Gennetian 2018

Lisa A.
Gennetian and Christopher Rodrigues New York University

Heather D. Hill University of Washington∗
Pamela A. Morris New York University∗∗
Income Level and Volatility by Children’s Race

and Hispanic Ethnicity
Objective: This study documents how income children was similar regardless of the nativity
dynamics during childhood differ across or citizenship status of adults in the household,
racial/ethnic groups and among Hispanics by although it differed by household linguistic iso-
nativity, citizenship, and the English-language lation. Receipt of social assistance offered less
proficiency of households. income stabilization for low-income Hispanic
Background: Income volatility has emerged as children than for peers; however, household
a distinct form of economic disadvantage that earnings, particularly from residential male
can impact family life and child well-being. Yet adults (most of whom were fathers), had a
little is understood about how income volatility stabilizing influence on income.
is stratified by race and ethnicity. Conclusion: Income volatility is higher among
Method: Using longitudinal data on children low-income families than among higher income
from the 2004 (n = 7,651) and 2008 (n = 12,183) families, irrespective of racial/ethnic status. At
panels of the Survey of Income and Program the lowest income levels, Hispanic children were
Participation, this study examined income level statistically more likely than children of other
and volatility among Hispanic, non-Hispanic racial/ethnic groups to experience slightly more
White, and non-Hispanic Black children. stable income.
Results: When compared with peers, Hispanic Implications: Understanding how different
children were more likely to be low income, experiences of income volatility by children’s
but experience slightly less income volatility. race/ethnicity might influence family life and
Income volatility among low-income Hispanic children’s development can inform policy and
program practice.
Institute for Human Development and Social Change,

New York University, 246 Greene Street, Floor 5E, New
Economic disadvantage is highly stratified by
York, NY 10003 ([email protected]). race and ethnicity in the United States, with His-
∗ panic and non-Hispanic Black families facing
Daniel J. Evans School of Public Policy and Governance,
University of Washington, 323 Parrington Hall, Box higher poverty rates, lower average income and
353033, Seattle, WA 98195. wealth, and higher rates of material hardship
∗∗Department of Applied Psychology, Steinhardt School of than non-Hispanic White families (McKernan,
Culture, Education and Human Development, New York Ratcliffe, Steuerle, & Zhang, 2013; Neckerman,
University, 246 Greene Street, New York, NY 10003. Garfinkel, Teitler, Waldfogel, & Wimer, 2016;
Key Words: disparities, economic well-being, race, Hispanic, Semega, Fontenot, & Kollar, 2017). Recently,
low-income families, Latino, Latina, poverty. research in economics and sociology has drawn
Journal of Marriage and Family (2018) 1
DOI:10.1111/jomf.12529
2 Journal of Marriage and Family
attention to income volatility as a distinct form Hispanic—including financial optimism, the

