DOI: 10.3886/icpsr02535
title: Multi-City Study of Urban Inequality, 1992-1994: [Atlanta, Boston, Detroit, and Los Angeles]
title: Archival Version

description: The Multi-City Study of Urban Inequality was designed to
broaden the understanding of how changing labor market dynamics,
racial attitudes and stereotypes, and racial residential segregation
act singly and in concert to foster contemporary urban
inequality. This data collection comprises data for two surveys: a
survey of households and a survey of employers. Multistage area
probability sampling of adult residents took place in four
metropolitan areas: Atlanta (April 1992-September 1992), Boston (May
1993-November 1994), Detroit (April-September 1992), and Los Angeles
(September 1993-August 1994). The combined four-city data file in Part
1 contains data on survey questions that were asked in households in
at least two of the four survey cities. Questions on labor market
dynamics included industry, hours worked per week, length of time on
job, earnings before taxes, size of employer, benefits provided,
instances of harassment and discrimination, and searching for work
within particular areas of the metropolis in which the respondent
resided. Questions covering racial attitudes and attitudes about
inequality centered on the attitudes and beliefs that whites, Blacks,
Latinos, and Asians hold about one another, including amount of
discrimination, perceptions about wealth and intelligence, ability to
be self-supporting, ability to speak English, involvement with drugs
and gangs, the fairness of job training and educational assistance
policies, and the fairness of hiring and promotion
preferences. Residential segregation issues were studied through
measures of neighborhood quality and satisfaction, and preferences
regarding the racial/ethnic mix of neighborhoods. Other topics
included residence and housing, neighborhood characteristics, family
income structure, networks and social functioning, and interviewer
observations. Demographic information on household respondents was
also elicited, including length of residence, education, housing
status, monthly rent or mortgage payment, marital status, gender, age,
race, household composition, citizenship status, language spoken in
the home, ability to read and speak English, political affiliation,
and religion. The data in Part 2 represent a telephone survey of
current business establishments in Atlanta, Boston, Detroit, and Los
Angeles carried out between spring 1992 and spring 1995 to learn about
hiring and vacancies, particularly for jobs requiring just a high
school education. An employer size-weighted, stratified, probability
sample (approximately two-thirds of the cases) was drawn from regional
employment directories, and a probability sample (the other third of
the cases) was drawn from the current or most recent employer reported
by respondents to the household survey in Part 1. Employers were
queried about characteristics of their firms, including composition of
the firm's labor force, vacant positions, the person most recently
hired and his or her salary, hours worked per week, educational
qualifications, promotions, the firm's recruiting and hiring methods,
and demographic information for the respondent, job applicants, the
firm's customers, and the firm's labor force, including age,
education, race, and gender.
description: Part 1: Multistage area probability sample. Part 2:
Size-weighted, stratified, probability sample.
description: Datasets: 
DS0: Study-Level Files
DS1: Household Survey Data File
DS2: Employer Telephone Survey Data File
description: Part 1: Adult residents in four selected metropolitan
areas in the United States (Atlanta, Boston, Detroit, Los Angeles),
Part 2: Active business establishments in the same four areas.
description: Two weights are provided in Part 1: a
post-stratified nonresponse adjusted household weight and a person
weight. Four weights are provided in Part 2.The data files in
Parts 1 and 2 can be linked.This collection has not been
processed by ICPSR staff. ICPSR is distributing the data and
documentation for this collection in essentially the same form in
which they were received. When appropriate, hardcopy documentation has
been converted to machine-readable form and variables have been
recoded to ensure respondents' anonymity.