Cytkova Wallendorf Migration Assimilation Consumption

8/2/2019 Cytkova Wallendorf Migration Assimilation Consumption

1/12

Ethnic Migration, Assimiiation,and ConsumptionMELANIE WALLENDORFMICHAEL D. REILLY*

The cultural assimilation of M exican-Americans in the Southwest is assessed bycomparing .their food consumption patterns with those of income-matched Anglosliving in the sam e region and those of income-matched Mexicans living in MexicoCity. Rather than relying on self-report data as indicators of consumption patterns,data concerning the contents of the garbage of these three types of householdsare u sed. The results suggest that, contrary to predictions b ased on the traditionalmodel of assimilation. Mexican-American consumption pattems are not a simpleblending of Mexican and Anglo patterns. Rather, M exican-American consumptionpatterns suggest the emergence of a unique cultural style.

T he concept of culture per\'ades discussions of inter-national marketing and calls for a more sociologicalapproach to understanding consumer behavior (cf. Nicosiaand Mayer 1976; Zaltman and W allendorf 1977). The term"c ul tu re " is usually taken to mean a set of socially acquiredbehavior pattems common to the members of a particularsociety or ongoing, large-scale human group (Fairchild1970). Thus, all societies have a culture comprised of theirlanguage, traditions, customs, shared meanings, and insti-tutions.A premise of the study of culture is that the behavioralpattems characteristic of a particular culture express theshared values and beliefs of that culture. For example,Americans' common habit of introducing newcomers bymentioning their occupation reflects the value placed upontype of work as a basis for status in American culture.Cultural values are also expressed through the material ob-jects (e.g., dress, food, housing) characteristic of a partic-ular culture (Royce 1982).

This is not to imply, however, that culture and its as-sociated behavior pattem s remain constant over time . Quiteto the contrary, culture is adaptive. Collective adjustmentsare made when changes occur in the material conditions oflife. Therefore, as a society is confronted with differentconditions, its culture adapts. For example, as American

Melanie Wallendorf and Michael D. Reilly are both Assislani Profes-sors of Marketing at the College of Business and Public Administration.Univers i ty of Ar izona. Tucson . AZ 85721. The authors would l ike toexpress their gratitude to Professor William Rathje of the Garbage Projectat the University of Arizona and Ivan Restrepo of the Centro de Econ-desarollo in Mexico for making the data available for the analysis. Thanksare also extended to Susan Dobbins. Elizabeth Hirschman. Joseph New-man. William Redmond. Larry Santi. Mark Speece. Gerald Zaltman. andtwo anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier draftof this paper.

29 2

society has faced various environmental conditions (e.g.,diminishing water supply, increasing levels of air pollu-tion), some of its culturally prescribed practices (e.g ., waterusage, s tandards for automobile cons truct ion) havechanged. For this reason it is perhaps more precise to referto cultural styles rather than traditions. The word traditionimples a lack of change over time, which in many respectsmakes it an inappropriate characterization of the behaviorpatterns indicative of a particular culture (Royce 1982).Thus, the term cultural style is used to refer to the contentof a culture as well as its subjective value orientations andstandards. In addition, cultural style appropriately impliesthat the behavior patterns of individuals are the result ofindividual choice.To examine cultural styles empirically, one must beginby making cross-culturai comparisons. Thus, at a mini-mum, a knowledge of two cultures is needed to provide apoint of departure or comparison base. What few studiesexist regarding cultural differences in consumption have,for the most part, examined two different groups and at-tributed whatever differences found empirically to culturaldifferences. For example, several such studies have pro-vided descriptions of consumption differences between thegroups of interest in this papernamely, Mexican-Ameri-cans and Anglos (Cer\'antes 1980; Gillett and Scott 1975;Hoover, Green, and Saegert 1978; Hoyer and Deshpande1982; Longman and Pruden 1971; Pruden and Longman1972). Unfortunately, it is impossible to be sure that theobser\'ed consumption behavior differences reflect culturaldifferences. Instead, it may well be that such demographicdifferences as those in income, education, age distribution,family size, or product availability are the true causes ofconsumption differences. Before culture can be employedin a causal explanation, controls are needed for these otherfactors.

e JOURNAL OF CONStJMER RESEARCH Vol. 10 December 1983


2/12

MIGRATION, ASSIMILATION, AND CONSUMPTION 293Additionally, a priori explanations of how and why cul-ture affects consumption are needed. This becomes partic-ularly important when investigating subcultures embeddedwithin a larger culture. That is, the way in which an im-migrating subgroup becomes a part of the culture into whichit moves should provide the basis for explaining and evenpredicting consumption pattems. The sociological theoryembedded in the traditional assimilation model providessuch a basis for explanation and prediction.

