发表机构
Stanford University; University of Chicago; Babson College（斯坦福大学; 芝加哥大学; 巴布森学院）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
该研究利用1870-1940年美国全量人口普查数据，发现非裔女性中感知肤色较深者的教育、婚姻及收入结果更差，而男性无此差异，揭示了感知肤色对非裔美国人经济结果的性别化影响。
AI 中文摘要
我们利用19世纪末至20世纪初的美国全量十年一次人口普查数据，研究非裔美国人因感知肤色差异导致的经济结果差异。通过比较人口普查普查员编码为“黑人”或“混血儿”的儿童，并将这些儿童在历次人口普查中关联起来，我们首先记录了感知肤色较深与较浅的非裔美国人在教育程度和收入方面存在巨大差距。为了厘清这些差距的驱动因素，我们识别出所有35992个家庭，其中普查员对同性兄弟姐妹赋予了不同的“黑人/混血儿”分类。与编码为混血儿的姐妹相比，编码为黑人的姐妹教育程度更低，结婚可能性更小，且丈夫的教育程度更低、收入可能更低。这些模式与当时对感知肤色较深的非裔美国女性更严重的歧视一致。相比之下，我们发现不同分类的兄弟之间教育程度、婚姻结果和收入相似。任何肤色的被感知为非裔美国人的男性都面临相似的当时歧视，这符合“一滴血”种族分类规则，该规则将任何有已知非裔血统的个体归为一类。普通人群中感知肤色较深的非裔美国男性收入较低，是由家庭间机会和资源的差异驱动的，可能反映了历史或家庭层面歧视的影响。
英文摘要
We study differences in economic outcomes by perceived skin tone among African Americans using full-count U.S. decennial census data from the late-19th and early-20th centuries. Comparing children coded as "Black" or "Mulatto" by census enumerators and linking these children across population censuses, we first document large gaps in educational attainment and income among African Americans with darker and lighter perceived skin tones. To disentangle the drivers of these gaps, we identify all 35,992 families in which enumerators assigned same-gender siblings different Black/Mulatto classifications. Relative to sisters coded as Mulatto, sisters coded as Black had lower educational attainment, were less likely to marry, and had less-educated, likely lower-earning husbands. These patterns are consistent with more severe contemporaneous discrimination against African American women with darker perceived skin tones. In contrast, we find similar educational attainment, marital outcomes, and incomes among differently-classified brothers. Men perceived as African Americans of any skin tone faced similar contemporaneous discrimination, consistent with the "one-drop" racial classification rule that grouped together individuals with any known Black ancestry. Lower incomes for African American men perceived as having darker skin tone in the general population were driven by differences in opportunities and resources that varied across families, likely reflecting the impacts of historical or family-level discrimination.