of economic disadvantage with implications transmission of educational values, family cohe-
for child and adult well-being (Gennetian, sion, and close social networks—may reduce
Rodrigues, Hill, & Morris, 2018; Gennetian, income volatility or help to reduce its adverse
Wolf, Hill, & Morris, 2015; Hardy, 2014; West- effects (Aldoney & Cabrera, 2016; Calzada,
ern, Bloome, Sosnaud, & Tach, 2012, 2016), Tamis-LeMonda, & Yoshikawa, 2013; Egge-
but we know little about how income volatility been & Hogan, 1990; Marin & Gamba, 1996).
differs by race and ethnicity. The pan-ethnic label of “Hispanic” also includes
Income volatility—measured as the amount families who are diverse in terms of nativity,
of change around mean income or by counts citizenship, English-language proficiency, coun-
of large shocks (often losses) to income—has try of origin, and related characteristics that
increased substantially since the 1970s, par- could shape varying experiences—favorably or
ticularly for low-income families (Dynan, unfavorably—of income volatility.
Elmendorf, & Sichel, 2012; Gottschalk & Mof- Economic disadvantage, including persistent
fitt, 2009; Hardy & Ziliak, 2014; Morduch racial/ethnic disparities in income and wealth,
& Schneider, 2017; Morris, Hill, Gennetian, have been major topics of prior research on the
Rodrigues, & Wolf, 2015; Western et al., 2012, family. Most studies, however, conceptualize
2016). This trend is consistent with the increas- economic disadvantage as low average levels of
ing instability of work, family structure, and income, particularly income below the poverty
public assistance for less-educated adults during line (e.g., Bloome, 2014; Eggebeen & Lichter,
the same period (Cherlin, 2010; Farber, 2010; 1991; McLanahan & Percheski, 2008; Thiede,
Hardy, 2017; Kalleberg, 2009, 2010; Lam- Kim, & Slack, 2017). Examining the racial
bert, Fugiel, & Henly, 2014; Manning, Smock, stratification of income with more dynamic mea-
& Majumdar, 2004). The causes of income sures is important because family studies and
changes and the fluctuations in resources have developmental psychology theories suggest that
been shown to affect material hardship and adult repeated change, particularly repeated change on
and child outcomes (Gennetian et al., 2015; a negative trajectory, can be stressful, decrease
Hardy, 2014; Leete & Bania, 2010; Sandstrom the quality of parenting, and adversely affect
& Huerta, 2013). Although the mechanisms of child well-being (Bronfenbrenner & Morris,
these effects have not been identified conclu- 2006; Conger, Conger, & Martin, 2010; Elder,
sively, theory would suggest that income volatil- 1974; Mistry, Vandewater, Huston, & McLoyd,
ity could affect consumption, stress, parenting, 2002). Prior studies have found negative asso-
and the regularity of family routines (Anderson, ciations of instability in family structure, child
Butcher, Hoynes, & Schanzenbach, 2016; H. D. care, and residence with cognitive and behav-
Hill, Morris, Gennetian, Wolf, & Tubbs, 2013). ioral outcomes at the school level and child
We might expect income volatility to follow level (Adam, 2004; Adam & Chase-Lansdale,
racial stratification patterns similar to those 2002; Cavanagh & Huston, 2006, 2008; Pilarz,
of poverty, where Hispanic poverty rates fall 2018; Riina, Lippert, & Brooks-Gunn, 2016;
between non-Hispanic Blacks’ higher rates and Ziol-Guest & McKenna, 2014). However,
non-Hispanic Whites’ lower rates. However, research has rarely, if at all, examined how these
other economic and cultural characteristics latter associations, and associations between
associated with Hispanic ethnicity complicate income volatility and outcomes for children,
these hypotheses. On one hand, when compared may differ across racial and ethnic groups.
with other racial/ethnic groups, Hispanic fami- The first step in doing so is to understand how
lies have less wealth and savings, lower rates of different groups experience income dynamics.
health insurance coverage, fewer ties to formal This study documents how income dynamics
financial institutions, and greater employment during childhood differ across racial/ethnic
instability, making them vulnerable to income groups and among Hispanics, by nativity, citi-
volatility and putting them at risk for nega- zenship, and English-language proficiency. Such
tive repercussions of such income volatility an empirical investigation has only recently
(McKernan, Ratcliffe, Simms, & Zhang, 2011; become possible with the availability of large
Murphy, Guzman, & Torres, 2014). On the other national data sets that allow for analyses of
hand, some documented cultural and demo- Hispanic households within and across income
graphic characteristics associated with being levels. Using longitudinal data from the 2004
Income Volatility by Children’s Race and Hispanic Ethnicity 3
and 2008 Survey of Income and Program Par- and the gap in volatility between the highest and
ticipation (SIPP; https://www.census.gov/sipp/) lowest income families has grown substantially
spanning from February 2004 through August in recent decades (H. D. Hill, 2018; Morris
2011, we used continuous and categorical mea- et al., 2015).
sures to document income level and volatility Recently, researchers who study family
across race and ethnic groups; within Hispanic economic disadvantage have theorized about
households according to nativity, citizenship the likely causes and consequences of income
status, and English-language proficiency; and volatility (Adams et al., 2016; H. D. Hill et al.,
between two distinct macroeconomic contexts. 2013; H. D. Hill, Romich, Mattingly, Shamsud-
We asked the following questions: Do experi- din, & Wething, 2017; Sandstrom & Huerta,
ences of income volatility differ for Hispanic 2013). The increases in volatility in the 1970s
versus non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic and 1980s coincide with increasingly precarious
White children? Do racial differences vary employment arrangements and family structures
by income level? How does income volatility (Cherlin, 2010; Kalleberg, 2009, 2010; Lambert
vary for Hispanic children in households with et al., 2014; Manning et al., 2004). For instance,
varying levels of English-language proficiency, workers in low-income families face greater
nativity, or U.S. citizenship status? What is the between- and within-job instability as a function
role of earnings and social assistance in overall of both economic cycles and enduring structural
income volatility, and how does this vary by changes to the economy (Farber, 2010; Fligstein
race and ethnicity? & Taekjin, 2004; Kalleberg, 2009, 2010). Since
the 1990s, all men and never-married women
have seen declines in long-term employment
Background tenure and increases in short-term job insta-
Income Volatility as a Distinct Form bility (Farber, 2010; Hollister, 2011; Hollister
of Economic Disadvantage & Smith, 2014). Increases in between-job
instability have been particularly large for
Economic studies document a trend in the less-educated, non-White, and private-sector
United States of increasing earnings and income workers (Jaeger & Stevens, 1999). In addition,
volatility starting in the 1970s (Dahl, DeLeire, public assistance benefits, which help to smooth
& Schwabish, 2011; Dynan et al., 2012; Moffitt income volatility, have become less stable over
& Gottschalk, 2012; Hacker, 2008; Haider, time (Hardy, 2017), in part because they are
2001; Hardy & Ziliak, 2014; Keys, 2008; Leete more closely tied to employment.
& Bania, 2010; Ziliak, Hardy, & Bollinger, In the economic context of the family, the-
2011). Researchers use a variety of terms ories from economics and sociology suggest
synonymously to describe this phenomenon, that changes to economic circumstances affect
such as income variability, income volatility, parents and children through the following two
and income insecurity. Many of these studies primary pathways: (a) changes in consumption
focus on male earnings volatility (Celik, Juhn, and the related investments a family can make
McCue, & Thompson, 2012; Gottschalk & to support children’s development (Bradley &
Moffitt, 1994, 1999, 2009; Haider, 2001; Mof- Corwyn, 2002; Mayer, 1997) and (b) stress and
fitt & Gottschalk, 2002, 2011a, 2011b, 2012; its effects on family conflict and parenting (Con-
Neumark & Wascher, 2001; I. Shin, 2012; D. ger et al., 2010; Masarik et al., 2016; McLoyd,
Shin & Solon, 2011; Stevens, 2001), but a Jayaratne, Cebaloo, & Borquez, 1994; Mistry
growing number examine family or household et al., 2002).
income volatility (Carey & Shore, 2013; Dahl Income volatility is important to the study of
et al., 2011; Dynan et al., 2012; Gosselin & economic disadvantage during childhood. Bioe-
Zimmerman, 2008; Hacker, 2008; Jensen & cological models emphasize the influential role
Shore, 2011) and its implications for adults and of stability in the contexts and relationships that
children (Gennetian et al., 2015; Hardy, 2014; support developmental processes (Bronfenbren-
Leete & Bania, 2010). Income variability is ner & Morris, 2006). Developmental psychology
highest for the lowest income families (Dynan researchers have long argued for the role of con-
et al., 2012; Gottschalk & Moffitt, 2009; Hardy sistency and predictability in supporting healthy
& Ziliak, 2014; Morduch & Schneider, 2017; developmental growth (Bronfenbrenner & Mor-
Morris et al., 2015; Western et al., 2012, 2016), ris, 2006; Rutter & Rutter, 1993), such as the
role of contingent responsiveness to support strategies to compensate for income loss may
self-regulation (Landry, Smith, & Swank, 2006) be more feasible and less noticeable when small
or the importance of attachment security for the changes are made, whereas a relatively large
development of a secure internal working model change (e.g., a residential move to a new com-
(Sroufe, 1990). Related theoretical constructs munity) could require substantial adjustment.
from developmental psychology (e.g., chaos A sizable positive income shock (e.g., a $1,000
and cumulative risk) and social neuroscience cash windfall from the Earned Income Tax
(e.g., chronic stress and allostatic load) highlight Credit) may or may not have an impact similar
how high levels and frequency of change can to that of a sizable negative income shock (e.g.,
overwhelm the psychological and physiolog- a $1,000 decrease in monthly earnings due to
ical systems of human adaptation (Evans & reduced work hours), although these changes
English, 2002; Ganzel, Morris, & Wethington, are similar in magnitude ($1,000) and frequency
2010; McEwen, 2007; Shonkoff et al., 2012). (a single shock). Regular, predictable changes
Parenting is an oft-cited mediator of chaos in in family income, such as those experienced by
the home, especially for young children, with seasonal workers, might not disrupt family pro-
responsivity and warmth (reducing chaos) and cesses because they can be anticipated and plans
harsh parenting (increasing chaos) being espe- can be made to accommodate the change or
cially implicated in these processes (Coldwell, smooth the family’s consumption. Furthermore,
Pike, & Dunn, 2006; Dumas et al., 2005). If income volatility that occurs because of inten-
income volatility reflects or creates constant tional reallocation of parental time might be less
change in children’s lives, and particularly if disruptive if parents substitute time at home for
it causes chronic stress and related reductions income than if other changes are made. Finally,
in warmth and contingency in parent–child the detrimental effects of income volatility may
interactions, it could have long-lasting effects vary across the stages of childhood, with the
on stress response systems, emotional health, negative effects being most disruptive during
and social relationships (Danese & McEwen, early childhood and adolescence, when the con-
2012; Evans & Schamberg, 2009; Miller, Chen, sistency of family routines may be especially
& Parker, 2011). critical to support healthy development and
Empirical support for the disruptiveness of (especially for adolescents) mitigate the risks of
instability in family economic contexts is grow- acting out and delinquent behavior.
ing. Many studies suggest that discrete changes
in income level, poverty status, parental employ-
ment, and housing are disruptive to parenting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Income
and child development (Adam, 2004; Adam & Volatility
Chase-Lansdale, 2002; Cavanagh & Huston, Although low income, poverty, and other mea-
2006, 2008; Conger, Ge, Elder, Lorenz, & sures of economic disadvantage are consistently
Simons, 1994; Kalil & Ziol-Guest, 2005; Riina higher for Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black
et al., 2016; Wolf & Morrissey, 2017; Yeung, families than for non-Hispanic White families,
Linver, & Brooks-Gunn, 2002; Ziol-Guest & few studies have examined income volatility
McKenna, 2014). Three recent studies demon- through the lens of racial or ethnic stratification.
strated negative associations between income Acs, Loprest, and Nichols (2009) reported that
volatility and both adolescent and adult school Hispanics are more likely than non-Hispanics
outcomes (Gennetian et al., 2015, 2018; Hardy, to experience a 50% or greater income drop
2014). Two of these studies (Gennetian et al., from one year to the next. Using the Panel Study
2015; Hardy, 2014) used nationally represen- of Income Dynamics, H. D. Hill (2018) found
tative data and showed that the adverse effects that between the 1970s and 2000s, income
are larger for lower income and non-White variability increased for households headed
adolescents. by Blacks and Whites (the data do not allow
Different dimensions of income a comparison of Hispanic and non-Hispanic
volatility—including the magnitude, frequency, households), but that Black households faced
and direction of income change—could trans- higher variability and less income growth than
late into qualitatively different experiences for did White households. Hardy (2017) showed
families and children (Calzada et al., 2013; that income volatility is particularly high for
Hogan, Eggebeen, & Clogg, 1993). Patchwork Black families relative to White families when
examining pretax and pretransfer income (i.e., of receipt is lower among Hispanic families
cash earnings). He also found that, historically, (Alvira-Hammond & Gennetian, 2015).
taxes and transfers played a much larger role On the other hand, Hispanic children may
in smoothing income for Black families than be protected against income volatility or its
for White families prior to the 2000s, but the detrimental effects by certain cultural and
safety net is now less responsive to income demographic characteristics that may enhance
volatility in Black families than in White income volatility as well as buffer its negative
families. ramifications (Marin & Gamba, 1996). Children
Hispanic ethnicity is associated with a set of in Hispanic families are more likely to reside
cultural, demographic, and economic character- in multigenerational households, with multiple
istics that complicate efforts to predict whether adult earners; thus, although the complexity of
it will be associated with higher or lower income having multiple earners may impose different
volatility, relative to non-Hispanic ethnicity. On types of volatility in these households, the
one hand, Hispanic children are more likely to impact on income might be stabilizing (Fry &
face economic risks that may increase income Passel, 2014). Hispanic families are more likely
volatility. The period from 2007 to 2010 alone to reside in ethnically similar communities and
included a 36% increase in the proportion of His- have tighter, more closely connected social
panic children in poverty (Murphy et al., 2014). networks, with potential availability of informal
Rates of unemployment and underemploy- and formal financial or emergency assistance
ment are higher among Hispanic households, (Calzada et al., 2013; Sarkisian, Gerena, &
and issues of citizenship status and language Gerstel, 2007). The combination of these struc-
proficiency are more likely to interfere with tural aspects of household composition with
entry into and retention in formal employment the norms of familism and high employment
(Brown & Patten, 2014; Patten, 2016). Employ- associated with Hispanic ethnicity suggests a
ment among Hispanic households is more lower likelihood of gaps in earnings, and in
likely to be seasonal, offer low wages, provide overall household income, that would otherwise
fewer benefits such as paid sick days, and place contribute to income volatility (Almeida, Mol-
workers at greater risk of occupational injuries nar, Kawachi, & Subramanian, 2009; Calzada
(Brown & Patten, 2014). Hispanic workers are et al., 2013).
typically assigned to more dangerous assign- The repercussions of income volatility may
ments at job sites and are likely to accept unfair be more pernicious among Hispanic and Black
work tasks because they are often the primary households than among White households
income earner of a large family (Hallowell & because Black and Hispanic households may
Yugar-Arias, 2016). Hispanic workers are also have fewer or less readily available resources
less likely than non-Hispanic workers to request that can serve as cushions against negative
safety assistance and personal protection equip- income shocks, including health and home
ment and are more likely to underreport injuries insurance coverage, savings, and access to for-
because of fear of their employers (Hurley & mal financial institutions and credit (DeCamp
Lebon, 2012; Menzel & Gutierrez, 2010). & Bundy, 2012; I. Hill, Stockdale, Evert, &
These characteristics of employment not Gifford, 2006; Roche, Lambert, Ghazarian, &
only affect the level and stability of earned Little, 2015). Wealth is much lower among
income but also can impede consistent receipt Hispanic and Black households when compared
of social assistance because of eligibility cliffs with White households (Kochhar, Fry, & Taylor,
and the administrative burden of providing 2011). Some aspects of Hispanic children’s
documentation to determine eligibility. English lives might also increase their vulnerability to
proficiency may be a barrier to the receipt instability in the home. Nearly 40% of Hispanic
of both earned and social assistance income. children with one foreign-born parent and 21%
Inability or reluctance (because of shame) to of Hispanic children with U.S.-born parents
ask for translation of information, for example, live in crowded housing, defined as three or
reduces the accuracy of information received more people per bedroom. By comparison,
or may intimidate potential recipients and thus less than 15% of low-income, non-Hispanic
prevent them from pursuing such income in the children—irrespective of race—live in crowded
first place. Whereas social assistance may serve conditions (Turner, Guzman, Wildsmith, &
as a stabilizing source of income, incidence Scott, 2015). Several studies found that the
adverse effects of residential instability on of other racial/ethnic groups). Yet this period
parent–child relationships and child outcomes included high immigration and racial/ethnic
are strongest for non-White children (Perkins, demographic compositional change in the
2017; Riina et al., 2016). Gennetian et al. (2015) United States, meaning that the numbers of
found that income volatility was associated with Hispanic households became large enough
higher rates of expulsions and suspensions to allow examination separately from other
among non-White adolescents than among groups. Furthermore, analyses using income
White adolescents. If stress and chaos are data from 2004 to 2006 are not confounded by
already at high levels in non-White households, the broader economic shifts triggered by the
income volatility may tip the balance from 2008 Great Recession. The 2008 panel followed
manageable to unmanageable levels of stress, households for 16 waves, with data collected
with implications for family life and children’s every 4 months. The first nine waves, with data
development. collected between September 2008 and August
Even positive income shocks may have 2011, capture a short postrecession period.
unexpected effects if tensions arise between The SIPP 2004 analytic sample includes
allocation of resources to children residing in 7,651 children ages 0 to 18 in Wave 1, with
the United States and other household consump- 33% ages 0 to 5, 40% ages 6 to 12, and 27%
tion or investment objectives abroad. Cultural ages 13 to 18. (Of the 129,854 total individ-
and historical values may differentially influ- ual children and adults, 19,195 were dropped
ence choices to invest in children directly, such because of missing data in Wave 1, 80,882 were
as purchasing items for school, or indirectly, dropped because the individuals were older
such as by funding efforts to gain citizenship than age 18, and 29,777 were dropped because
among other adult household members. The of missing longitudinal data.) The child age
effects of income volatility among Hispanic span offers flexibility to examine the research
children may be neutralized by the variety of questions across several different developmen-
protective factors that Hispanic parents and their tal transitions during the course of the nine
social and familial networks may provide, such waves examined from the 2004 sample. These
as closer community networks and social and 7,651 children are in 4,069 households. Of
emotional support systems; consistent parenting this group, 1,510 children (19.7%) are identi-
styles may also help buffer children from the fied as Hispanic, representing 753 households
chaos or stress that can result from income (18.5%). Nearly all of the children who are
volatility (Aldoney & Cabrera, 2016; Calzada identified as Hispanic are in households with
et al., 2013; Fuller & Garcia Coll, 2010). other siblings or children who are identified as
Hispanic; that is, the child sample has very little
within-household Hispanic ethnicity variation.
Data, Sample, and Measures By racial/ethnic mix, 3,316 households have
The analytic sample for this study is drawn all non-Hispanic children, 29 households are
from the 2004 and 2008 SIPP panels. The identified as having mixed racial/ethnic chil-
SIPP is a nationally representative survey of dren, and 724 households have all Hispanic
households conducted by the U.S. Census children.
Bureau and is uniquely suitable to answer The SIPP 2008 analytic sample includes
the questions posed in this study because it 12,183 children ages 0 to 18 in Wave 1, with
includes monthly income information for each a similar distribution across age groups as the
4-month wave of data in the multiwave panel. 2004 analytic sample (and similar proportions
The 2004 panel followed households for 12 dropped for not meeting criteria as described for
waves, with data collected every 4 months. the 2004 sample). These 12,183 children are in
This study used the first nine waves, with data 6,567 households. Of this group, 2,338 children
collected between February 2004 and Jan- (19.2%) are identified as Hispanic, representing
uary 2007. This time period is characterized 1,231 households (18.7%). By racial/ethnic
as post–welfare reform, with relatively stable mix, 5,336 of the SIPP 2008 households have all
rates of poverty, including among Hispanic non-Hispanic children, 44 households are iden-
households (whereas in the post-2008 period, tified as having mixed racial/ethnic children, and
rates of poverty increased more sharply among 1,187 households have all Hispanic children.
Hispanic households than among households Next we describe the measures of income level,
income volatility, race, and ethnicity used in this selected to participate in the study. The SIPP
analysis. does not collect information about whether
a household is sending remittances to others
outside of the United States. Therefore, we do
Household Monthly Income Level not know whether or how income allocated
To measure household income level, we used the to remittances may be reported. Remittance
average of monthly income reported during the payments may influence the availability and
panel. Average monthly income is a composite stability of income for household expenditures
variable computed by the Census Bureau, which and consumption. However, other research has
adds up the reported pretax income of every- found that remittances made to others are not at
one in the household. This measure includes the cost of consistent own expenditure whether
earned income, cash transfer payments (i.e., weekly or monthly, even at the cost of skipping
means-tested income, not including the cash meals or meeting basic needs at home, so we
equivalent of means-tested programs such as believe that the impact of remittances on our
food stamps), lump-sum and one-time pay- measures is minimal (Lopez, Livingston, &
ments, regular salary or other income from Kochhar, 2009).
self-owned businesses, property income, and We relied on total pretax income in our anal-
any interest and dividend income (Westat, ysis for several reasons. First, because our unit
2007). To explore the role of social assistance of analysis in the sample is the child, a variety of
income, we separately examined the cash value substantive assumptions regarding filing status,
of food stamp income. Income data are collected household structure, dependents, and filing sta-
at each wave, once every 4 months, and reported tus of each dependent would have to be made to
on for the previous 4 months. Imputed values accurately calculate posttax income (even when
of income in the SIPP are generated using hot using well-developed software such as Taxsim,
deck imputation techniques from a randomly available at the National Bureau of Economic
selected case that was observationally similar Research, to estimate posttax income; http://
on a number of variables (Westat, 2007). In users.nber.org/~taxsim/). Our initial investiga-
cases where the entire household survey was tion into this possibility suggested that the biases
missing data for a wave, the SIPP does not associated with the assumptions necessary to
impute any value and indicates a missing value. calculate pretax income overwhelmed the biases
In our main analyses, we used all reported and associated with relying on total household
imputed values, but we also tested the sensitivity income. Second, when we conducted a sensi-
of those results by excluding observations with tivity test to calculate posttax income with the
substantial imputed income. Taxsim software for a random subsample of
Studies have shown that the income data col- children from each income grouping, we found
lected in the SIPP are subject to reporter seam that pretax income and posttax income are
bias, such that income is reported with more qualitatively similar for children in the lowest
error when recalled from previous months and income groups and that such an adjustment
much less error when reported for the current slightly shifts the distribution of households
month (D. Hill, 1987; Moore, 2007). There- from the highest income categories to the
fore, we used only income reported for the middle. Finally, the inclusion of tax credits
month in which the data were collected at each or refunds would have mechanical effects on
wave. Given this restriction, monthly income is measures of income volatility given our focus
reported three times per year for each household. on measurement, resulting in greater income
We used total household income, rather than volatility by default. We elected to exclude this
family income, to represent the household eco- form of positive income shock for this reason
nomic context. Unrelated household members and further because the implications of the
may contribute to expenses, such as rent and one-time income shock on consumption and
food costs, and changes in an unrelated house- related financial behavior are difficult to predict.
hold member’s income may alter the resources
and stress levels of both parents and children. In
Household Income Volatility
addition, household income as a unit of analysis
maintains the national representativeness of We captured the magnitude of income volatility
the data set in that households were randomly with the following two conventional measures:
the standard deviation of the arc percent change Ethnicity and Related Measures
(APC), defined as the average difference in We identified Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, and
income between two time points relative to the non-Hispanic White children in this study on
mean value across the two time points, and the basis of the reported race and ethnicity of
the coefficient of variation (CV), the ratio of the reference adult (a parent in the majority of
the standard deviation of monthly income to cases). The SIPP data include racial and eth-
the mean of monthly income. A higher value of nic identity of each individual in the household
either measure indicates more income volatility, in each wave. Nonnegligible intrawave variation
and zero indicates constant monthly income. is present in the reporting of both racial and
Both the CV and APC measures respect symme- ethnic identities across waves. To address this,
try, such that a family that has a 100% increase we coded a child as Hispanic if the reference
in income from 50 to 100 in 1 year and a 50% adult (the far majority of whom are parents of
decrease in income from 100 to 50 in the next at least one child in the household) self-reported
year would have similar absolute quantitative as Hispanic in any of the waves. The remain-
values for both kinds of transitions (up and ing children were coded as Black if the refer-
down). Each construct is also not dependent on ence adult self-reported as Black in any of the
starting values, so the formula can be applied waves; those who did not have a reference adult
equivalently for different subgroups. The CV is who self-reported as Black were coded as White
more heavily influenced by differences in mean if the reference adult self-reported as White in
income (i.e., it captures income inequality as any of the waves. In the descriptive tables, we
well as variability). In contrast, the value of the present a comparison of the distribution of chil-
APC is bounded by −200 and 200. The APC is dren by race/ethnicity according to identifica-
most intuitively interpreted as a percent change tion of race/ethnicity at the child level compared
measure. Both are preferable to alternative with identification of race/ethnicity at the refer-
measures such as percent change, which cannot ence adult level. The decision to base the anal-
be computed for an income value of zero. ysis on the race/ethnicity of the reference adult
We measured the frequency of monthly rather than that of the child is addressed in more
income changes using two additional measures. detail next.
The first counts the total number of income As a pan-ethnic classification, Hispanic
shocks (positive and negative) as changes in encompasses a variety of countries of origin
income across consecutive waves of 33% or and variation in English-language proficiency,
more (for definition of threshold, see Elder, nativity, and U.S. citizenship status. The SIPP
1974; sensitivity tests using a 25% threshold data are particularly rich in allowing further
exploration across a range of characteristics that
derive qualitatively similar results). We also
may indicate cultural, political, and residential
created separate measures for the number of
heterogeneity among Hispanics. We separately
positive income shocks and the number of
coded and examined income volatility among
negative income shocks. Although the CV and Hispanic households by whether at least one
APC measures use all available income data adult household member is U.S. born; whether
across the nine waves (with a minimum of at at least one adult household member is a U.S.
least two waves of nonmissing data and, in citizen (Bachmeier, Van Hook, & Bean, 2014;
the case of the APC, two consecutive waves Van Hook & Bachmeier, 2013); whether the
of data), we restricted the analyses of income reference adult is proficient in English (1 = if
shocks to cases with eight or more waves of the adult speaks only English, or speaks English
complete data to allow for accurate measure- well/very well and another language, 0 = if the
ment of within-year income shocks during at reference adult does not speak English at all);
least a 1-year period. Thus, our calculations and whether the child lives in a linguistically
of income shocks encompass one-time large isolated household, defined as one in which
changes in income as well as multiple shifts in no person age 14 and older speaks English
income of a certain magnitude within a year. very well.
Analyses of income shocks were also run for Although it is possible to also examine
the sample having nonmissing information language proficiency and citizenship status
for eight or more waves as a sensitivity test of children, we did not include this in the
(not reported). investigation for several reasons. First, more
than 98% of Hispanic children are native born. We found no qualitative difference in our main
Second, an overwhelming majority speaks conclusions.
English or English and Spanish (81% of An additional nuance in the SIPP data that we
children ages 5 to 18 for whom data were considered in our analysis was country of origin
collected speak English only; 13% speak identification, which does not always align with
English and Spanish; 1.3% speak Spanish Hispanic identification as defined by the U.S.
only; 4% speak English and another lan- Census. We recoded 100 reference adults in the
guage). Third, we assume that children are 2004 SIPP sample and 154 reference adults in
not the primary contributors to household the 2008 SIPP sample who reported a country of
income status. These within-Hispanic household origin that would be considered Hispanic (by the
characteristics—along with generational differ- U.S. Census), but did not self-report as Hispanic.
ences in educational completion—are associated To address this and to ensure that the recoding
with economic self-sufficiency and security (Joo does not affect the results, we ran a sensitiv-
& Reeves, 2015; Schneider, Martinez, & Owens, ity check for all analyses by relying strictly on
2006). English-language proficiency and nativ- self-reported Hispanic indicator (without recod-
ity status are both favorable predictors of formal ing based on country of origin). We found no
labor market participation and earnings (Bleak- qualitative difference in our main conclusions.
ley & Chin, 2004). Language barriers, legal Finally, we explored the option to examine His-
and citizenship status requirements, and fear panic children by the country of origin of the
of deportation or other immigration-related reference adult available in the 2004 SIPP ana-
concerns have also been found to unfavorably lytic sample, but we did not pursue this option
affect receipt of social services and assistance further because of small sample size.
among Hispanic families (Sandstrom, Huerta,
Loprest, & Seefeldt, 2014; Toomey et al., 2014).
These differentiating characteristics among Methods
Hispanic households may further interact with We used descriptive statistics to examine income
community characteristics—including region level and volatility by race and ethnicity. In addi-
of the United States, urbanicity, and the density tion, we examined ethnic differences for children
of local Hispanic population—in ways that residing in households in different income quin-
support or dampen income volatility but are tile groups. Income quintile thresholds were
beyond the scope of the current study. (How- derived via the distribution of household income
ever, an initial look at differences in income for the 2004 sample and then for the 2008 sample
volatility among Hispanic households by U.S. as of Wave 1. The resulting sample sizes were
region did not reveal substantive differences, large enough to support examination of income
potentially because this geographic measure is level and characteristics within Hispanic house-
too broad.) holds in only the lowest three income quintiles
Our decision to proceed with our analy- (20th, 40th, and 60th percentiles). We tested for
sis based on the reference adult’s reported statistical significance of differences across out-
race and ethnicity, as mentioned previously, comes by racial and ethnic groups or income lev-
could conflate or increase the proportion of els using analysis of variance for overall group
mixed-ethnicity households that are identified as differences and then two-by-two t tests. Statis-
Hispanic. We found 145 non-Hispanic children tically significant differences at the 5% level
in the 2004 SIPP sample and 72 non-Hispanic or lower were reported in tables. Our analyses
children in the 2008 SIPP sample in households applied weights provided by the SIPP to adjust
with a Hispanic reference adult. In addition, for sampling design and attrition and to produce
151 Hispanic children in the 2004 SIPP sample nationally representative population estimates.
and 244 Hispanic children in the 2008 SIPP Sensitivity tests showed that weighted and
sample are in households with a non-Hispanic nonweighted descriptive statistics were qualita-
reference adult. To address this and to ensure tively similar, reflecting the intent of the SIPP
that the decision to rely on the ethnic identity sampling design. Our results were also qualita-
of the reference adult for the main analyses tively similar when we adjusted standard errors
does not affect the results, we reran all analyses to account for clustering of children within
by child ethnic identity as a sensitivity check. households.
Figure 1. Household Income Quintile Distribution of Children, Survey of Income and Program Participation
2004, by Hispanic Ethnicity and Race.
34.9%
28.7%
27.0% 27.8%
24.7% 24.9%
21.1% 21.3%
18.7%
20.0%
15.5% 14.6%
10.5% 10.8% 11.0%