A TRADITIONALASSIMILATION MODEL

Any analysis comparing two cultural groups living in aparticular geographic areafor example, Mexican-Ameri-cans and Anglosmust take into account the assimilationprocess which has occurred and the relative impact of theMexican-Americans' culture of origin and culture of resi-dence. A traditional approach to cross-cultural mobilityviews the immigrant's behavior pattern as a mixture orblend of the two cultures. That is, behavior reflects a com-bination of the norms of the culture of origin and the normsof the culture of residence. Full assimilation is said to haveoccurred when the impact of the norms associated with theculture of origin becomes very small. At that point theperson has effectively become a member of the culture ofresidence.Assimilation has several components (Gordon 1964;Montero 1981; Schoen and Cohen 1980). First, there iscultural assimilation (also referred to as acculturation),which involves changes in the behavior pattem of the im-migrants. These behavior pattems include such elements aslanguage, dress, and food. Another such change is changein consumption p attem s, including amount or types of prod-ucts purchased. Accordingly, cultural assimilation shouldbe of most interest to those who study consumption pat-tems. Cultural assimilation may take generations to occur.A second component of the assimilation process is striw-tural assimilation, which involves entry into occupationalcategories and primary groups such as clubs, cliques, andorganizations composed primarily of members of a domi-nant culture. A third component of the assimilation processbegins after some degree of cultural and structural assimi-lation has occurred (G urak and Fitzpatrick 1982). This ismarital assimilation, or intermarriage between immigrantsand members of the dominant culture.The next four components of assimilation imply bothattitudinai and behavioral changes on the part of immigrantsand members of the host society. Idetitificational assimi-lation occurs when immigrants develop a sense of identitybased solely on the host society. This is the subjective iden-tification with the culture referred to by Royce (1982). At-titude receptional assimilation exists when members of thehost society are not prejudiced against members of the im-migrant group. Behavior receptiotiat assimilation takesplace when members of the host society do not discriminate

against members of the immigrant group . Civic assimilationimplies the absence of value and power conflicts betweenmembers of the host society and mem bers of the immigrantgroup. Full assimilation, including all seven components,may require a time period spanning several generations.By decomposing assimilation into components, the ex-tent to which particular immigrant groups have assimilatedinto the culture of residence can be assessed. For example,it appears that Mexican-Americans in northem urban areashave fairly high levels of cultural and marital assimilation,but low structural assimilation (Schoen and Cohen 1980).Mexican-Americans are over-represented in blue-collar oc-cupations and have a median family income substantiallybelow that of non-Hispanics but above that of Americanblacks (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1980). Despite theirrelatively high rate of exogamy in northem urban a reas, themarital assimilation process has occurred more slowly inthe Southwest (Gurak and Fitzpatrick 1982). Based on re-search to date, it appears that Mexican-Americans in theSouthwest have experienced some cultural and structuralassimilation and, to a lesser degree, marital assimilation.However, it would be difficult to argue that full assimilationhas occurred.

Thus, the extent of assimilation can be determined foreach of the seven components of traditional assimilation.What is still needed is an explanation of why assimilationoccurs at a particular rate.

FURTHER ELABORATIONOF ASSIMILATION PRO CESSES

Thus far, our discussion has focused on indicators ofcultural assimilation. Yet this does not fully explain howassimilation occurs. Only by describing the mechanismsthat cause assimilation can we see how culture influencesan individual's pattem of behavior.There are two mechanisms that enable the culture of res-idence to have an impact on the individual's behavior pat-tems: motivation and structure. As the individual lives andparticipates in the new culture, he/she may begin to inter-nalize the normative expectations prevalent in that culture.That is, the individual is motivated to comply voluntarilywith the behavior pattems which reflect the values and be-liefs of the culture. Secondly, the individual may begin toreflect the pattems of the culture of residence because of

structural constraints that force compliance. For example,' laws and safety concems may force someone traveling inanoth er country to drive on a different side of the road thanhe/she is accustomed to doing. Similarly, lack of avail-ability may force some immigrants to make changes inwhich foods they purchase. Thus, behavioral change mayoccur without a concomitant change in values or beliefs.In making empirical com parisons, therefore, it is crucial toinclude only those behavior pattems that reflect free choicesmade by immigrants and to exclude adaptations to structuralconstraints.


3/12

294 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCHConditions of Assimilation

In descr ib ing the way in which these two mechanismsoperate, i t is impor tant to document the condit ions underw h i c h t h e a s s i m i l a t i o n p r o c e s s o c c u r r e d . T h e p r o c e s swhereby the culture of res idence has an impact on the be-havior pattems of an indiv idual wil l be quite d if ferent de-pending on whether :

1. The immigrants have moved voluntarily in the hope ofmaking occupational, political, or financial gains (e.g.,many Mexican-Americans moving into the Southwest).This motivation is the primary cause of the currently highlevels of intemational migration from the developing tothe developed nations of the world (Chaney 1980). 2. The immigrants have moved involuntarily (e.g., the re-cent compulsory relocation of Navajos out of their ances-tral lands because of Congressional settlement of conflict-ing tribal claim s; Scudder 1982).3 . The group remains in the same geographic area but. be-cause of conquest, conversion, or immigration, the dom-inant culture changes (e.g., many Native American tribessuch as the Yaquis; Spicer 1980).4. The immigrants move to a new area but remain isolatedfrom the dominant culture (e.g.. the Amish in Pennsyl-vania). In this case, it is unlikely that many of the normsof the culture of residence will be internalized.

