Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-06
  • 2023-07
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • 2024-04
  • 2024-05

    • Table also shows the ancestral distribution of the sample by

    2018-10-26

    Table 1 also shows the ancestral distribution of the sample by generational status. For example, Column 1 shows that Blebbistatin among immigrants who arrived after age 13, individuals from the West Indies are the largest immigrant subgroup (proportion: 0.360) followed by immigrants from Africa (0.229), Latin America (0.179), and Haiti (0.175). Due partly to differences in the length and intensity of different immigration streams to the United States, the ancestral distribution of the second generation (Columns 3 and 4) varies considerably from that of the foreign-born (Column 1 and 2). Column 3 shows that 31.3 percent of the second generation with two foreign-born parents has parents who both hail from the West Indies, 14.6 percent have parents who both come from Haiti, and another 17 percent have parents who were born in Latin America. Because most contemporary waves of African immigrants arrived in the United States after 1990, a relatively small percent of second-generation immigrants have parents who were born in Africa, 6.2 percent. Table 2 presents descriptive statistics for the West Indian, Haitian, African, and Latin American ancestral groupings. Similar to Table 1, Table 2 shows very modest differences in smoking patterns among foreign-born individuals by age at arrival. Perhaps the most striking pattern that emerges from Table 2 is the difference in smoking patterns among members of the second generation by the number of foreign-born parents. For every subgroup, U.S.-born individuals with one foreign-born parent report far higher smoking rates than those with two foreign-born parents. This gap in smoking status is largest among individuals whose parents were born in Africa (0.151 versus 0.052) and the West Indies (0.168 versus 0.091), respectively. The gap is smallest among individuals from Haiti and Latin America. Table 3 shows estimates from probit regression models examining the associations between generational status and smoking for the entire sample. As we noted earlier, the results are shown as marginal effects. Table 3 presents two regression models. First, Model 1, our baseline model, controls for immigrant generational characteristics, including whether an individual migrated at or prior to or after age 13 (first-generation immigrants) and whether an individual had one or two foreign-born parents (second-generation immigrants). The third/higher generation (U.S.-born individuals who have two U.S.-born parents) is the reference group. We also control for age, sex, and survey year. In addition to the variables contained in Model 1, Model 2 includes controls for marital status, family size, education, occupation, family income, metropolitan area status, and state of current residence. Model 1 of Table 3 shows Primary cells after controlling for age and sex, relative to the third or higher generation, the proportion of current smokers is 0.137 (95% CI: -0.143, -0.130) points lower for immigrants who arrived after age 13 and 0.120 (95% CI: -0.134, -0.107) points lower for immigrants who arrived at or before age 13. The relationship between second-generation status and smoking behavior, however, differs depending on the number of foreign-born parents. Second-generation individuals with two foreign-born parents are less likely than the third/higher generation to report smoking (-0.064 points: (95% CI: -0.082, -0.046)). We find no statistically significant difference in smoking status between the third/higher generation and second-generation immigrants with one foreign-born parent. Taken together, results from Model 1 show a steady increase in the probability of being a current smoker moving from the first generation to the second generation with two foreign-born parents to second-generation members with mixed nativity parentage (one U.S.-born and one foreign-born parent). The confidence intervals shown in Table 3 confirm that differences across generational groups in the probability of being a current smoker are statistically significant across generations at conventional levels. Although the magnitude of these estimates changes somewhat after controlling for relevant demographic variables (Model 2), the qualitative significance of most of the results remains the same.