Ethnic Hostility among Ethnic Majority and Minority Groups

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 6.2 continued Lower general to higher general -4.40** 0.00 -4.40** 0.00 Higher general -3.41** 0.00 -3.43** 0.00 Higher general to pre-university -2.66** 0.00 -2.69** 0.00 Mean grade score secondary education (centred) 4.46** 0.00 4.43** 0.00 Mean grade score secondary education squared 0.59* 0.02 0.65** 0.01 Number of exact subjects secondary education (centred) 3.32** 0.00 3.31** 0.00 Number of exact subjects secondary education squared 0.15~ 0.10 0.15 0.11 Exam results higher education (failed exams=reference) No exams -0.15 0.87 -0.16 0.86 Did not participate in exams 2.71 0.11 2.67 0.11 Passed exams 2.82** 0.00 2.82** 0.00 Mean grade score secondary education*Parental eduation (university=reference) Mean grade score secondary education*Primary, lower vocational and lower general 1.56 0.01 Mean grade score secondary education*Intermediate vocational 0.32 0.69 Mean grade score secondary education*Higher general and pre-university 0.70 0.40 Mean grade score secondary education*Professional college 0.90 0.14 Mean grade score secondary education*LN(parental income) 0.93 0.03 Mean grade score secondary education*Ethnic group (other=reference) Mean grade score secondary education*Dutch -0.71 0.33 Mean grade score secondary education*Surinamese/Antilleans 0.49 0.77 Mean grade score secondary education*Turks/Moroccans -2.08 0.30 Variance components Observations (level 1) N=27160 696.85 0.00 446.94 0.00 447.21 0.00 390.63 0.00 390.63 0.00 Individuals (level 2) N=6790 172.15 0.00 197.96 0.00 121.79 0.00 135.36 0.00 135.24 0.00 ** p
6.4.2 Success probabilities Table 6.2 shows the results of a hierarchical random intercept model with the four subjective success probabilities (one per educational option, level 1) nested in the individual students (level 2). With Table 6.2 we test whether differences in ability cause analogous differentiation in students’ subjective probability of educational success (hypothesis 1). The subjective probability of success differs across educational levels and fi elds of study. On average, men perceive their chances of success at the professional college level in non-science fi elds as approximately 84 per cent, as shown by the constant in model 1 (Table 6.2). Science fi elds within professional colleges are considered to be more diffi cult than non-science fi elds at the university level; success probabilities are 57.27 per cent (84.36 + -27.09) versus 71.27 per cent (84.36 + -13.08), respectively. On average women estimate their chances 8.60 per cent lower than men (Table 6.2, model 1). This stems from the fact that women estimate their chances within science fi elds approximately 21 per cent lower than men (6.39 + -27.23; Table 6.2, model 2). On the other hand, women estimate their chances within non-science fi elds somewhat (but signifi cantly) higher than men: 6 per cent higher for the professional college–non-science track (as shown by the main effect of ‘women’) and 2 per cent higher for the university–non-science track (i.e. 6.39 + -4.09; Table 6.2, model 2). Native Dutch students estimate their chances 1.52 per cent lower than western ethnic minorities. The success probabilities of Surinamese/Antileans and Turks/Moroccans do not signifi cantly deviate from the success probabilities of western ethnic minorities. Students from more advantaged backgrounds estimate their success probabilities higher on average; students whose parents have maximally attained a degree from a professional college estimate their chances 5.23 per cent lower than students with at least one parent with a university degree. Students with richer parents estimate their likelihood of success higher than poorer students (Table 6.2, model 1 and 2). Model 3 adds ability to model 2. Ability is an important determinant of the subjective likelihood of success in higher education; the explained variance of model 3 increased by 7.6 per cent compared to model 2. 2 Students whose teacher’s recommendation after primary school was below higher general secondary education estimate their chances lower than students whose primary school teacher recommended a higher secondary school level. Both the main effects and the squared effects of mean grade point average and number of science subjects are signifi cant (at =0.10, two-tailed). The effect of the mean grade point average in secondary school on the success probabilities increases the higher the grade point average is. The same holds for the number of science subjects taken in secondary school. Students who failed their fi rst exams estimate their success probabilities approximately 3 per cent lower than students who passed their fi rst exams (Table 6.2, model 3). After controlling for these ability measures, the main effect of being a women increases from 6.39 to 11.12, implying that women’s underestimation of their success probability in science subjects diminished by some 5 per cent in comparison with men and their overestimation of their success probability in non-science fi elds increased by 5 per cent (model 3). On average, the differences between men and women almost halved; from -8.60 (model 1) to -3.39 (not shown). 130
Page 1 and 2:
ETHNIC HOSTILITY AMONG ETHNIC MAJOR
Page 3:
Promotores: prof. dr. N. D. de Graa
Page 6 and 7:
Science is so much more fun when yo
Page 8 and 9:
3.4.1 Opposition to ethnic intermar
Page 10:
8.3.1 Theoretical implications for
Page 14 and 15:
1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 NEW QUESTIONS 1
Page 16 and 17:
1. Introduction | New questions ski
Page 18 and 19:
1. Introduction | The setting of th
Page 20 and 21:
1. Introduction | Research question
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Table 1.1 Outline of empirical chap
Page 28:
1. Introduction | Notes 27
Page 32 and 33:
2. SOCIAL MOBILITY AND ETHNIC HOSTI
Page 34 and 35:
2. Social Mobility and Ethnic Hosti
Page 36 and 37:
social conformity favour more toler
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
e more important than the infl uenc
Page 42 and 43:
2.4 RESULTS 2. Social Mobility and
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48:
Page 51 and 52:
1987). Assessment of the importance
Page 53 and 54:
The actual ethnic competition withi
Page 55 and 56:
(Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). Wagner e
Page 57 and 58:
seven categories: no-religion, Roma
Page 59 and 60:
the lower the opposition to ethnic
Page 61 and 62:
Table 3.1 Hierarchical linear inter
Page 63 and 64:
Table 3.2 Hierarchical linear inter
Page 65 and 66:
In model 8 we focus on the characte
Page 67 and 68:
Table 3.3 Comparison of explanatory
Page 69 and 70:
3.5 CONCLUSIONS We observed a weak
Page 71 and 72:
9. The models presented in this cha
Page 74 and 75:
4. THE LOCAL LIVING ENVIRONMENT AND
Page 76 and 77:
unit such as states or countries, w
Page 78 and 79:
4. The Local Living Environment and
Page 80 and 81: 4. The Local Living Environment and
Page 84 and 85: 4.4 RESULTS 4. The Local Living Env
Page 86 and 87: Table 4.2 continued Household compo
Page 92: 4. The Local Living Environment and
Page 96 and 97: 5. TRENDS IN ETHNIC EDUCATIONAL INE
Page 98 and 99: 5. Trends in Ethnic Educational Ine
Page 102 and 103: the worsening economic conditions o
Page 110 and 111: Table 5.3 continued Male (Female=re
Page 112 and 113: Table 5.4 continued Male (Female= r
Page 118 and 119: 6. EXPLANATIONS FOR ETHNIC EDUCATIO
Page 120 and 121: To answer our research questions, w
Page 122 and 123: 6. Explanations for Ethnic Educatio
Page 126 and 127: Table 6.1 continued Pre-university
Page 138 and 139: Model 4 includes both the ability m
Page 144 and 145: 7. EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT AND ETHNI
Page 146 and 147: among four ethnic minority groups i
Page 148 and 149: 7. Educational Attainment and Ethni
Page 152 and 153: Table 7.1 Summary of hypotheses Cor
Page 156 and 157: Table 7.2 continued Control variabl
Page 160 and 161: Table 7.3 continued 2nd gen. Turks
Page 164 and 165: Table 7.4 continued 2nd gen. Turks
Page 168: 7. Educational Attainment and Ethni
Page 172 and 173: 8. CONCLUSION 8.1 INTRODUCTION 8. C
Page 174 and 175: 8.2 QUESTIONS, RESULTS AND CONCLUSI
Page 176 and 177: 8. Conclusion | Questions, results
Page 178 and 179: 8. Conclusion | Questions, results
Page 180 and 181:
8. Conclusion | Questions, results
Page 182 and 183:
local living environments (on ethni
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
8. Conclusion | Theoretical implica
Page 192 and 193:
ethnic hosting threat contact / res
Page 194 and 195:
8. Conclusion | Retrospect and pros
Page 196 and 197:
8. Conclusion | Notes 195
Page 198 and 199:
APPENDIX Appendix 197
Page 200 and 201:
APPENDIX 2.2 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
Page 202 and 203:
Appendix 2.3 continued Mobility typ
Page 204 and 205:
APPENDIX 2.4 TUTORIAL DIAGONAL MOBI
Page 206 and 207:
*********MEANS and OLS***********.
Page 208 and 209:
impact on depY. *The relative impac
Page 210 and 211:
Appendix *The impact of the destina
Page 212 and 213:
vector d = d1 to d6. vector p = p1
Page 214 and 215:
*and with constraints our model wou
Page 216 and 217:
Appendix 215
Page 218 and 219:
Appendix 3.1 continued father’s s
Page 220 and 221:
APPENDIX 3.3 OPPOSITION TO ETHNIC I
Page 222 and 223:
Appendix Appendix 4.1 continued Eco
Page 224 and 225:
Appendix APPENDIX 4.3 VARIANCE COMP
Page 226 and 227:
Appendix 5.1 continued Ethnicity N
Page 228 and 229:
APPENDIX 5.3 ROBUSTNESS OF ES ASSOC
Page 230 and 231:
Appendix APPENDIX 5.5 MULTI-NOMINAL
Page 232 and 233:
Appendix 7.1 continued 2nd gen. 2nd
Page 234 and 235:
Appendix 233
Page 236 and 237:
BIBLIOGRAPHY Bibliography Abu-Rayya
Page 238 and 239:
Bibliography Buijs, F. J., Demant,
Page 240 and 241:
Bibliography (pp. 345-383). Oxford:
Page 242 and 243:
Bibliography euthanasia, homosexual
Page 244 and 245:
Bibliography Onderzoek (ISEO). Mart
Page 246 and 247:
Bibliography Politics, 58(1), 41-72
Page 248 and 249:
Bibliography Worchel (Eds.), The so
Page 250 and 251:
Bibliography 249
Page 252 and 253:
Summary in Dutch / Nederlandstalige
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
CURRICULUM VITAE Curriculum Vitae J
Page 266 and 267:
ICS DISSERTATION SERIES ICS dissert
Page 268 and 269:
ICS dissertation series 37) Andreas
Page 270 and 271:
ICS dissertation series 76) Inge Si
Page 272 and 273:
ICS dissertation series 115) Martin
Page 274:
Why do some individuals express mor
show all

Ethnic Hostility among Ethnic Majority and Minority Groups

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?