Questioning the Traditional Assimilation ModelAs discussed earlier, the traditional assimilation modelpostulates that, over time, the individual's behavior pattemswill become less like those of the culture of origin and more

like those of the culture of residence. T his process probablycharacterizes cultural assimilation which is structurallymandated or constrained. It may also characterize culturalassimilation resulting from an involuntary change, with thedegree of resistance to the new culture having a strongeffect on the lapse of time required for full assimilation.However, the traditional assimilation model may not beappropriate to situations of voluntary intemational mobilityin the hope of personal gain. Individuals may move partlybecause they believe they will fit in better with the culturalstyle of the culture of destination. In this case, they mayhave notions about the cultural style of the culture of des-tination prior to moving. These notions may lead to achange in behavior pattems prior to making the geographicmove, which itself demonstrates at least some desire tobecome a part of the culture of destination. Thus length ofstay in the new host culture may not accurately reflect de-gree of assimilation because it fails to take into account themotivation that immigrants bring to the process of re-orienting their life patterns. The traditional assimilationmodel may therefore be less applicable to the case of vol-untary immigrants who bring a level of motivation tochange to the new culturea level not characteristic ofimmigrants facing the other three conditions listed in theprevious section.

HYPOTHESISThe purpose of this study is to assess whether the con-sumption pattems of Mexican immigrants to the U.S. pri-marily reflect the culture of origin or the culture of resi-dence. That is, the purpose here is to determine the extentto which Mexican-Americans have moved through the cul-

tural assimilation process predicted by the traditional assim-ilation model, particularly with reference to their consump-tion patterns. This wilj provide some indication as towhether Mexican-American consumers represent a distinctmarket segment or are sufficiently assimilated that theirconsumption pattems are essentially like those of Angloconsumers. Such a determination will also provide an em-pirical test of the traditional assimilation model. Thus, thehypothesis investigated is a statement of the central tenetof the traditional assimilation model:

H: Immigrants to a new culture will exhibit a culturalstyle that lies somewhere between the normativelyprescribed behavior pattems prevalent in the cul-ture of origin and those prevalent in the culture ofresidence.The purpose of the empirical work reported here is todetermine whether this hypothesis appears to be accuratein the context of Mexican-American immigrants in theSouthwest. Because of their immigration history, it is im-possible to specify in the hypothesis whether their culturalstyle is likely to more closely fit the culture of origin or theculture of residence. This is because a large percentage ofMexican-Americans currently living in the U.S. have either

immigrated within the last 10 years (36 percent) or havebeen in the U.S. for 20 or more years (56 percent). Asmaller group (28 percent) has been in the U.S. between10 and 19 years {Spanish USA 1981). This bimodal distri-bution, combined with the previously mentioned problemsof using length of residence as an indicator of assimilation,make it difficult to specify whether the consumption pat-tems of Mexican-Americans are more like those of Mexi-cans with comparable incomes or those of Anglos withcomparable incomes from the same area of residence. Thehousing segregation of large numbers of Mexican-Ameri-cans in the Southwest could serve either to perpetuate thecultural style of the culture of origin or to quickly socializenewcomers to the cultural style of the immigrants' newculture of residence through close contact with others whohave immigrated and partially assimilated to the new cul-ture. (For more on the causes and effects of residentialsegregation, see Duncan and Lieberson 1959; Lieberson1961, 1963; Massey 1979.) Thus, no prediction is madewithin the hypothesis as to whether the immigran ts' culturalstyle will be more similar to that of the culture of origin orthe culture of residence. The hypothesis will be supportedby findings that place Mexican-American consumption lev-els within the range established by the consumption levelsof Mexicans and Anglos.


4/12

MIGRATION, ASSIMILATION, AND CONSUMPTION 295METHOD

Cultural ContextThe cul tural groups studied were Mexican-Americans

living in an urban area in the Southwest, Anglo residentsof the same urban area, and Mexicans living in an urbanarea in Me xic o. T his cultural contex t wa s chosen for anumber of reasons. Immigration of Mexicans to the U.S.has been occurring in large numbers. In the 10-year periodfrom 1970 to 1980, the number of Mexican-Americans l iv-ing in the U.S. increased by 60 percent, while total U.S.population has increased by only 9 percent (Pachon andMoore 1981). Since over 80 percent of Mexican-Americanslive in urban areas (U .S . Bureau of the Census 1980), sam -ples were restricted to such areas. Because the move is onemade by many people, immigrants are not isolated oncethey reach the culture of destination. Thus, opportunitiesexist either to attempt to reconstruct the culture of originor to enmesh oneself in the culture of residence.

There is, then, potential for a variety of behavioral pat-tems to emerge . Also, in the Southwest , structural con-straints such as unavailability of food products from theculture of origin (tortillas, com masa, green chiles, and soon) are unlikely to occur. This removes a structural con-straint explanation for most observed changes in behavior.