8.6%
0.0%
Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5
Hispanic Black White
Note. All comparisons between Hispanic and Black non-Hispanic children statistically differ from White non-Hispanic
children at the p < .01 level.
Results 2011. Slightly more than a quarter (27%) of His-

Income Distribution of Children by Race panic children were in the lowest income quintile
and Ethnicity group in 2008 to 2011, which is comparable to
the proportion of Hispanic children in the lowest
Figure 1 shows the distribution of Hispanic income quintile group (29%) documented dur-
children by income level, sorted into quintiles ing the prerecession period. However, Hispanic
based on Wave 1 income. We found that 28.7% children were statistically slightly more likely
of Hispanic children resided in the lowest to be in the second quintile group from 2008 to
income quintile group, compared with 15.7% of 2011 than they were in the prerecession period.
non-Hispanic children, which is consistent with We found a statistically smaller proportion
current estimates of Hispanic children residing of Hispanic children in households in the top
below poverty based on the U.S. Census. In com- income quintile group in the 2008 to 2011
parison, 8.6% of Hispanic children were in the period than in the 2004 to 2006 period prior to
highest income quintile group, compared with the recession. In comparison, we found a statis-
24.5% of non-Hispanic children. Thus, there tically larger proportion of Hispanic children in
was a statistically significant gap of 20 percent- households in the second lowest quintile group
age points (absolute difference) between the in 2008 to 2011 than in the prerecession period.
percentages of Hispanic children in the lowest
and highest income quintile groups, compared
with a gap of 8.8 percentage points among Socioeconomic Characteristics of Households
non-Hispanic children. Figure 1 uncouples the With Children by Race and Ethnicity
category of non-Hispanic children, separating Table 1 presents a variety of demographic and
non-Hispanic Black from non-Hispanic White economic characteristics of children and their
children. Similar to Hispanic children, Black households by Hispanic ethnicity, beginning
children were statistically more likely to be in with a comparison of children identified as
households in the lowest income quintile groups Hispanic according to child’s reported ethnicity
when compared with non-Hispanic White chil- as compared with the reference adult’s reported
dren. Black children were also 6.2 percentage ethnicity that we rely on for the main analyses.
points statistically more likely to reside in The first two panels of the table show the slight
households in the lowest income quintile when variation in racial/ethnic identity among chil-
compared with Hispanic children. dren who are identified as Hispanic according to
Figure 2 shows the distribution of Hispanic the reference adult’s Hispanic identity, with just
children during the period from 2004 to 2006 8% of that group of children identified instead
and compares this with the period from 2008 to as White. In the 2008 SIPP data, virtually every
Figure 2. Household Income Quintile Distribution of Hispanic Children, Survey of Income and Program
Participation 2004 and 2008.
31.9%*
28.7%
27.4% 27.0%
21.1% 20.6%
0.2
14.6%
13.2%
8.6%
6.9%*
0
Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5
Hispanic 2004 Hispanic 2008
Note. Statistical differences between Hispanic 2004 to 2006 and Hispanic 2008 to 2011 are shown at *p < .05.
child identified as Hispanic was also coded What might be masked by grouping children
as Hispanic according to the reference adult’s in the large category of non-Hispanic? Educa-
ethnicity. tion of the reference adult and the composition
When compared with non-Hispanic children of earners in the household were two striking
in either the 2004 or 2008 samples, Hispanic differences in characteristics within the category
children resided with more adults and were of non-Hispanic children. Specifically, among
more likely to reside with three or more chil- the lowest income households (first quintile) in
dren and with a reference adult who had less Wave 1 of the 2004 data, 58% of Hispanic chil-
than a high school degree or equivalent. When dren resided with at least one adult earner, com-
compared with non-Hispanic children, Hispanic pared with 48% of White children and 41% of
children had lower monthly household incomes, Black children. Yet, 35% of the reference adults
but employment levels of the reference adult had a high school degree or equivalent among
were similar. Hispanic children during the the lowest income Hispanic children, compared
period from 2008 to 2011 were more likely than with 58% of the lowest income White chil-
non-Hispanic children to reside with an adult dren and 61% of the lowest income Black chil-
earner and to reside with a reference adult who dren. These patterns were qualitatively similar in
had at least a high school degree or equivalent; Wave 1 of the 2008 data. Thus, one distinguish-
however, a similar pattern was observed when ing feature of low-income Hispanic children,
we compared non-Hispanic children between when compared with their low-income Black
Wave 1 (May) in the 2004 sample and Wave 1 peers, appeared to be the higher likelihood of
(December) in the 2008 sample. having one adult earner present in the household
Table 2 expands on selected socioeconomic despite lower levels of completed education.
characteristics of Hispanic children for each of
the lowest three income quintile groups. When
compared with children in the lowest income Income Volatility by Race and Ethnicity
quintile groups, Hispanic children in the third Table 3 presents the three measures of income
income quintile group (i.e., middle income volatility (income shocks, CV, and standard
relative to the total income distribution) were deviation of the APC) for the bottom three
more likely to reside in a household with more income quintiles for Hispanic (top panel) and
adult earners and with a reference adult who non-Hispanic (lower panel) children. Table 4
had a higher completed education level, who presents the means and standard errors of these
was married, and who was working full-time. same measures separately for non-Hispanic
This pattern generally holds across these same White and non-Hispanic Black children.
characteristics captured during Wave 1 of the Irrespective of race and ethnicity, time period,
2008 SIPP panel. or measure, income volatility was higher among
Table 1. Descriptive Characteristics of Children and Their Households by Hispanic Ethnicity
SIPP 2004 sample SIPP 2008 sample

