{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.00851063829787234, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003404255319148936, 'mean_word_length': 5.958579881656805, '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}}
Vulnerable to Disparity? The Imperfect Alignment of Neighborhood Relative Inequality with the Racial Invariance Thesis

Abstract Despite the importance of relative inequality in studies on race, place and crime, existing literature has paid little attention to the possibility of racial differences in the effect of relative inequality at the neighborhood level. I argue the anomie and social disorganization frameworks make competing predictions regarding whether relative inequality aligns with the racial invariance thesis, and assess hypotheses derived from each perspective using data from the 2000 National Neighborhood Crime Study. A comparison of marginal effects derived from multilevel negative binomial regression models indicate relative inequality effects on homicide are larger in neighborhoods comprised primarily by Blacks and Latinos, while effects on robbery and burglary are greater in White, Latino and Integrated areas. My observations add to a growing body of work demonstrating the importance of income inequality for neighborhood crime but suggest the magnitude of the effect varies considerably by crime type and neighborhood ethnoracial composition.