A sample of Mexicans l iving in Mexico was included inorder to assess the basic direction of Mexican culture asenacted by Mexicans of comparable income. Studies thatonly investigate the behavior pattems of Ang los and .Mex-ican-Americans cannot address the process of assimilationor the impact of Mexican culture because they contain nocomparison base. Without the inclusion of the Mexicansample, the researcher cannot separate the effects of culturefrom the effects of minority or immigrant status in the cul-ture of destination (Mirowsky and Ross 1980). Thus, threegroups rather than two are needed. The primar>' comparisonto be made here is between the Anglos and the Mexican-Americans. Yet the Mexican sample is needed as an indi-cation of whether Mexican consumption pattems are higheror lower than Anglo consumption pattems. The Mexicansample serves to anchor one end of the continuum fromculture of origin to culture of residence, and this is centralto the traditional assimilation mo del. T he thrust of our studywas not to compare Mexicans to Anglos, but to compareMexican-Americans and Anglos in l ight of knowledgeabout the general direction of differences between Mexicanand Anglo cultural styles.Normative Context

To test the relative impacts of the two cultures, the be-havior pattems selected must reflect underlying culturalnorms and values. One set of behavior pattems stronglyconnected to cultural style is that conceming foods (Braudel1967; Gr eeley, M cCrea dy, and Theisen 1980; Patai 1977;Royce 1982). Cultural style is particularly l inked to thetypes of foods consumed and the frequency with which theyare consumed.

For this study, seven types of foods with normative con-nections to cultural style were chosen. All have strongnorms connected with them in American culture and dif-ferent norms connected with them in Mexico. Thus, theyare categories that show changes during the assimilationprocess. The food groups chosen and some of their relevantcategories are:

1. Meats2. Bread types (white, dark, tortillas)3. Cereals (regular dry. high-sugar dry)4. Caffeine prcxducts (coffee, tea)5. Soft drinks6. Alcoholic beverages (spirits, win e, beer)7. Convenience foods

It was expected that several current American beliefs andbehaviors would show effects in these categories. In par-ticular, it was expected that Anglo cultural style would bebuilt around current beliefs regarding the desirability ofhigh amounts of protein, a concem with serum cholesterollevels, a desire to reduce calories and cavities, a desire toincrease fiber consumption, and the need to be consciousof time demands. Substantial data exist to indicate that na-tionwide American consumption pattems reflect the follow-ing trends:

1. Fairly high levels of protein consumption, shifting towardmore poultry and away from red meats (Brewster andJacobson 1978: Semling 1983; Standard and Poors' In-dustry Surveys 1983; USDA 1982). and shifting awayfrom eggs (Brewster and Jacobson 1978: USDA 1982).2. Low consumption of breads, shifting toward dark breadsas opposed to white breads (Przybyla 1983: Semling 1983:Standard and Poors' Industry Sur\e\s 1983: Wall StreetJournal 1980. 1981).3. Higher consumption of regular dry cereals as opposed tohigh-sugar dr>' cereals or tho.se in which sugar is listed asthe first and therefore most prevalent ingredient (Semlinn1983).4. Lx)ng-term movement away from consumption of caffeineproducts [Beverage Industry 1983d; Brewster and Jacob-son 1978; Chemical Marketing Reporter 1983- Jerrey1983; USDA 1982).5. Shifting away from regular sugared soft drinks (BeverageWorld my. Beverage Industry 1983a, 1983b. and 1983d;Standard and Poors' Industry Sun e\s 1983; USDA 19801982).6. Preference for beer and wine over spirits (Beverage In-dustry 1983c, 1983d; Shanken \9i2. Standard and Poors'Industry Surveys 1983).7. Frequent use of convenience foods (Brewster and Jacob-son 1978).

These norms were not expected to operate with regardto Mexicans' food consumption. Royce (1982) suggests that


5/12

296 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH

Mexicans may be less concerned with slimness than areAnglos. Graham (1981) provides evidence that Spanish-speaking people perceive time differently; accordingly, theMexican cultural style should show less sensitivity to timepressures (see also Diaz-Guerrero 1975; Hereford et al.1967; Fromm and Maccoby 1973).Garbology

Questionnaire and interview methodologies are fraughtwith problems when the research concems culture. Repon-dents from different cultures may be asked imperfectlytranslated questions about concepts that may not exist inone culture or the other, and for Mexican-Americans, thelanguage of the questionnaire may generate a systematicbias . Response bias may interact with the culture of therespondent to produce systematically related inaccuraciesin the data. Further, the tolerance of intrusions, such as arenecessitated by data collection activities, varies from cul-ture to culture. Thus, interview methods for assessing cul-tural factors face some critical difficulties.Unobtrusive measures are more desirable on severalgrounds. Response errors are eliminated because the sub-jects are unaware of their inclusion. Actual consumption,rather than self-reported consumption, then becomes thefocus of the research. Standardized coding procedures canbe developed that do not depend on accurate translation.Behavior pattems are observed directly, in lieu of reportedbehaviors.Le Project du Garbage, developed under the guidance ofWilliam Rathje, an anthropologist at the University of Ar-izona, has been involved in the collection and analysis ofbehavior by reference to physical remains since 1973 (seeRathje and Harrison 1978; Rathje and Hugh es 1978 ;McGuire, Hughes, and Rathje 1982). Typically, collectionsof garbage are unobtrusively sampled from the regular pick-ups left by residences. Each item in the collection is codedas to weight or volume, brand name, cost, material com-position, and waste rate. To protect individual anonymity,samples are identified only by the census tract in whichthey were collected. Thus, each observation represents therefuse of one household within a census tract. These dataallow the researcher to track consum ption based on productdispossession rather than on purchase.