Hispanic Non-Hispanic Hispanic Non-Hispanic
Characteristic Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE
Race/ethnicity of child
White, non-Hispanic 0.08 0.71 0.02 0.69
Black, non-Hispanic 0.02 0.18 0.01 0.17
Other, non-Hispanic 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.11
Hispanic 0.89 0.03 0.97 0.03
Race/ethnicity of reference adult 0.74 0.75
White, non-Hispanic 0.19 0.17
Black, non-Hispanic 0.07 0.08
Other, non-Hispanic 1.00 1.00
Hispanic
Reference adult and household characteristics, Wave 1
Adult reference person is male 0.43 0.39 0.47 0.43
Age of adult reference person 37.20 0.26 40.04 0.14 38.43 0.22 40.57 0.11
Number of adults residing in household 2.32 0.03 2.03 0.01 2.39 0.02 2.05 0.01
Number of adult earners residing in household 1.53 0.03 1.47 0.01 1.50 0.02 1.43 0.01
Ratio of adult earners residing in household 0.67 0.01 0.73 0.00 0.64 0.01 0.71 0.00
0 adult earners residing in household 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.10
1 adult earners residing in household 0.40 0.41 0.47 0.43
2 or more adult earners residing in household 0.49 0.50 0.44 0.47
Less than high school degree 0.46 0.09 0.43 0.08
High school degree or GED 0.39 0.51 0.47 0.57
Some college 0.12 0.29 0.08 0.23
More than college 0.03 0.11 0.02 0.12
Married 0.72 0.73 0.71 0.72
Widowed/divorced/separated 0.15 0.17 0.13 0.17
Never married 0.13 0.10 0.15 0.11
3 or more children residing in household 0.51 0.36 0.52 0.34
Youngest child is younger than 6 years old 0.58 0.48 0.61 0.49
Characteristics of child
Male child 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.51
Age of child 8.23 0.15 8.84 0.07 8.25 0.12 8.61 0.06
Foster or related child to reference adult 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99
Biological/adopted child of reference adult 0.89 0.92 0.87 0.91
Reference adult employment, Wave 1
Not employed 0.27 0.25 0.27 0.25
Employed full-time 0.60 0.58 0.58 0.60
Employed part-time 0.08 0.13 0.11 0.12
Mix of full-time, part-time, temporary employment 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.03
Current monthly household income, $ 4, 545 107 6, 995 81 3, 970 72 6, 826 63
Sample size 1, 510 6, 141 2, 338 9, 845
Source. Authors’ calculations of 2004 and 2008 SIPP data.
Note. SIPP = Survey of Income and Program Participation.
Table 2. Descriptive Characteristics of Hispanic Children and Their Households by Income Quintile
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q1 Q2 Q3
Characteristic Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE
Race/ethnicity
White, non-Hispanic 0.05 0.06 0.09 0.01 0.01 0.02
Black, non-Hispanic 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00
Other, non-Hispanic 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hispanic 0.91 0.94 0.88 0.99 0.97 0.98
Reference adult and household
characteristics, Wave 1
Adult reference person is male 0.30 0.51 0.49 0.32 0.49 0.52
Age of adult reference person 35.25 0.46 37.56 0.59 37.39 0.51 36.01 0.42 37.91 0.35 39.15 0.52
Number of adults residing in household 1.88 0.04 2.25 0.04 2.40 0.05 1.87 0.03 2.25 0.03 2.62 0.05
Number of adult earners residing in 0.73 0.03 1.44 0.03 1.92 0.04 0.76 0.03 1.40 0.02 1.85 0.04
household
Ratio of adult earners residing in 0.43 0.02 0.68 0.02 0.82 0.01 0.44 0.02 0.66 0.01 0.75 0.01
household
0 adult earners residing in household 0.34 0.04 0.00 0.32 0.01 0.00
1 adult earner residing in household 0.58 0.52 0.25 0.61 0.61 0.33
2 or more adult earners residing in 0.07 0.45 0.75 0.07 0.38 0.67
household
Less than high school degree 0.58 0.52 0.42 0.56 0.50 0.33
High school degree or GED 0.35 0.42 0.45 0.38 0.45 0.59
Some college 0.06 0.06 0.13 0.05 0.05 0.05
More than college 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.03
Married 0.55 0.72 0.77 0.58 0.72 0.75
Widowed/divorced/separated 0.24 0.12 0.14 0.18 0.14 0.11
Never married 0.21 0.16 0.09 0.24 0.14 0.14
3 or more children residing in household 0.56 0.48 0.54 0.51 0.58 0.51
Youngest child is younger than 6 years 0.61 0.60 0.54 0.63 0.65 0.59
old
Male child 0.54 0.53 0.50 0.49 0.47 0.55
Age of child 7.86 0.28 8.27 0.27 8.51 0.31 7.63 0.23 8.31 0.21 8.44 0.27
Foster or related child to reference adult 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.98
Biological/adopted child of reference 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.92 0.91 0.81
adult
Reference adult employment, Wave 1
Not employed 0.54 0.23 0.09 0.50 0.25 0.16
Employed full-time 0.32 0.60 0.78 0.32 0.61 0.67
Employed part-time 0.09 0.10 0.05 0.11 0.11 0.13
Mix of full-time, part-time, temporary 0.06 0.06 0.08 0.07 0.03 0.04
employment
Sample size 445 438 308 652 749 482
Note. Q1 = Quintile 1; Q2 = Quintile 2; Q3 = Quintile 3; SIPP = Survey of Income and Program Participation.
children in the lowest income households when qualitatively similar for the 2008 to 2011 period
compared with the middle-income (third quin- (not shown).
tile group) households. Irrespective of ethnic- Within income level by ethnicity in the 2004
ity (i.e., Hispanic or non-Hispanic), during the to 2006 period, Hispanic children in the lowest
period from 2004 to 2006, children in the lowest income households statistically had slightly
income group were similarly likely to experience more income stability than the lowest income
at least one positive (approximately 88%) or one non-Hispanic children based on the CV or APC
negative (80%) income shock. The pattern was (e.g., the APC equaled 67 among Hispanic
Table 3. Income Volatility of Children in Households by Hispanic Ethnicity and Income Quintile
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q1 Q2 Q3
Hispanic
Measure of income shocks
Percent any positive shock 0.94 0.01 0.79 0.02* 0.75 0.03* 0.87 0.02 0.73 0.02 0.70 0.02*
Total number of positive shocks 2.20 0.07 1.44 0.06 1.22 0.06 1.89 0.05 1.45 0.05 1.20 0.06*
Percent any negative shock 0.78 0.02 0.62 0.03* 0.66 0.03* 0.71 0.02 0.66 0.02* 0.67 0.02*
Total number of negative shocks 1.27 0.05 1.03 0.06* 1.02 0.06* 1.28 0.05 1.12 0.04 1.13 0.06*
Total number of shocks 3.47 0.10 2.47 0.10* 2.24 0.11* 3.17 0.09 2.57 0.08 2.33 0.10*
Measure of CV
Total income Waves 1 to 9 0.51 0.02* 0.34 0.01* 0.32 0.01 0.51 0.02* 0.38 0.01 0.35 0.01*
Total income including food stamps 0.46 0.01* 0.32 0.01* 0.32 0.01 0.44 0.01* 0.36 0.01 0.33 0.01*
Earned income 0.78 0.04 0.40 0.02* 0.37 0.02 0.67 0.03* 0.45 0.01* 0.40 0.02
Unearned income 1.01 0.05 1.12 0.06 1.11 0.05 0.93 0.04 1.27 0.05* 1.05 0.05
Female earnings 0.73 0.06 0.53 0.05 0.50 0.04 0.63 0.05* 0.54 0.04 0.47 0.04
Male earnings 0.80 0.06 0.40 0.04* 0.42 0.04 0.78 0.05 0.55 0.03 0.53 0.05
Measure of SD of APC
Total income Waves 1 to 9 67.37 2.03* 45.87 1.92 39.68 1.68 67.74 2.07 50.09 1.59 44.03 1.98*
Total income including food stamps 60.14 1.86 44.06 1.88 38.96 1.64 58.18 1.90 47.00 1.46 42.85 1.89*
Earned income 78.04 2.38 51.28 2.24* 46.91 2.21* 78.71 2.61 57.32 1.84* 48.95 2.21*
Unearned income 76.02 3.43 73.67 3.11 85.66 3.33 66.62 2.22* 81.58 2.37 79.29 2.96
Female earnings 55.35 3.38 52.62 3.89 62.54 4.64* 55.00 3.26 51.83 3.04 49.05 3.72
Male earnings 84.62 4.74 48.19 3.71* 49.35 4.29 89.08 4.55 63.77 2.96 63.33 4.28*
Sample size 445 438 308 652 749 482
Non-Hispanic
Percent any positive shock 0.94 0.01 0.80 0.01 0.68 0.01 0.88 0.01 0.76 0.01 0.61 0.01
Total number of positive shocks 2.26 0.04 1.56 0.04 1.14 0.03 1.94 0.03 1.37 0.03 0.98 0.03
Percent any negative shock 0.77 0.01 0.57 0.02 0.50 0.02 0.73 0.01 0.62 0.01 0.52 0.01
Total number of negative shocks 1.39 0.04 0.96 0.04 0.78 0.03 1.30 0.03 1.06 0.03 0.84 0.03
Total number of shocks 3.65 0.07 2.52 0.07 1.91 0.05 3.24 0.06 2.43 0.05 1.82 0.05
Measure of CV
Total income Waves 1 to 9 0.62 0.01 0.37 0.01 0.31 0.01 0.76 0.06 0.40 0.01 0.30 0.01
Total income including food stamps 0.52 0.01 0.36 0.01 0.30 0.01 0.61 0.05 0.38 0.01 0.29 0.01
Earned income 0.83 0.03 0.50 0.02 0.35 0.01 1.19 0.13 0.58 0.02 0.36 0.01
Unearned income 0.96 0.03 1.05 0.04 1.14 0.03 0.97 0.02 1.01 0.03 1.11 0.03
Female earnings 0.76 0.04 0.61 0.03 0.50 0.02 0.85 0.05 0.59 0.03 0.54 0.03
Male earnings 0.83 0.06 0.56 0.03 0.39 0.02 2.14 0.85 0.63 0.03 0.45 0.02
Earned income 78.18 1.90 54.25 1.49 41.61 1.15 80.43 1.75 63.09 1.41 43.54 1.11
Unearned income 81.30 1.90 80.43 1.86 83.74 1.66 78.49 1.50 77.84 1.48 81.92 1.37
Female earnings 59.88 2.17 58.38 2.34 49.10 1.82 61.65 2.03 49.50 1.79 46.87 1.84
Male earnings 82.06 4.51 58.29 2.73 47.34 2.47 89.67 3.96 68.13 2.71 47.96 1.90
Sample size 1,002 1,093 1,289 1,650 1,619 1,905
Note. APC = arc percent change; CV = coefficient of variation; Q1 = Quintile 1; Q2 = Quintile 2; Q3 = Quintile 3; SD = standard deviation;
SIPP = Survey of Income and Program Participation.
* p < .05 indicates statistically significant differences between Hispanic and non-Hispanic within quintile.
Table 4. Income Volatility of Children in Households by Race and Income Quintile
SIPP 2004 samplea SIPP 2008 sampleb
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q1 Q2 Q3
Non-Hispanic White
Measure of CV
Earned income 0.85 0.04 0.48 0.02 0.34 0.01 1.06 0.11 0.55 0.02 0.35 0.01
Unearned income 1.06 0.05 1.06 0.04 1.14 0.04 1.02 0.03 1.07 0.04 1.12 0.04
Female earnings 0.79 0.06 0.66 0.04 0.50 0.03 0.87 0.08 0.58 0.03 0.54 0.04
Male earnings 0.93 0.08 0.58 0.04 0.39 0.03 2.80 1.28 0.57 0.03 0.43 0.03
Earned income 84.27 2.46 54.28 1.85 39.36 1.21 84.17 2.30 62.04 1.68 42.67 1.22
Unearned income 88.36 2.70 80.45 2.23 83.29 1.83 80.25 2.06 79.02 1.80 83.02 1.58
Female earnings 60.77 3.03 60.25 2.84 47.49 2.03 62.90 2.73 49.75 2.21 47.89 2.16
Male earnings 100.86 4.60 60.52 3.39 46.33 2.79 90.40 5.14 67.10 3.16 48.16 2.20
Sample size 486 743 1,012 933 1,131 1,470
Non-Hispanic Black
Measure of CV
Earned income 0.83 0.05 0.53 0.04 0.36 0.03 0.91 0.06 0.66 0.04 0.40 0.03
Unearned income 0.82 0.05 1.07 0.07 1.04 0.08 0.88 0.04 0.90 0.05 1.02 0.07
Female earnings 0.74 0.05 0.47 0.05 0.41 0.05 0.83 0.07 0.63 0.06 0.51 0.08
Male earnings 0.55 0.12 0.46 0.06 0.38 0.05 0.82 0.11 0.83 0.10 0.52 0.07
Earned income 73.19 3.31 52.23 2.86 46.70 3.25 73.09 2.96 66.25 3.04 44.40 2.93
Unearned income 72.20 2.90 84.05 3.89 77.32 4.19 74.00 2.40 74.90 2.89 72.39 3.58
Female earnings 59.90 3.41 48.71 4.25 46.91 4.57 60.62 3.26 51.32 3.41 40.14 4.09
Male earnings 46.70 7.30 49.46 4.68 51.97 6.21 78.00 7.89 75.39 7.07 43.17 4.40
Sample size 393 249 185 566 358 264
Note. Analysis of variance tests applied to assess statistical differences across measures by Hispanic, White, and Black within quintile.
Sample size for White plus Black does not equal non-Hispanic because a small group of “other” are not presented. APC = arc percent change;
CV = coefficient of variation; Q1 = Quintile 1; Q2 = Quintile 2; Q3 = Quintile 3; SD = standard deviation; SIPP = Survey of Income and Program
Participation.
a For the 2004 SIPP panel sample, 13 of 15 income instability measures met statistical significance for racial/ethnic differences at p < .05 in
Q1, 4 of 15 measures in Q2, and 14 of 15 measures for Q3.

