.” American Politics Research 31:361-78.

55.

Tate

Katherine L.

1993. From Protest to Politics: The New Black Voters in American Elections. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

56.

Teddlie

Charles

Fen

. 2007. “Mixed Methods Sampling: A Typology with Examples.” Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1:77-100.

57.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. 2008. “Now That You Are a Permanent Resident.” http://www.uscis.gov.

58.

Valbrun

Marjorie

. 2001. “Haitian-Americans: Their Search for Political Identity in South Florida.” APF Reporter 20 (1): 1-10.

59.

Valbrun

Marjorie

. 2003. “Coming Out Party: Haitian-American Women Step Out from Behind the Scenes and into U.S. Politics.” APF Reporter 20 (4): 1-2.

60.

Verba

Sidney

Nie

Norman

. 1972. Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper & Row.

61.

Verba

Sidney

Nie

Norman

Kim

Jae-On

. 1978. Participation and Political Equality. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

62.

Verba

Sidney

Schlozman

Kay

Brady

Henry

. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

63.

Warren

Christopher L.

Moreno

Dario V.

2003. “Power Without a Program: Hispanic Incorporation in Miami.” In Racial Politics in American Cities, 3rd ed., edited by Browning

Rufus P.

Marshall

Dale Rogers

Tabb

David H.

281-308. New York: Addison Wesley.

64.

Waters

Mary C.

1994. “Ethnic and Racial Identities of Second-Generation Black Immigrants in New York City.” International Migration Review 28:795-820.

65.

Waters

Mary C.

1999. Black Identities: West Indian Immigrant Dreams and American Realities. New York: Russell Sage Foundation and Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

66.

Wielhouwer

Peter W.

2000. “Releasing the Fetters: Parties and the Mobilization of the African-American Electorate.” Journal of Politics 62:206-22.

67.

Woldemikael

Tekle

. 1989a. Becoming Black American: Haitians and American Institutions in Evanston, Illinois. New York: AMS Press.

68.

Woldemikael

Tekle

. 1989b. “A Case Study of Race Consciousness among Haitian Immigrants.” Journal of Black Studies 20:224-39.

69.

Zephir

Flore

. 1996. Haitian Immigrants in Black America: A Sociological and Sociolinguistic Portrait. Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.

70.

Zephir

Flore

. 2004. The Haitian Americans. Westport, CT: Greenwood.