Of course, the notion of using samples of garbage asindicators of consumption is not new. It has been suggestedby Jacoby (1976) as a way of avoiding some of the errorsof self-report data. In fact, it was used by Charles Parlinin the early 19OO's to prove to the Campbell Soup Companythat, contrary to their assumption, wealthy people (whooften had household help) did not use canned soup, whileblue-collar families did (Hollander 1978; Bartels 1962).Research comparing the findings from garbage analysiswith the results from self-report data on consumption in-dicates systematic biases in self-report data. It appears thatrespondents consistently overestimate the quantity of nor-matively valued items (e.g., milk and beef) they consume,and consistently underestimate the quantity of items with

negative normative connotations (e.g., beer and candy;Rathje 1978).Problems with garbage analysis include distortions intro-duced by recycling, compost piles, garbage disposals, pets,and the use of items that leave no residue. Fortunately,most of these distortions were not a problem for our analysisbecause it was based primarily on items that result in dis-carded packaging materials. As for recycling, an extensiveexamination of the evidence in garbage of the recyclingbehavior of Anglos and Mexican-Americans suggests noreason to suppose systematic bias for this analysis (McG uireet al. 1982). However, the data are limited to items con-sumed at home, whether they are purchased by householdmembers or brought in by nonhousehold members.There are other limitations on the inferences that can bedrawn from purely behavioral data. Without interview data,we can only speculate as to the motivational and cognitiveprocesses underlying the behav ioral pattem s reflected in thegarbage analysis. Questions that cannot be definitely an-swered include those pertaining to Mexican-American per-ceptions of Anglo culture, the particular ways in whichMexican-Americans leam about Anglo culture, their atti-tudes and desires conceming the assimilation process, theirdesired as opposed to their actual levels of consumption ofvarious products, and other such psychological and exper-iential factors. Yet these questions become interesting onlyafter questions conceming actual behavior pattems are ex-plored. T his latter goal was the task of the research reportedhere.Analysis Procedure

Since the purpose of our research was to compare theconsumption behavior of different cultural groups, threesamples of garbage were used. The first sample was col-lected in the Federal District of Mexico under the auspicesof Centro de Econdesarollo (the Mexican equivalent of theNational Science Foundation in the U.S.). Initially, thecomparison of urban Mexicans to immigrants to the Amer-ican Southwest might seem inappropriate because the ma-jority of the immigrants come from rural areas in Mexico.How ever, three justifications for the use of an urban samplecan be offered:

1. The structural situation (e.g., access to packaged foods,degree of reliance on own produce and livestock) of urbanSouthwest residents is comparable only to that of urbanMexican residents.2. Many Mexico City residents have migrated from ruralMexiean areas as well.3. Perhaps most importantly, the use of an urban Mexicansample provides a stronger test of the hypothesis presentedhere.

This last point is tme because the use of an urban ratherthan a rural M exican sample serves to minimize rather thanmaximize the differences between the Mexicans, the Mex-ican-Americans, and the Anglos.As part of the analysis of the consumer behavior of M ex-


6/12

MIGRATION. ASSIMILATION. AND CONSUMPTION 297TABLE 1

CENSU S TRACTS USED IN TH E ANALYSIS

TractnumberSpanish speaking1980 census data(percent)

Median income1970 censusdata'Adultequivalentsper household' Adultsper household'

Mexican-Americans1138Anglos

18

6693.218.59.0

$6,500$6,500$6,500$7,500

2.973.602.272.49

2.632.242.111.92

'19 80 census data on incsme by tract is not yet available."Computed by adjusting the caloric requirements o( age groups reported in the census to an index number where 1.0 is equal to the caloric requirements suggested for an adult Thus aninfant would be counted as 0.4 because caloric requirements are about 40 percent ot adult levels; and a teenager would be counted as 1.1 because caloric requirements are about 110percent ol adult levels. In weighting the means, singlei)erson, adult renu t households were lirst removed trom the age profiles. Garbage samples were not collected from multi-unit rentaldwellings and the great majority ol single-person rental households are in such dwellings. Omitting those households makes the weighted means more reflective ol the actual householdswhich were sampled in the refuse analysis.'Residents over 19 (the legal drinking age), tess single-person rentals, divided by number ol households based on census data.

ico City residents, samples of garbage were collected from16 areas, grouped into five distinct economic strata, basedon their income in comparison to the Mexican minimumwage. The second of these strata, eaming between one andthree times the Mexican minimum wage, was selected forthis analysis because it most closely paralleled the socio-economic position of the Mexican-American and Anglosamples. A total of 217 garbage samples was included inthe Mexican sample.The data on the consumption habits of Anglo and Mex-ican-American consumers were drawn from the Tucson.

