New report from Peter Aspinall of CHSS.<\/p>\n
Background The way to categorise people born of inter-ethnic and racial unions \u2014 the \u201cmixed\u201d group \u2014 remains unclear and requires new insights, given the increasing size and complexity of the group and its emerging health profile.<\/p>\n
Methods A mixed methods research study focusing on ethnic options of young \u201cmixed race\u201d people (n=326) recruited in colleges and universities investigated respondents’ preferences with respect to concepts, terminology and classifications.<\/p>\n
Results The overwhelming generic term of choice was mixed race, widely interpreted by respondents to include mixed minority groups. Respondents were able to assign themselves in a valid way to a 12-category extended 2001 England and Wales Census classification for \u201cmixed\u201d, which collapses into five main groupings and also maps back to the census categories. Among options tested for census purposes, multi-ticking performed poorly and is not recommended.<\/p>\n
Conclusions A more finely granulated classification for \u201cmixed\u201d is feasible where needed, but this requires more extensive testing before it can be judged preferable to a \u201ctick one or more\u201d option that has been shown to have poor reproducibility in validation surveys.<\/p>\n