A young age at arrival is believed to be an important predictor of adult immigrant achievement, but there is no consensus on what age(s) at arrival is pivotal/crucial/critical. The 2000 census reports exact years of arrival and age providing us the opportunity to test different formulations for age-atarrival effects for several different socioeconomic outcomes. We focus on the experiences of Mexican immigrants to the U.S. in this study.Our results indicate that the effect of early arrival is much greater for English proficiency than other outcomes and bears significantly on most, not all, attainments. There is little evidence at any age of a sharp discontinuity demarcating a 1.5 generation from older immigrants and, in fact, a series of classifications or a continuous measurement of age at arrival may be preferred in some cases. Guidelines are offered for the most appropriate formulation of age at arrival under different contexts.Age at arrival has been recognized as an important factor determining the outcomes of immigrant adaptation, in addition to generation and duration of U.S. residence; it identifies the stage of the life cycle at which an immigrant is beginning life in a new country (Piore, 1979). The age or stage at arrival can effectively determine the extent of acculturation, language acquisition, and schooling, so much so that Rumbaut (1991) was compelled to dub immigrants who arrived as young children the "1.5 generation." Their experiences and outcomes differ so dramatically from adult immigrants that "first generation" is not an entirely appropriate label for them.Many immigration researchers have adopted a simple dichotomous definition of the 1.5 generation as immigrants who arrived prior to the age of twelve.
Twentieth-century American men and women were often unable to live up to or down to their own fertility ideals. In a national random sample of 11,126 ever-married men and women over the age of 44, “discrepant fertility”—the difference between ideal fertility and completed fertility—was common. This article seeks to identify the causes of such discrepancies, and findings suggest that the most important exogenous factor is “birth cohort.” Those born prior to or after the Great Depression were prone to exhibit negative discrepant fertility, having had fewer children than they thought ideal, while those born during the Depression—the parents of the baby boom—were characterized by significant positive discrepant fertility, having had more children than they thought ideal. It is argued that these cohort effects are closely related to social and economic conditions that prevailed as twentieth-century Americans came of age and assessed their professional and familial prospects.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.