Arizona data base established by the ongoing activities ofLe Project du Garbage. The Mexican-American sampleconsisted of 102 refuse observations from two predomi-nantly Mexican-American census tracts. The Anglo sampleof 97 observations was drawn from two census tracts con-taining few Mexican-Americans. These four census tractsall had 1970 income levels of between one and three timesthe U.S. minimum wage.Thu s, the three samples were matched on relative incomelevel; each sample had approximately the same level ofearnings relative to the cultural context in which it wasembedded. Of course, the income levels of the Mexican-Americans and the Anglos were directly comparable. A

relative income level close to the minimum wage was ap-propriate because that income level is characteristic of Mex-ican-Americans (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1980). Thismeans that the Anglo sample is not typical of most An glos,nor is the Mexican sample typical of most Mexicans.Rather, the samples were chosen to be comparable in rel-ative income level to a characteristic sample of Mexican-Americans. Selected characteristics of the census tractsused in the study are shown in Table I.Two dependent variables were incorporated in the anal-ysisfrequency counts and volume estimates. Frequencycounts refer to the number of items of the described type

found in the garbage, while volume estimates refer to thevolume of the items as indicated by packaging and labelinginformation. For example, a six-pack of beer cans wouldbe recorded with a frequency of 6 and a volume of 2130milliliters. Volume estimates are used in all analyses, ex-cept for the categories of take-out foods, egg s, and pastries.It was believed that for most food products, the volume ofthe product consumedrather than the frequency withwhich a product container or package is discardedis amore appropriate indicator of cultural style. For many prod-ucts, the frequency count might well be the result of fre-quent purchases and use of small-volume pac kages. For thisreason, volume data were used in the analysis. However,for take-out foods, eggs, and packaged pastries, the fre-quency data were believed to be more reflective of culturalstyle. Thus, the analysis reflects the frequency with whichthere was evidence of consumption of take-out foods, re-gardless of the volume consumed. Because the volumemeasure of take-out foods does not disaggregate by type offood product (hamburger vs. cookies), the volume is com-puted by mixing apples and orangesor apple tarts andorange drinkperhaps quite literally.In all cases, the analysis procedure used was one-wayANOVA, comparing mean levels of consumption for all

three sample groups. To test the sensitivity of the analysisto the income-matching procedure, all analyses were redoneusing the next higher income stratum of Mexicansi.e.,we relaxed the assumption that the relative income level ofthe Anglos and the Mexican-Americans needed to be com-parable to that of the Mexicans. The next higher incomestratum of Mexicans (the middle stratum of the five) wasused in the comparison to see whether the results reflecteddifferences in buying power rather than cultural differences.However, the results showed no difference in the directionof the Mexican findings, which was the primary determi-nation to be made from the use of the Mexican sample.


7/12

298 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCHTABLE 2

MEAN QUANTITY CONSUMED BY HOUSEHOLD PER DAY"

Item

Unweighted means Weighted means"

Mexicans Mexican-Americans Anglos F valueMexican-Americans Anglos F value

Meats and EggsBeefOther red meatsChickenOther poultryUnknown meatEggsBreadsWhite breadDark breadPackaged prepared tortillasCerealsRegular dry cereal

High-sugar dry cerealCaffeine productsCoffeeTe aSoft drinks and sweetsRegular so da (nondietetic)Pastries (number of co ntainers)Alcoholic beveragesSpiritsWineBeerConvenience foodsPrepared soupsCanned vegetables

Frozen vegetablesFruit or vegetable juice (canned or bottled)Take-out meals (number of items)

2.93.3.201.52.938.47.94.4

6.81.215.2.0413.3.0657.27.666.8

4.714.5n a9.4.005

189.3102.437.239.023.71.7145.832.561.7

18.06.017.74.3

291.5.139.310.5180.7

54.4 '120.444.4100.3.67

128.161.854.41.85.7.963.339.917.834.93.813.54.9

169.6.0434.976.2324.335.471.017.881.2.74

35.9'30.6'12.9'1.46.2=19.4'17.6'7.3'27.T

i.r1.8.152.8

23.3'1.6"2.48.9'12.1'

2 5 . ^35.1 '15.8'39.r

59.031.511.713.1. 7.2.544.710.018.9

5.42.07.41.7

87.8.114.14.274.8

16.738.013.331.2.20

54.826.123.6.82.4.427.417.27.615.21.6

7.02.471.6.1717.639.0163.415.230.47.834.6.31

.1.12.6.82.34.2"4.3"2.58.3'5 .r

.04

.02.2.64.3"

2.36 .^6.0"

.11.21.4.13.0

in grams or milliliters.luleans weighted to rellect household size and composKion as described in Table 1 .^ n i l i c a n l a t p < 0. 0 1."Significant at p 0.05.

FINDINGSThe results of the analysis are shown in Table 2. Thefirst three columns show the results for the average quantity

of the item consumed per household per day. All quantitiesare expressed in grams or milliliters. For example, a meanof 355 milliliters for the beer category would indicate thatsuch households consume an average of one can of beerper day.Meats and Eggs

There were several noteworthy differences in meat con-sumption. Most dramatic is the finding that M exican-Amer-ican households eat more red meat than Anglos (beef andother red meats added together). Consumption of chickenand other poultry by Mexican-Americans is also high com-

pared to Anglos. The category of "unknow n me ats" refersto meats found in the refuse that could not be classifiedaccording to type. Overall, the Mexican-American meatconsumption pattem does not confirm the traditional assim-ilation model. Rather, a cultural style of consumption fall-ing outside the range established by Mexican and Angloconsumption pattems seems evident. However, egg con-sumption does appear to confirm the traditional assimilationmodel, with Mexican-American consumption lying be-tween that of Anglos and Mexicans.Breads

Certain types of bread, such as tortillas, were expectedto have cultural ties and indeed, M exican-Americans clearlyhave continued the Mexican pattem of serving tortillas. YetMexican-Americans appear to differ from the Mexican pat-


8/12

MIGRATION, ASSIMILATION, AND CONSUMPTIONtern of preparing tortillas at home from corn and wheatflour (which accounts for the low mean consum ption byMexicans of packaged prepared tortillas). Instead, it ap-pears that Mexican-Americans have chosen a pattern ofusing packaged prepared tortillas. This is simultaneous evi-dence of cultural persistence (Greeley et al. 1980) in thepreference for tortillas and of traditional assimilation to thetime consciousness of the culture of residence.

