Although there is no paucity of theoretical frameworks for explaining people’s health service utilization (HSU), theoretical frameworks designed to account for variations in immigrants’ HSU remain underdeveloped. Building on influential theories or models for explaining HSU and especially Andersen’s widely used health behavior model, this article proposes a theoretical framework for explaining disparities in immigrant HSU. The proposed framework explains disparities in immigrant HSU by the health care need, resources, and predisposing factors of immigrants, and macrostructural/contextual conditions at both the general and immigrant-specific levels, as well as the mediating relationships among some of these factors. It is believed that this new framework can offer a fuller understanding of the determination process of immigrant HSU.

A global crisis generated by human-made climate change has added urgency to the need to fully understand human pro-environmental behaviors (PEBs) that may help slow down the crisis. Factors influencing personal and public PEBs may or may not be the same. Only a few studies have empirically investigated the determinants of personal and public PEBs simultaneously, but they contain major limitations with mixed results. This study develops a conceptual model for explaining both personal and public PEBs that incorporate demographic, socioeconomic, political, and attitudinal variables, and their direct and indirect effects. Using the latest available data from the 2010 General Social Survey and structural equation modeling (SEM), we tested the determinants of both personal and public PEBs in the United States. The results reveal that environmental concerns, education, and political orientation demonstrate similar significant impacts on both personal and public PEBs, but income, gender, race, urban/rural residency, region, and party affiliation have differential effects on these behaviors. Age, cohort, and religion have no significant effect on both types of behaviors. Our results confirm some existing findings; however, they challenge the findings of much of the literature.

Everyday discrimination has been studied for the last three decades, but there is a lack of quantitative research on the effects of race, gender, and class, and especially their intersectional effects, on perceived everyday discrimination for the U.S. population as a whole, despite a few studies at the local or group levels. Using new data from the 2018 General Social Survey and multiple regression, this study investigates how race, gender, and class independently and intersectionally shape everyday discrimination experiences in the United States. The results indicate that, holding other variables constant, Blacks self-claimed a significantly higher level of everyday discrimination than Whites, but other races did not differ significantly from Whites in such an experience; class was inversely associated with the level of everyday discrimination, and gender did not have an independent effect. However, while Black men self-reported a higher level of everyday discrimination than White men, Black women self-reported a lower level of everyday discrimination than White women; higher-class Blacks tended to report a significantly higher level of everyday discrimination experiences than lower-class Blacks. The findings have significant implications for research and practice in the area of everyday discrimination.

This study examines the patterns of interracial marriage and interethnic marriage among foreign-born Asians in the United States, using pooled data from the 2008–2012 American Community Surveys. Results show that the most dominant pattern of marriage among foreign-born Asians was still intra-ethnic marriage and that interracial marriage, especially with whites, rather than interethnic marriage among Asians, remained the dominant pattern of intermarriages. Out of all foreign-born Asian marriages, inter-Asian marriages stayed at only about 3%. Among all foreign-born Asian groups, Japanese were most likely to marry interracially and interethnically, while Asian Indians had the lowest rates of interracial marriage and interethnic marriage. Foreign-born Asian women were more likely to interracially marry, especially with whites, than foreign-born Asian men, but they were not much different from foreign-born Asian men in terms of their interethnic marriage rate. The findings have significant implications for intermarriage research, assimilation, and Asian American panethnicity.

This study investigates the effects of race and gender on perceived employment discrimination using the 2016 General Social Survey that provides new data on perceived employment discrimination that aligns more closely with the legal definition of employment discrimination. It is found that 19% of the American adults self-reported the experience of employment discrimination in job application, pay increase, or promotion in the past 5 years. The results of logistic regression analysis show that either controlling or not controlling for other factors, Blacks were much more likely to perceive being discriminated in employment than Whites, but other races were not significantly different from Whites in perceived employment discrimination after holding other variables constant. While gender did not have a significant independent effect on perceived job discrimination, it did interact with race to influence perceived job discrimination. Regardless of race, women were somewhat less likely than men to perceive job discrimination, but Black women were significantly even less likely than White women to self-report job discrimination, and Black men were much more likely to self-report employment discrimination than White men. These findings have implications for combating employment discrimination and addressing social inequalities.