b For the 2008 SIPP panel sample, 13 of 15 income instability measures met statistical significance for racial/ethnic differences at p < .05 in
Q1; 5 of 15 measures in Q2; 12 of 15 measures in Q3.

children vs. 72 among all non-Hispanic chil- between the lowest and highest income children
dren; separately, the APC equaled 72 among for both Hispanic and non-Hispanic children;
White children and 75 among Black children, as that is, all lowest income children experienced
shown in Table 4). Although the lowest income more income stability with the addition of
Hispanic children (first quintile group) expe- food stamp income. Second, the dampening
rienced the same number of positive income effect was more pronounced among the lowest
shocks as the lowest income non-Hispanic chil- income non-Hispanic children when compared
dren, they experienced slightly fewer negative with lowest income Hispanic children (i.e., the
income shocks (1.3 during a 2.5-year period vs. addition of food stamp income had a more sub-
1.4 among non-Hispanic children, even when stantial stabilizing effect among non-Hispanic
non-Hispanic Black children were examined children than among Hispanic children).
separately from non-Hispanic White children, Tables 3 and 4 include measures of income
as shown in Table 4). The pattern for children volatility that add the cash value of food stamp
in the second and third income quintile groups income among recipient households. Because
differed from that of children in the lowest receipt of food stamps dramatically increased
income quintile: Hispanic children experienced during the Great Recession, we focused this por-
modestly more negative income shocks and total tion of the analysis on the findings from the
income shocks than did non-Hispanic children. 2008 to 2011 data period. Among the lowest
Across periods, income volatility was gener- income non-Hispanic children, the APC of total
ally similar for the lowest income Hispanic chil- income decreased from 115 to 58 with the addi-
dren from 2008 to 2011 compared with 2004 to tion of food stamp income. In contrast, the low-
2006, although the number of positive income est income Hispanic children experienced much
shocks statistically decreased. Income volatility smaller changes in income volatility with the
substantively improved for the lowest income addition of food stamp income (an APC of 67
non-Hispanic children in 2008 to 2011 ver- with the added cash value of food stamp income
sus 2004 to 2006. However, among the lowest compared with an APC of 58 without the added
income Hispanic children, the source of income cash value of food stamp income). The stabi-
volatility appeared to have shifted. Whereas the lizing influence of social assistance income was
lowest income Hispanic children had higher particularly pronounced among Black children
income volatility than their non-Hispanic peers in the lowest income quintile, moving from an
as a result of having fewer negative income APC of 169 to 50 in 2008 to 2011 with the
shocks in 2004 to 2006, income volatility from addition of food stamp income (see Table 4).
2008 to 2011 appeared to be related to a reduc- The equivalent change among White children
tion in the number of positive income shocks. was a reduction in the APC from 82 to 65
in 2008 to 2011 with the cash value of food
stamp income. These ethnic and racial differ-
Income Volatility and the Role of Social ences in the stabilizing influence of food stamp
Assistance Income income was a function of differences in receipt.
Among recipients, social assistance payments In Wave 1 of the SIPP 2008 panel (interview
were most commonly disbursed on a monthly month December 2008), 45% of households of
basis and thus served as a predictable and low-income (first quintile) Hispanic children and
stable source of monthly income. The stan- 47% of low-income White non-Hispanic chil-
dard deviation of the APC was reestimated dren’s households received food stamp bene-
to combine the total household income with fits, compared with 65% of low-income Black
the cash value of food stamp income with the non-Hispanic children’s households.
expectation that food stamp income would
reduce the APC (i.e., increase income stabil-
Income Volatility and Earned Income
ity) among recipients. The addition of food
stamp income had two dampening effects We next examined household earned income
on observed differences in income volatility separately from household unearned income,
between low-income and higher income chil- and earnings of residential adult females (91%
dren and between low-income Hispanic and of whom were reference adults who were a bio-
non-Hispanic children. The addition of food logical or adopted mother of at least one child
stamp income reduced the income volatility gap in the household) separately from earnings of
residential adult males (92% of whom were ref- children were combined into one category,
erence adults who were a biological or adopted their earnings stability looked qualitatively
father of at least one child). These results are also similar to residential fathers of Hispanic chil-
shown in Tables 3 and 4. dren.) These patterns imply that employed
fathers of Black children experienced relatively
Stability of household earned and unearned less variation in their monthly earned income
income. For the lowest income Hispanic chil- than employed fathers of Hispanic children
dren, the stability of household earned income experienced.
increased (i.e., lower CV or lower income
volatility) or stayed similar (according to
the APC), and stability of unearned income Income Volatility Among Hispanic Households
increased in 2008 to 2011 compared with 2004 by Citizenship, Nativity, and Language
to 2006. The pattern differed for the lowest Table 5 presents income volatility according to
income non-Hispanic children, for whom sta- the APC measure (for simplicity) among His-
bility of household earned income decreased panic children by household member citizen-
(i.e., higher CV and APC or higher income ship status, nativity, and English-language pro-
volatility), but the stability of unearned income ficiency. There was not enough intrawave vari-
was unchanged in 2008 to 2011 when compared ation across 2004 to 2006 or 2008 to 2011 to
with 2004 to 2006. empirically assess changes in household citi-
As noted in the analysis of food stamp zenship status in relation to changes in eco-
income, the broad classification of non-Hispanic nomic circumstances. However, although rela-
children masked considerable heterogeneity by tively high correlations across some character-
race that is confounded with the source of istics were found as expected (e.g., at least one
income: Earned income volatility was lower adult being a U.S. citizen was highly corre-
among non-Hispanic Black children than lated with at least one adult being U.S. born),
among Hispanic and non-Hispanic White chil- several characteristics among Hispanic children
dren (Table 4). This is in part because measures were not perfectly related and thus had the
of earnings volatility were affected by the stabil- potential to capture different dimensions of His-
ity of employment status (being stably engaged panic child economic experiences and circum-
in paid work or not) as well as by the stability stances. For example, among Hispanic chil-
of income generated from employment and dren, the correlation between household lin-
from the presence and residential stability of guistic isolation and nativity status was −0.45,
potential adult earners. As previously described, and the correlations between linguistic isola-
the lowest income Black non-Hispanic children tion and household citizenship status was −0.39
were much less likely to have at least one adult (not shown).
earner in the household than were their peers. These characteristics of Hispanic children
also correlated with other demographic and
Stability of fathers’ and mothers’ earned socioeconomic characteristics. Among the
income. When separately examining individual lowest income children (first quintile group),
earnings of residential adults (most of whom are reference adults in linguistically isolated house-
parents, as noted), we found that mothers of the holds were less likely to have completed a high
lowest income Hispanic children experienced school degree or equivalent (26%), compared
earnings volatility, and rates of employment, with Hispanic children in non–linguistically
similar to those of mothers of the lowest income isolated households (40%), although house-
non-Hispanic children. The stability of res- holds in linguistically isolated households had
idential fathers’ earnings and employment more resident adults and a higher likelihood
substantively varied across racial and ethnic of having at least one adult earner. The lowest
groups. Residential fathers of Hispanic children income Hispanic children in households with
had similar rates of employment and less stable at least one U.S. citizen also were more likely
earnings than residential fathers of non-Hispanic to be in a household with a reference adult
White children, but substantively higher rates of who had completed a high school degree or
employment and earnings volatility than resi- equivalent (45%), compared with the lowest
dential fathers of non-Hispanic Black children. income Hispanic children in households with
(Thus, when residential fathers of non-Hispanic no U.S. citizens (23%), and, similar to the
Table 5. Income Volatility as Measured by Arc Percent Change of Children in Hispanic Households by Selected
Characteristics