What is interesting is that white and dark bread alsoappear to have different cultural bases. Mexican-Am ericansdo not lie between the Anglo and Mexican pattems withrespect to consumption of white bread. Rather, Mexican-Americans consume more white bread than the Anglos.Anglos show a pattem characterized by the consumption ofproportionally more dark breads, a pattem not evident forthe Mexican-Americans. Anglo consumption of dark breadis highest, followed by Mexican-Americans, then Mexi-cans.Cereals

The consumption pattems for regular dry cereal followthe predictions of the traditional assimilation model. Mex-ican-American consumption lies between the high con-sumption by Anglos and the low consumption by M exicans.Yet this is not true for consumption of high-sugar dry ce-reals (those for which sugar is listed as the first ingredient).Consumption of high-sugar dry cereals is highest amongMexican-Americans, followed by Anglos, then Mexicans.Thus, the notion of traditional assimilation is not supportedin the high-sugar dry cereal category.Caffeine Products

The results indicate that Mexicans are the biggest con-sumers of coffee, although the results are not statisticallysignificant at the p < 0.05 level. Yet when tea and coffeeconsumption are combined, Mexican-Americans end upbeing the biggest consumers of caffeine products, followedby the Mexicans, then the Anglos. Again, the Mexican-Americans have constructed a cultural style that is not ex-plained by the traditional assimilation model.Soft Drinks and Sweets

Interestingly, Mexican-Americans consume more regular(nondietetic) soft drinks at home than either of the othertwo groups. They are followed by Anglos, then Mexicans.Mexican-Americans are also the heaviest consumers ofpackaged pastries. Again, this category does not supportthe traditional assimilation model.Alcoholic Beverages

The results for the alcoholic beverages category indicatethat the three groups differ in the types of beverages con-sumed. Anglos are the largest consumers of both beer andwine, followed by Mexican-Americans, then Mexicans.Mexicans, however, are the largest consumers of spirits ofthe three groups.

29 9These findings are consistent with previous research byGreeley, McCready, and Theisen (1980) on cultural differ-ences in drinking behavior. This research indicates that cul-tural groups each have their own "pattems of attitudes andbehaviors toward the use of alcoholic beverages" (Greeleyet al. 1980, p. 1). For each group, the drinking of certain

beverages has a particular social meaning and serves a par-ticular social function. Greeley et al. cite the family to-gethemess implied by Italians eating and drinking wine to-gether, the hospitality implied by Irish hosts offering drinksto guests, and the religious symbolism of wine for Jews.The consumption pattems reflected in our research in-dicate three distinct cultural styles of in-home alcoholicbeverage consumption. Of course, a substantial quantity ofalcoholic beverages is consumed outside the home, so thepicture is not complete. In addition, attitudinai questionswould be needed to assess the meaning and functions of in-home alcohol consum ption. W hat is clear is that the culturalstyles differ for the three groups.

Convenience FoodsNot all convenience foods are widely available in Mex-ico. Indeed, frozen vegetables are so scarce that in thisanalysis they are considered to be unavailable in Mexico.This structural constraint places some limitations on theanalyses that can be done and inferences that can be d rawn.However, comparable data are available on differences be-tween Anglos and Mexican-Americans.Overall, the Mexican-Americans appear to be the heav-iest users of convenience foods. In particular, they use take-out foods more frequently than the Anglos. They also usemore prepared soups, canned vegetab les, frozen vegetables,and ready-to-serve (as opposed to frozen concentrate) fruitand vegetable juices than do the Anglos. T his is reminiscentof the finding discussed earlier conceming Mexican-Amer-icans' high usage of prepared tortillas. The Mexican-Amer-icans appear to have adopted the pattem predicted for theAnglos more than the Anglos have, in that they appear touse many prepared foods which minimize the time and ef-fort required to serve them.

Household Size and CompositionOne possible explanation for the differences betweenAnglo and Mexican-American consumption pattems is that

they reflect differences in household size and composition.Mexican-Americans tend to have larger households thancomparable Anglo populations. For example, Mexican-Americans have an average of 4.06 family members perhousehold nationwide, compared with 3.3 for the U.S. pop-ulation as a whole (Pachon and Moore 1981). Thus, theassimilation of Mexican-Americans to the Anglo norm ofsmaller families appears to be a component of the assimi-lation process that may take several generations to com-plete.To determ ine the degree to which this cultural differencein household size w as responsible for the observed pattem s,a weighting procedure was used. Each census tract used in


