Appendix C.

Ethnic Differences in the Effects of Assimilation

	High School Graduation^a	College Enrollment^a	Academic Achievement^b	Self- Esteem^b	Depression^b	Delinquency^b	Violence^b	Controlled Substance Use^b
Hispanics:
Assimilation Measure
Length of Stay	^***		^***	^***				^***
Length of Stay > 5 years	^***	^**		^***			^**
U.S.- Born			^***			^***		^**
% U.S.-Born in Neighborhood	^***	^***		^**		^**	^**
% U.S.-Born > 70%	^***	^***	^***	^**		^***
% Non-Co-Ethnics in Neighborhood	^***	^***		^***
% Non-Co-Ethnics> 60%	^***	^**		^***
English language use in home	^**	^***	^***	^***	^***	^**
Proportion of non-coethnic friends		^**					^**
Asians:
Assimilation Measure
Length of Stay	^***	^***				^***	^***	^***
Length of Stay > 5 years			^**				^**	^**
U.S.- Born								^**
% U.S.-Born in Neighborhood	^***				^***
% U.S.-Born > 70%			^***
% Non-Co-Ethnics in Neighborhood								^**
% Non-Co-Ethnics> 75%
English language use in home	^***	^***	^***				^**
Proportion of non-coethnic friends		^***	^***

Statistical Significance:

^**

p< .05

^***

p<.01

Methodology: The cells contain statistical significance of F (for continous outcomes) or chi-square (for binary outcomes) computed from nested model tests in which we compared the models in Table 1 to models that added interaction terms between the assimilation variable and the series of ethnic dummy variables. A significant value of F (or chi-square) indicates that there is statistically significant ethnic variation in the effect of assimilation on the outcome in question.

Notes:

^a)

Wave 3 data. N = 713 for Asians; N = 1,204 for Hispanics

^b)

Wave 1 data. N = 993 for Asians; N = 1.661 for Hispanics

^c)

Models control for age, sex, family income, parental education, neighborhood poverty rate, and family structure. Models using assimilation measures other than length of stay and generation also control for length of stay and generation.

^d)

Hazard ratio of intitiating sexual intercourse.