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q1 Q2 Q3
Nativity status
At least one adult household 60.63 2.67* 50.23 2.90 42.16 2.26 70.69 3.00 45.86 2.01* 41.44 2.51
member is U.S. born
No adult household member is 73.07 2.93 43.32 2.51 35.83 2.43 64.98 2.84 53.73 2.38 48.57 3.17
U.S. born
Citizenship status
At least one adult household 62.46 2.42* 46.90 2.57 40.12 2.03 67.46 2.68 42.99 1.64 40.97 2.16*
member is a U.S. citizen
No adult household member is 73.03 3.31 44.86 2.86 38.53 2.93 68.15 3.26 61.89 3.07 54.92 4.55
a U.S. citizen
English-language proficiency
Reference person is English 67.66 2.71 52.40 2.79 38.61 2.19 67.04 2.92 45.89 2.04* 42.76 2.39
proficient
Reference person is not 66.93 3.02 38.54 2.45 41.69 2.50 68.49 2.95 56.53 2.46 48.22 3.21
English proficient
Linguistic isolated household 61.01 3.22* 48.15 3.59 35.62 3.89 72.93 3.33* 49.90 2.87 56.36 4.57*
Non–linguistically isolated 70.80 2.56 44.33 2.11 40.53 1.85 64.40 2.63 50.18 1.92 41.54 2.17
household
Source. Authors’ calculations of 2004 and 2008 SIPP data. Note. Q1 = Quintile 1; Q2 = Quintile 2; Q3 = Quintile 3;
SIPP = Survey of Income and Program Participation. * p < .05 indicates statistically significant differences between groups
within the quintile for the respective year.
children in linguistically isolated households, volatility in 2008 to 2011 in an opposite pat-

