Steele and Perkins (2019) examine the impact of the apparent volume of migrants in the neighborhood on the propensity to redistribute in New York City. The article aims to scrutinize how views and misperceptions about the volume of migrant populace impact the positions about rearrangement and societal strategies in among the most varied and racially diverse metropolitans in the world, New York City.
The researchers evaluated info from a varied sample of New York dwellers enlisted via Amazon Mechanical Turk. The participants answered a sequence of queries concerning their views of the size of the migrant populace of their area before showing their redistributive and community strategy predilections (Steele & Perkins, 2019). The researchers found that about 25 percent of New York residents overvalued the volume of the migrant populace. However, the share was lesser than those in research of different geographical fields. In addition, those who saw a smaller share of the national population or overestimated the size of the migrant population were the least supportive of redistribution and community strategies.
Assessment of the Source
One of the strengths of the source is that it was readable and followed the proper research methods. It includes an abstract that gives an overview of what the paper contains, including the research methods and results of the study. The target population for the research is the residents of New York City. First, the researchers begin by focusing on the NYC dwellers’ biased views towards the volume of the migrant populace. They then ask participants about their views concerning the extent of both migrant and national populaces in their areas (Steele & Perkins, 2019). The authors then compare the accuracy of the views to response report from the American Community Survey. Another strong point of this study is that it allows the researchers to test and examine straightly if the perceptions differ and the extent to which they are associated with redistribution and social policies.
However, the source contains some criticisms. For instance, it does not contain a separate literature review section. The researchers have integrated the literature review into the other part of the research, which makes it quite hard to differentiate the literature review and the content section. In addition, the sample for research contains residents who are not arbitrarily assigned to areas of home, which is morally laden (Steele &Perkins, 2019). Besides, the gauge of participants’ viewed extent of the migrant cluster was ordinal. It never lined up with the ASC classes of the particular numbers of immigrants and national populaces.
Reference
Steele, L. G., & Perkins, K. M. (2019). The effects of perceived neighborhood diversity on preferences for redistribution: A pilot study. Societies, 8(3), 82.