{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020116807268007787, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003244646333549643, 'mean_word_length': 5.79295154185022, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Assimilation and Stratification in the Homeownership Patterns of Racial and Ethnic Groups 1

This study investigates homeownership differences among twelve racial/ethnic groups using the Public Use Sample data (PUMS) of the 1980 census. The analysis draws inspiration from two broad approaches in the literature on spatial processes—one approach is labeled as “assimilation” and the other as “stratification”—and includes both individual-level and contextual determinants. The study identifies a number of differences among non-Hispanic whites, blacks, American Indians, and Asian and Hispanic groups in access to homeownership. Majority group members have the greatest probability of homeownership, net of compositional characteristics. They also are the most likely to be able to respond to the housing needs of married persons and households with children by buying a home, and they have one of the smallest disparities in ownership between persons of low and high income. Homeownership opportunities in the suburban portions of metropolitan areas have their greatest impact on majority group members, while minority homeownership is more responsive to the composition of the central-city housing stock. Nevertheless, for every group there is a strong correspondence between homeownership and various individual-level factors: age, household composition, socioeconomic position and language acculturation. The observed differences in ownership are substantially attenuated when group differences in some of these variables are controlled.