these children had more adults residing in the tern from 2004 to 2006, with income volatility
household and a higher likelihood of having at increasing among lowest income Hispanic
least one adult earner. children in households with at least one U.S.
Table 5 shows that during the 2004 to 2006 citizen. A similar shift was not observed among
period, income volatility was higher among the lowest income Hispanic children in house-
the lowest income Hispanic children in households varying by nativity status. We found
holds with at least one household member who a similar type of shift when examining low-
was U.S. born or a U.S. citizen, compared est income Hispanic children in households
with the lowest income Hispanic children in according to linguistic isolation (although not
households with no U.S. citizens or U.S.-born by English-language proficiency). Hispanic
adults. This difference may be because of a children in linguistically isolated households
higher likelihood of receipt of social assistance showed less income volatility than Hispanic
benefits as a stabilizing source of income. children in households who had English speak-
English proficiency levels of the reference adult ers during the 2004 to 2006 period, but more
did not show differentiation in volatility of income volatility during the 2008 to 2011
income among lowest income Hispanic chil- period. Reference adult employment patterns
dren; however, linguistic isolation of household of Hispanic children by linguistic isolation
members did. also substantively differed across these periods:
Volatility of income shifted between the Whereas few differences are shown in other
2004 to 2006 and 2008 to 2011 periods. The demographic characteristics, Hispanic children
citizenship status of Hispanic children’s house- in households that were not linguistically iso-
hold members showed differentiation in income lated were more likely to have an unemployed
reference adult than Hispanic children in lin- volatility by race and ethnicity, which found that
guistically isolated households in 2004, but less Hispanics were more likely than non-Hispanics
likely in 2008. to experience a 50% or greater income drop
from one year to the next (Acs et al., 2009). The
differences could be due to different types of
Discussion measures used to capture income volatility or
This study expands our understanding of the different samples, as we focused our analyses
racial and ethnic stratification of children’s from the perspective of children. Although
economic circumstances. Our analyses of the some Hispanic children are more vulnerable
dynamics of income change within and across than non-Hispanic children in many ways,
Hispanic children, relative to non-Hispanic because of factors such as legal status, fluency,
White and Black children, and at varying and precarious work among parents, they are
levels of income, has only recently become more likely to reside with at least one adult
possible with the availability of large national earner (shown here as well as by Fry & Pas-
data sets because of the growing propor- sel [2014]), which could be stabilizing. Our
tions of Hispanic and low-income Hispanic finding that the stability of earnings, particu-
households nationally. larly fathers’ earnings, seems to be particularly
Consistent with census estimates and prior income stabilizing among Hispanic children is
research (e.g., Annie E. Casey Foundation, consistent with that hypothesis.
2017), we found that a higher proportion of His- More research needs to be done to understand
panic children are likely to be residing in poverty fully why differences in income volatility might
(compared with children of other racial/ethnic exist for children with different racial/ethnic
groups) in the 2000s. Despite higher poverty makeup, the extent to which these differences
rates, Hispanic children experienced slightly are shaped by community characteristics (e.g.,
less income volatility than their peers. Other residing in urban versus rural areas or in estab-
key findings were that the experience of low but lished vs. emerging Hispanic communities),
stable income, on average, did not vary among and whether these differences are substantively
Hispanic children according to the nativity or meaningful for adult or child well-being. It is
citizenship status of adults. In addition, Hispanic unclear from our results whether the combina-
children were no more likely than other children tion of low income and stable income is likely
to experience low and volatile income in 2008 to be a beneficial or detrimental aspect of the
to 2011, despite the dramatic changes in the economic circumstances of Hispanic children.
economy. However, differences in income level On one hand, this finding could point to a
and income volatility between the lowest and greater likelihood of stagnant low income for
highest income Hispanic children shifted in Hispanic children, which would point to unique
2008 to 2011when compared with prerecession challenges that Hispanic workers may face in
levels. A lower proportion of Hispanic chil- economic mobility. These challenges could
dren appeared in the highest income categories relate to real or perceived restricted access to
and a higher proportion in the middle-income public assistance for immigrants, which can vary
category. This shift in distribution appeared in nuanced ways by program and state (U.S.
to be accompanied by a reduction in experi- Department of Health and Human Services,
encing positive income shocks (which might Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning
suggest families’ difficulties with economic and Evaluation, 2012), or to the greater like-
mobility). lihood of being employed in low-quality jobs
Overall, the results suggest that income with low earnings or little career advancement
volatility is higher among low-income families (Brown & Patten, 2014). On the other hand, the
than among higher income families, irrespective more stable income among Hispanic children,
of racial/ethnic status. At the lowest income relative to non-Hispanic White and Black chil-
levels, however, Hispanic children were more dren, may have favorable influences on family
likely than children of other racial/ethnic groups life and child well-being if it relates to the social
to experience somewhat more stable income. support of multigenerational family structures.
The differences by ethnicity were modest in Future studies might examine the dynamics of
size but statistically significant. Our findings sources of income in much greater detail by
differ from the one prior analysis of income racial/ethnic group and address open questions
about how the modestly higher income sta- of volatility in other aspects of children’s lives
bility experienced by Hispanic children might related to household routines and time spent with
influence family functioning, parental stress, or parents, as the earned income may be gener-
children’s development. ated from juggling multiple jobs, balancing sea-
sonal work, or being continuously employed in
low-quality or low-wage jobs.
Limitations
A more dynamic perspective on racial dis-
Our study produced several new descriptive parities in economic disadvantage should also
facts about income dynamics across racial/ethnic inform policymaking and program practices.
group but also has several limitations. The study The operation and success of early educa-
captures an important time period but does not tion, school-based initiatives, and income
extend beyond 2011, and thus does not cap- supports—many of which target and serve His-
ture the most recent shifts in the macroeco- panic and non-Hispanic Black children—often
nomic, political, demographic, or social context hinge on assumptions about the stability of the
that can influence income stability in different home economic environment. Income volatility
ways according to race and ethnicity. Second, can be a challenge to program administration
although the descriptive facts reveal many poten- and to achieving goals of family stability and
tial explanatory factors that can affect family life self-sufficiency, but opportunities exist for future
and children’s development, the extent to which research to test administrative experiments and
these patterns are causal or not and whether the larger interventions designed to promote eco-
causal mechanisms differ by race and ethnicity nomic stability (Hardy, 2016; H. D. Hill et al.,
are not examined. Third, our analyses assume 2017; Romich & Hill, 2017).
that reporting of income, earnings, and related
economic behavior are of similar quality and
have similar biases (e.g. under- or overreport- Note
ing) across race and ethnicity. Finally, our anal- This research was inspired by Dr. Gennetian’s collaboration
yses of female reference adults (most of whom with the National Center for Research on Hispanic Fami-
are mothers) in comparison with male reference lies and Children. This research was made possible by Grant
90PH0025 by the Office of Planning, Research and Evalua-
adults (most of whom are fathers) are novel in tion, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Depart-
that most research focuses on one or the other; ment of Health and Human Services. The authors thank
however, with the SIPP data we were able to cap- Emily Green for her research assistance on earlier drafts, and
ture the economic behavior of residential male Natasha Cabrera, Danielle Crosby, Lina Guzman, Michael
reference adults only. Lopez, Ann Rivera, and Elizabeth Wildsmith for their con-
structive feedback on earlier versions of this research. The
study contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and
do not necessarily represent the official views of Office of
Conclusion Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Chil-
We expanded the study of economic disparities dren and Families, or U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services.
by race and ethnicity with measures that cap-
ture dynamic features of income during child-
hood. Future research in family studies can
further untangle the complicated intersections References
of socioeconomic status and race/ethnicity by Acs, G., Loprest, P. J., & Nichols, A. (2009). Risk
examining how the effects of income volatility and recovery: Documenting the changing risks to
on parent stress, parenting, and child well-being family incomes. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
may also differ by race/ethnicity and explor- Adam, E. (2004). Beyond quality: Parental and
ing potential explanatory factors for these differ- residential stability and children’s adjustment.
ences. For example, the implications of greater Current Directions in Psychological Science,
income stability for the developmental outcomes 13(5), 210–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-
7214.2004.00310.x
of the lowest income Hispanic children are Adam, E. K., & Chase-Lansdale, P. L. (2002). Home
ambiguous. On one hand, stable earnings and sweet home(s): Parental separations, residential
less reliance on social assistance income may be moves, and adjustment problems in low-income
beneficial to children if receipt of assistance is adolescent girls. Developmental Psychology,
associated with stigma or shame; on the other 38(5), 792–805. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-
hand, earnings stability may come at the cost 1649.38.5.792
Adams, G., Boyle, M., Isaacs, J. B., Sandstrom, Brown, A., & Patten, E. (2014). Statistical portrait of
H., Dubay, L., Gelatt, J., & Katz, M. (2016). Hispanics in the United States, 2012. Retrieved
Stabilizing children’s lives: Insights for research from Pew Research Center website: http://www
and practice. Retrieved from Urban Institute web- .pewhispanic.org/2014/04/29/statistical-portrait-
site: https://www.urban.org/research/publication/ of-hispanics-in-the-united-states-2012/
stabilizing-childrens-lives Calzada, E. J., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., & Yoshikawa,
Aldoney, D., & Cabrera, N. (2016). Raising Amer- H. (2013). Familismo in Mexican and Domini-
ican citizens: Socialization goals of low-income can families from low-income, urban communi-
immigrant Latino mothers and fathers of young ties. Journal of Family Issues, 34, 1696–1724.
children. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 25, https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x12460218
3607–3618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-016- Carey, C., & Shore, S. H. (2013). From the peaks
0510-x to the valleys: Cross-state evidence on income
Almeida, J., Molnar, B. E., Kawachi, I., & Subra- volatility over the business cycle. Review of Eco-
manian, S. V. (2009). Ethnicity and nativity sta- nomics and Statistics, 95(2), 549–562. https://doi
tus as determinants of perceived social support: .org/10.1162/REST_a_00299
Testing the concept of familism. Social Science Cavanagh, S. E., & Huston, A. C. (2006). Family
and Medicine, 68(10), 1852–1858. https://doi.org/ instability and children’s early problem behavior.
10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.02.029 Social Forces, 85(1), 551–581. https://doi.org/10
Alvira-Hammond, M., & Gennetian, L. A. (2015). .1353/sof.2006.0120
How Hispanic parents perceive their need and Cavanagh, S. E., & Huston, A. C. (2008). The timing
eligibility for public assistance. Washington, DC: of family instability and children’s social devel-
National Research Center on Hispanic Children opment. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70,
and Families. 1258–1270. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737
Anderson, P. M., Butcher, K. F., Hoynes, H. W., & .2008.00564.x
Schanzenbach, D. W. (2016). Beyond income: Celik, S., Juhn, C., McCue, K., & Thompson, J.
What else predicts very low food security among (2012). Recent trends in earnings volatility: Evi-
children? Southern Economic Journal, 82(4), dence from survey and administrative data. The
1078–1105. https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.12079 BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 12(2).
Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2017). Kids Count https://doi.org/10.1515/1935-1682.3043
data center. Retrieved from http://datacenter. Cherlin, A. J. (2010). Demographic trends in the
kidscount.org/data/tables/44-children-in-poverty- United States: A review of research in the
by-race-and-ethnicity#detailed/1/any/false/870, 2000s. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72,
573,869,36,868/10,11,9,12,1,185,13/324,323 403–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.
Bachmeier, J. D., Van Hook, J., & Bean, F. D. (2014). 2010.00710.x
Can we measure immigrants’ legal status? Lessons Coldwell, J., Pike, A., & Dunn, J. (2006). Household
from two U.S. surveys. International Migration chaos—Links with parenting and child behaviour.
Review, 48(2), 538–566. https://doi.org/10.1111/ Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47,
imre.12059 1116–1122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610
Bleakley, H., & Chin, A. (2004). Language .2006.01655.x
skills and earnings: Evidence from childhood Conger, R. D., Conger, K. J., & Martin, M. J. (2010).
immigrants. The Review of Economics and Statis- Socioeconomic status, family processes, and
tics, 86(2), 481–496. https://doi.org/10.1162/ individual development. Journal of Marriage and
003465304323031067 Family, 72, 685–704. https://doi.org/10.1111/j
Bloome, D. (2014). Racial inequality trends and .1741-3737.2010.00725.x
the intergenerational persistence of income Conger, R. G., Ge, X., Elder, G. H., Lorenz, F. Q.,
and family structure. American Sociological & Simons, R. L. (1994). Economic stress, coer-
Review, 79(6), 1196–1225. https://doi.org/10 cive family process and development problems of
.1177/0003122414554947 adolescents. Child Development, 65(2), 541–561.
Bradley, R. H., & Corwyn, R. F. (2002). Socioe- https://doi.org/10.2307/1131401
conomic status and child development. Annual Dahl, M., DeLeire, T., & Schwabish, J. A. (2011).
Review of Psychology, 53(1), 371–399. https://doi Estimates of year-to-year volatility in earnings and
.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135233 in household incomes from administrative, survey,
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The and matched data. Journal of Human Resources,
bioecological model of human development. In W. 46(4), 750–774. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhr.2011
Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child .0000
psychology (6th ed., pp. 793–828). Hoboken, NJ: Danese, A., & McEwen, B. S. (2012). Adverse
Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470147658 childhood experiences, allostasis, allostatic load,
.chpsy0114 and age-related disease. Physiology & Behavior,
106(1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh Fuller, B., & Garcia Coll, C. (2010). Learning from
.2011.08.019 Latinos: Contexts, families, and child develop-
DeCamp, L. R., & Bundy, D. G. (2012). Generational ment in motion. Developmental Psychology, 46(3),
status, health insurance, and public benefit partici- 559–565. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019412
pation among low-income Latino children. Mater- Ganzel, B. L., Morris, P. A., & Wethington, E. (2010).
nal and Child Health Journal, 16(3), 735–743. Allostasis and the human brain: Integrating models
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-011-0779-8 of stress from the social and life sciences. Psycho-
Dumas J. E., Nissley, J., Nordstom, A., Smith, E. P., logical Review, 117(1), 134–174. https://doi.org/
Prinz, R. J., & Levine, D. W. (2005). Home chaos: 10.1037/a0017773
Sociodemographic, parenting, interactional, and Gennetian, L., Wolf, S., Hill, H. D., & Morris, P.
child correlates. Journal of Clinical Child and Ado- A. (2015). Intrayear household income dynam-
lescent Psychology, 34, 93–104. https://doi.org/10 ics and adolescent school behavior. Demography,
.1207/s15374424jccp3401_9 52(2), 455–483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-
Dynan, K., Elmendorf, D., & Sichel, D. (2012). The 015-0370-9
evolution of household income volatility. The BE Gennetian, L. A., Rodrigues, C., Hill, H. D., & Morris,
Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 12(2). P. A. (2018). Stability of income and school atten-
https://doi.org/10.1515/1935-1682.3347 dance among NYC students of low income fami-
Eggebeen, D. J., & Hogan, D. P. (1990). Giv- lies. Economics of Education Review, 63, 20–30.
ing between generations in American families. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.01.003
Human Nature, 1(3), 211–232. https://doi.org/10 Gosselin, P., & Zimmerman, S. (2008). Trends in
.1007/bf02733984 income volatility and risk, 1970–2004. Retrieved
Eggebeen, D. J., & Lichter, D. T. (1991). Race, family from Urban Institute website: http://www.urban
structure, and changing poverty among American .org/UploadedPDF/411672_income_trends.pdf
children. American Sociological Review, 56(6), Gottschalk, P., & Moffitt, R. A. (1994). Welfare
801–817. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096257 dependence: Concepts, measures, and trends. The
Elder, G. H. (1974). Children of the Great Depression. American Economic Review, 8(2), 38–42.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Gottschalk, P., & Moffitt, R. (1999). Changes in
Evans, G. W., & English, K. (2002). The environment job instability and insecurity using monthly sur-
of poverty: Multiple stressor exposure, psy- vey data. Journal of Labor Economics, 17(S4),
chophysiological stress, and socioemotional S91–S126. https://doi.org/10.1086/209944
adjustment. Child Development, 73(4), Gottschalk, P., & Moffitt, R. (2009). The rising insta-
1238–1248. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624 bility of US earnings. The Journal of Economic
.00469 Perspectives, 23(4), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1257/
Evans, G. W., & Schamberg, M. A. (2009). Child- jep.23.4.3
hood poverty, chronic stress, and adult working Hacker, J. S. (2008). The great risk shift: The new eco-
memory. Proceedings of the National Academy nomic insecurity and the decline of the American
of Sciences of the United States of America, dream. New York: Oxford University Press.
106(16), 6545–6549. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas Haider, S. J. (2001). Earnings instability and earn-
.0811910106 ings inequality of males in the United States:
Farber, H. S. (2010). Job loss and the decline in job 1967–1991. Journal of Labor Economics, 19(4),
security in the United States. In K. G. Abraham, 799–836. https://doi.org/10.1086/322821
J. R. Spletzer, & M. Harper (Eds.), Labor in the Hallowell, M. R., & Yugar-Arias, I. F. (2016). Explor-
new economy (pp. 223–266). Chicago: University ing fundamental causes of safety challenges faced
of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/ by Hispanic construction workers in the US using
9780226001463.003.0007 photovoice. Safety Science, 82, 199–211. https://
Fligstein, N., & Taekjin, S. (2004). The shareholder doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.09.010
value society: A review of the changes in working Hardy, B. L. (2014). Childhood income volatility and
conditions and inequality in the United States, adult outcomes. Demography, 51(5), 1641–1665.
1976–2000. In K. M. Neckerman (Ed.), Social https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-014-0329-2
inequality (pp. 401–432). New York: Russell Sage. Hardy, B. L. (2016). Addressing income volatility
Fry, R., & Passel, J. S. (2014). In post-recession in the United States: Flexible policy solutions for
era, young adults drive continuous rise in changing economic circumstances. Retrieved from
multi-generational living. Retrieved from Washington Center for Equitable Growth web-
Pew Research Center website: http://www site: http://equitablegrowth.org/labor-markets/
.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/07/17/in-post- addressing-income-volatility-in-the-united-
recession-era-young-adults-drive-continuing- states-flexible-policy-solutions-for-changing-
rise-in-multi-generational-living/ economic-circumstances/
Hardy, B. L. (2017). Income instability and the the Current Population Survey and Panel Study of
response of the safety net. Contemporary Eco- Income Dynamics. Journal of Labor Economics,
nomic Policy, 35(2), 312–330. https://doi.org/10 17(4), S1–S28. https://doi.org/10.3386/w6650
.1111/coep.12187 Jensen, S. T., & Shore, S. H. (2011). Semiparamet-
Hardy, B. L., & Ziliak, J. P. (2014). Decompos- ric bayesian modeling of income volatility het-
ing trends in income volatility: The “wild ride” erogeneity. Journal of the American Statistical
at the top and bottom. Economic Inquiry, 52(1), Association, 106(496), 1280–1290. https://doi.org/
459–476. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.12044 10.1198/jasa.2011.ap09283
Hill, D. (1987). Response errors around the seam: Joo, N., & Reeves, R. (2015). How upwardly mobile
Analysis of change in a panel with overlap- are Hispanic children? Depends how you look at
ping reference periods. In R. Boruch (Ed.), it. Retrieved from Brookings Institution website:
1986 Proceedings of the section on survey https://www.brookings.edu/blog/social-mobility-
research methods, American Statistical Associ- memos/2015/11/10/how-upwardly-mobile-are-
ation (pp. 210–215). Alexandria, VA: American hispanic-children-depends-how-you-look-at-it/
Statistical Association. https://doi.org/10.1787/ Kalil, A., & Ziol-Guest, K. M. (2005). Single moth-
9789264235120-table54-en ers’ employment dynamics and adolescent well-
Hill, H. D. (2018). Chapter Six: Trends and being. Child Development, 76(1), 196–211. https://
divergences in childhood income dynamics: doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00839.x
1970s–2000s. Advances in Child Development Kalleberg, A. L. (2009). Precarious work, insecure
and Behavior, 54, 179–213. https://doi.org/10 workers: Employment relations in transition.
.1016/bs.acdb.2017.10.002 American Sociological Review, 74, 1–22. https://
Hill, H. D., Morris, P., Gennetian, L. A., Wolf, S., doi.org/10.1177/000312240907400101
& Tubbs, C. (2013). The consequences of income Kalleberg, A. L. (2010). Good jobs, bad jobs: The
instability for children’s well-being. Child Devel- rise of polarized and precarious employment
opment Perspectives, 7(2), 85–90. https://doi.org/ systems in the United States, 1970s to 2000s.
10.1111/cdep.12018 New York: Russell Sage. https://doi.org/10.1177/
Hill, H. D., Romich, J., Mattingly, M., Shamsud-
0001839212472660
din, S., & Wething, H. (2017). An introduction to
Keys, B. (2008). Trends in income and consumption
household economic instability and social policy.
volatility, 1970–2000. In D. Jollife & J. Ziliak
Social Service Review, 91(3), 371–389. https://doi
(Eds.), Income volatility and food assistance in
.org/10.1086/694110
the United States (pp. 11–34). Kalamazoo, MI:
Hill, I., Stockdale, H., Evert, M., & Gifford, K.
W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
(2006). Do access experiences affect parents’
decisions to enroll their children in Medicaid https://doi.org/10.17848/9781435684126.ch2
and SCHIP? Maternal and Child Health Journal, Kochhar, R., Fry, R., & Taylor, P. (2011). Wealth gaps
10(6), 517–525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995- rise to record highs between Whites, Blacks, and
006-0145-4 Hispanics. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
Hogan, D. P., Eggebeen, D. J., & Clogg, C. C. (1993). Lambert, S. J., Fugiel, P. J., & Henly, J. R. (2014).
The structure of intergenerational exchanges in Precarious work schedules among early-career
American families. American Journal of Soci- employees in the US: A national snapshot.
ology, 98, 1428–1458. https://doi.org/10.1086/ Retrieved from University of Chicago website:
230194 https://ssascholars.uchicago.edu/sites/default/
Hollister, M. N. (2011). Employment stability in the files/work-scheduling-study/files/lambert.fugiel
US labor market: Rhetoric versus reality. Annual .henly_.precarious_work_schedules.august2014_
Review of Sociology, 37, 305–324. https://doi.org/ 0.pdf
10.1146/annurev-soc-081309-150042 Landry, S. H., Smith, K. E., & Swank, P. R. (2006).
Hollister, M. N., & Smith, K. E. (2014). Unmasking Responsive parenting: Establishing early foun-
the conflicting trends in job tenure by gender in the dations for social, communication, and indepen-
United States, 1983–2008. American Sociological dent problem-solving skills. Developmental Psy-
Review, 79(1), 159–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/ chology, 42(4), 627–642. https://doi.org/10.1037/
0003122413514584 0012-1649.42.4.627
Hurley, D., & Lebon, A. (2012). A comparison Leete, L., & Bania, N. (2010). The effect of income
of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses shocks on food insufficiency. Review of Economics
among Hispanic and non-Hispanic workers in the of the Household, 8, 505–526. https://doi.org/10
United States. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral .1007/s11150-009-9075-4
Sciences, 34, 474–490. https://doi.org/10.1177/ Lopez, M. H., Livingston, G., & Kochhar, R. (2009).
0739986312448316 Hispanics and the economic downturn: Housing
Jaeger, D. A., & Stevens, A. H. (1999). Is job stability woes and remittance cuts. Washington, DC: Pew
in the United States falling? Reconciling trends in Research Center.
Manning, W. D., Smock, P. J., & Majumdar, D. Moffitt, R. A., & Gottschalk, P. (2002). Trends
(2004). The relative stability of cohabiting and in the transitory variance of earnings in the
marital unions for children. Population Research United States. The Economic Journal, 112(478),
and Policy Review, 23(2), 135–159. https://doi.org/ C68–C73. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297
10.1023/b:popu.0000019916.29156.a7 .00025
Marin, G., & Gamba, R. J. (1996). A new mea- Moffitt, R. A., & Gottschalk, P. (2011a). Trends in the
surement of acculturation for Hispanics: The covariance structure of U.S. earnings, 1969–1987.
Bidimensional Acculturation Scale for Hispanics Journal of Economic Inequality, 9(3), 439–459.
(BAS). Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-010-9154-z
18, 297–316. https://doi.org/10.1037/t03849-000 Moffitt, R. A., & Gottschalk, P. (2011b). Trends
Masarik, A. S., Martin, M. J., Ferrer, E., Lorenz, F. in the transitory variance of male earnings in
O., Conger, K., & Conger, R. D. (2016). Cou- the US, 1970–2004 (Working Paper No. 16833).
ple resilience to economic pressure over time Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic
and across generations. Journal of Marriage and Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w16833
Family, 78, 326–345. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf Moffitt, R. A., & Gottschalk, P. (2012). Trends in
.12284 the transitory variance of male earnings methods
Mayer, S. E. (1997). What money can’t buy: Family and evidence. Journal of Human Resources, 47(1),
income and children’s life chances. Cambridge, 204–236. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhr.2012.0001
MA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10 Moore, J. C. (2007, December). Seam bias in the
.2307/2580731 2004 SIPP panel: Much improved, but much bias
McEwen, B. S. (2007). Physiology and neurobiology still remains. Paper presented at the U.S. Census
of stress and adaptation: Central role of the brain. Bureau/Panel Study of Income Dynamics Event
Physiological Review, 87(3), 873–904. https://doi History Calendar Research Conference, Wash-
.org/10.1152/physrev.00041.2006 ington, DC. Retrieved from https://psidonline
McKernan, S. M., Ratcliffe, C., Simms, M., & Zhang, .isr.umich.edu/Publications/Workshops/ehc-
S. (2011). Do racial disparities in private transfers 07papers/Seam%20Bias%20in%20the%202004
help explain the racial wealth gap? New evidence
%20SIPP%20Panel.pdf
from longitudinal data. Demography, 51, 949–974.
Morduch, J., & Schneider, R. (2017). The financial
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-014-0296-7
diaries: How American families cope in a world
McKernan, S. M., Ratcliffe, C., Steuerle, C. E., &
of uncertainty. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Zhang, S. (2013). Less than equal: Racial dis-
Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400884599
parities in wealth accumulation. Washington, DC:
Morris, P., Hill, H. D., Gennetian, L., Rodrigues,
Urban Institute.
McLanahan, S., & Percheski, C. (2008). Family struc- C., & Wolf, S. (2015). Income volatility in U.S.
ture and the reproduction of inequalities. Annual households with children: Another growing dis-
Review of Sociology, 34, 257–276. https://doi.org/ parity between the rich and the poor? (Discussion
10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134549 Paper No. 1429-15). Retrieved from Institute for
McLoyd, V. C., Jayaratne, T. E., Cebaloo, R., & Research on Poverty website: http://www.irp.wisc
Borquez, J. (1994). Unemployment and work inter- .edu/publications/dps/pdfs/dp142915.pdf
ruption among African-American single moth- Murphy, D., Guzman, L., & Torres, A. (2014). Amer-
ers: Effects on parenting and adolescent socioe- ica’s Hispanic children: Gaining ground, looking
motional functioning. Child Development, 65(2), forward. Retrieved from Child Trends Hispanic
562–589. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131402 Institute website: http://www.childtrends.org/
Menzel, N. N., & Gutierrez, A. P. (2010). Latino Neckerman, K., Garfinkel, I., Teitler, J., Waldfogel,
worker perceptions of construction risks. American J., & Wimer, C. (2016). Beyond income poverty:
Journal of Industrial Medicine, 53(2), 179–187. Measuring disadvantage in terms of material
https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.20735 hardship and health. Academic Pediatrics, 16(3),
Miller, E. G., Chen, E., & Parker, K. L. (2011). Psy- S52–S59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2016.01
chological stress in childhood and susceptibility to .015
the chronic diseases of aging: Moving towards a Neumark, D., & Wascher, W. (2001). Using the EITC
model of behavioral and biological mechanisms. to increase family earnings: New evidence and a
Psychological Bulletin, 137(6), 959–997. https:// comparison with the minimum wage. National Tax
doi.org/10.1037/a0024768 Journal, 54(2), 281–317. https://doi.org/10.17310/
Mistry, R. S., Vandewater, E. A., Huston, A. C., & ntj.2001.2.05
McLoyd, V. C. (2002). Economic well-being and Patten, E. (2016). Racial, gender wage gaps persist
children’s social adjustment: The role of family in U.S. despite some progress. Retrieved from Pew
process in an ethnically diverse low-income sam- Research Center website: http://www.pewresearch
ple. Child Development, 73(3), 935–951. https:// .org/fact-tank/2016/07/01/racial-gender-wage-
doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00448 gaps-persist-in-u-s-despite-some-progress/
Perkins, K. L. (2017). Reconsidering residential 179–227). Washington, DC: National Academies

mobility: Differential effects on child well-being Press.
by race and ethnicity. Social Science Research, Semega, J. L., Fontenot, K. R., & Kollar, M. A.
63, 124–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch (2017). Income and poverty in the United States:
.2016.09.024 2016 (U.S. Census Bureau Current Population
Pilarz, A. R. (2018). Multiple child care arrangements Report P60-259). Washington, DC: U.S. Govern-
and school readiness in kindergarten. Early Child- ment Printing Office.
hood Research Quarterly, 42, 170–182. https://doi Shin, D., & Solon, G. (2011). Trends in men’s
.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2017.09.004 earnings volatility: What does the Panel Study
Riina, E. M., Lippert, A., & Brooks-Gunn, J. of Income Dynamics show? Journal of Public
(2016). Residential instability, family support, Economics, 95(7–8), 973–982. https://doi.org/10
and parent-child relationships among ethnically .1016/j.jpubeco.2011.02.007
diverse urban families. Journal of Marriage and Shin, I. (2012). Income inequality and economic
Family, 78, 855–870. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf growth. Economic Modelling, 29(5), 2049–2057.
.12317 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.011
Roche, K. M., Lambert, S. F., Ghazarian, S. R., & Lit- Shonkoff, J., Garner, A. S., & American Academy
tle, T. D. (2015). Adolescent language brokering of Pediatrics, Committee on Psychosocial Aspects
in diverse contexts: Associations with parenting of Child and Family Health, Committee on Early
and parent-youth relationships in a new immigrant Childhood, Adoption, and Dependent Care,
destination area. Journal of Youth and Adoles- and Section on Developmental and Behavioral
cence, 44, 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964- Pediatrics. (2012). The lifelong effects of early
014-0154-3 childhood adversity and toxic stress. Pediatrics,
Romich, J., & Hill, H. D. (2017). Income instability 129(1), e232–e246. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds
and income support programs: Recommendations .2011-2663
for policy and practice. Retrieved from Math- Sroufe, L. A. (1990). An organizational perspective
ematica Policy Research website: https://www.
on the self. In D. Cicchetti & M. Beeghly (Eds.),
mathematica-mpr.com/our-publications-and-
The self in transition: Infancy to childhood (pp.
findings/publications/income-instability-and-
281–307). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
income-support-programs-recommendations-for-
Stevens, A. H. (2001). Changes in earnings instability
policy-and-practice
and job loss. Industrial and Labor Relations
Rutter, M., & Rutter, M. (1993). Change and continu-
Review, 55(1), 60–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/
ity: Some developmental processes. In M. Rutter
001979390105500104
& M. Rutter (Eds.), Developing minds: Challenge
and continuity across the life span (pp. 63–79). Thiede, B. C., Kim, H., & Slack, T. (2017). Mar-
New York: Basic Books. https://doi.org/10.1192/ riage, work, and racial inequalities in poverty: Evi-
s0007125000050649 dence from the United States. Family Relations, 79,
Sandstrom, H., Huerta, S., Loprest, P., & Seefeldt, 1241–1257. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12427
K. (2014). Understanding the dynamics of discon- Toomey, R. B., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Williams, D. R.,
nection from employment and assistance: Final Harvey-Mendoza, E., Jahromi, L. B., & Updegraff,
report. Washington, DC: US Department of Health K. A. (2014). Impact of Arizona’s SB 1070 immi-
and Human Services, Administration for Children gration law on utilization of health care and pub-
and Families, Office of Planning, Research and lic assistance among Mexican-origin adolescent
Evaluation. mothers and their mother figures. American Jour-
Sandstrom, H., & Huerta, S. (2013). The negative nal of Public Health, 104(S1), S28–S34. https://doi
effects of instability on child development: A .org/10.2105/ajph.2013.301655
research synthesis. Retrieved from Urban Insti- Turner, K., Guzman, L., Wildsmith, E., & Scott, M.
tute website: http://www.urban.org/research/ (2015). The complex and varied households of
publication/negative-effects-instability-child- low-income Hispanic children. Retrieved from
development-research-synthesis National Research Center on Hispanic Children
Sarkisian, N., Gerena, M., & Gerstel, N. (2007). and Families website: http://www.abtassociates
Extended family integration among Euro and Mex- .com/AbtAssociates/files/7d/7de41599-8c06-
ican Americans: Ethnicity, gender, and class. Jour- 448a-bdd2-4beeb09e615d.pdf
nal of Marriage and Family, 69, 40–54. https://doi U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00342.x Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and
Schneider, B., Martinez, S., & Owens, A. (2006). Evaluation. (2012). Overview of immigrants’ eli-
Barriers to educational opportunities for Hispanics gibility for SNAP, TANF, Medicaid, and CHIP.
in the United States. In M. Tienda & F. Mitchell Retrieved from https://aspe.hhs.gov/system/files/
(Eds.), Hispanics and the future of America (pp. pdf/76426/ib.pdf
Van Hook, J., & Bachmeier, J. D. (2013). How well Yeung, W. J., Linver, M. R., & Brooks-Gunn, J.
does the American Community Survey count nat- (2002). How money matters for young children’s
uralized citizens? Demographic Research, 29(1), development: Parental investment and family
1–32. https://doi.org/10.4054/demres.2013.29.1 processes. Child Development, 73(6), 1861–1879.
Westat. (2007). Survey of Income and Program Par- https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.t01-1-00511
ticipation user’s guide (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Ziliak, J. P., Hardy, B., & Bollinger, C. (2011). Earn-
Author. ings volatility in America: Evidence from matched
Western, B., Bloome, D., Sosnaud, B., & Tach, CPS. Labour Economics, 18(6), 742–754. https://
L. M. (2012). Economic insecurity and social doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2011.06.015
stratification. Annual Review of Sociology, Ziol-Guest, K. M., & McKenna, C. C. (2014). Early
38, 341–359. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev- childhood housing instability and school readi-
soc-071811-145434 ness. Child Development, 85(1), 101–113. https://
Western, B., Bloome, D., Sosnaud, B., & Tach, doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12105
L. M. (2016). Trends in income insecurity
among U.S. children, 1984–2010. Demography,
53(2), 419–447. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-
016-0463-0
Wolf, S., & Morrissey, T. (2017). Economic instabil-
ity, food insecurity, and child health in the wake of
the Great Recession. Social Service Review, 91(3),
534–570. https://doi.org/10.1086/694111

Gennetian 2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gennetian 2018

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gennetian 2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lisa A.

Gennetian and Christopher Rodrigues New York University

Income Level and Volatility by Children’s Race

Institute for Human Development and Social Change,

attention to income volatility as a distinct form Hispanic—including financial optimism, the

10.5% 10.8% 11.0%

Hispanic Black White

Results 2011. Slightly more than a quarter (27%) of His-

Hispanic 2004 Hispanic 2008

Table 1. Descriptive Characteristics of Children and Their Households by Hispanic Ethnicity

SIPP 2004 sample SIPP 2008 sample

SIPP 2004 sample SIPP 2008 sample

Characteristic Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE

SIPP 2004 sample SIPP 2008 sample

Characteristic Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE

Table 4. Income Volatility of Children in Households by Race and Income Quintile

SIPP 2004 samplea SIPP 2008 sampleb

Characteristic Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE

Q1, 4 of 15 measures in Q2, and 14 of 15 measures for Q3.

Q1; 5 of 15 measures in Q2; 12 of 15 measures in Q3.

SIPP 2004 sample SIPP 2008 sample

children in linguistically isolated households, volatility in 2008 to 2011 in an opposite pat-

Perkins, K. L. (2017). Reconsidering residential 179–227). Washington, DC: National Academies

You might also like