9/12

300 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH

the analysis was profiled in terms of number of persons ineach age category. Single-person, adult rental householdswere removed from the age profiles to make an approximateadjustment in the data base to account for the fact thatgarbage samples are not collected from multi-unit rentaldwellings, a large number of which contain single-personhouseholds. Each person in each tract was then assigned anindex number that reflected his/her calorie intake (as sug-gested by the Food and N utrition B oard, National Academ yof Sciences-National Research Council, 1974) relative tothat of a typical adult. The consumption means for eachtract were then weighted to refiect the average number ofadult equivalent residents per household. This procedure isappropriate because it weights individuals by their contri-bution to family food consumption. It therefore provides away of removing the effects of household size and com-position from the findings. The weighting procedure makesthe assumption that each of the two income-matched g roupshas the same percentage of its caloric needs met. For prod-ucts consumed predom inantly by adults (coffee, tea , spirits,wine, and beer), a similar procedure was used to computethe number of adults over the legal drinking age per sam-pled household. Adult equivalents per household and adultsper household are presented for each census tract in Table1. As expected, Mexican-American households in thesecensus tracts are somewhat larger than their Anglo coun-terparts.

Comparing the weighted means, presented in the rightportion o fTab le 2, it becomes clear that household size andcomposition differences cannot entirely account for the dif-ferences between Mexican-American and Anglo consump-tion pattems. In only two of the 15 product categories inwhich Mexican-American households consume an amountthat falls outside the range established by Mexican andAnglo pattems does the amount consumed per capita, afterweighting to reflect household size and composition, thenfall within the range established by these two groups. Inother words, when looking at the 15 product categories thatdid not support the traditional assimilation model in the firstset of analyses, only two of these revert to a position ofsupporting the traditional assimilation model after weight-ing to reflect household size and composition. In the other13 product categories, Mexican-American per capita con-sumption continues to fall outside the range established byMexican and Anglo consumption levels. Moreover, afterweighting for household size and composition, eggs can beadded to the list of products for which Mexican-Americanconsumption does not follow the predictions of the tradi-tional assimilation model.In several of the product categories, the difference be-tween consumption by Mexican-Americans and Anglos isnot statistically significant at the 0.05 level. However, thefact that Mexican-American consumption consistently fallsoutside the range established by Mexican and Anglo con-sumption levels indicates that the predictions of the tradi-tional assimilation model are not supported. In addition,sources conceming food consumption (USDA 1980, 1982;Standard and Poors' Itidustry Sur\'eys 1983) indicate thatAnglo pattems are moving o ver time in a direction that w ill

bring them closer to the Mexican pattem and thus fartheraway from the Mexican-American pattem. This would in-tensify the differences between Anglo and Mexican-Amer-icans and further question the traditional assimilationmodel.Pastries and fruit or vegetable juices are the only productcategories for which differences between Mexican-Ameri-cans and Anglos appear to be traceable to differences inhousehold size and composition. For the remaining prod-ucts, a different explanation for the consistent lack of sup-port of the traditional assimilation model must be consid-ered.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONSThe most important finding of our research is that theconsumption behavior pattems of Mexican-Americans can-not be viewed as a simple median between that of the Mex-icans and that of the Anglos. In many cases the consump-

tion pattems of Mexican-Americans are unlike those eitherof their culture of origin or of their culture of residence.Apparently, the assimilation process is more than a simplelinear progression from one culture to another. In the foodcategories of red meats, eggs, white breads, prepared tor-tillas, high-sugar dry cereal, caffeine produc ts, regular softdrinks, and several types of convenience foods, mean con-sumption by Mexican-Americanseven after weighting forhousehold size and compositionexceeds that of eitherAnglos or Mexicans. These findings fail to support the tra-ditional assimilation hypothesis. The causal force leadingto this particular cultural style has yet to be explored. Onlyspeculations can be offered, but some informed speculationis possible.It appears that the Mexican-American pattem is charac-teristic of stereotypical American pattems of consumptionprior to the increased and widespread concem about serumcholesterol levels, calories, cavities, sugar "highs." fiberintake, and caffeine consumption. The Mexican-Americanpattem of consuming high levels of red meats, eggs, whitebreads, high-sugar dr>' cereals, caffeine products, regularsoft drinks, and convenience foods is reminiscent of Anglopattems several years ago. Mexican-Americans may not beapproaching current Anglo pattems in a linear fashion, be-ginning with the Mexican end of the continuum. Rather,they appear to lie in a position beyond that of the Anglosin the direction of pre\'ious stereotypical A nglo pa ttems. Inthat sense, it is possible to interpret the results for the Mex-ican-Americans as indicative of assimilation to previousrather than to current Anglo pattems. It may be that Mex-ican-Americans have over-assimilated to their prior percep-tions of Anglo cultural style. Rather than assimilating to-ward the current and evolving cultural style of the cultureof residence, Mexican-Americans appear to have assimi-lated toward their intemalized conception of American life.This intemalized conception of American life may traceback to representations encountered before migrating aswell as to inferences drawn from the mass media and otherdepictions of American life encountered after the move.


10/12

MIGRATION, ASSIMILATION, AND CONSUMPTION 301This is reminiscent of the pattem noted in the aspirationsand accomplishments of Jewish immigrants to the U.S.a pattern that has been discussed extensively by Patai(1977, p. 393):

On the popular level it has often been observed that "theJews are like the Gentiles, only more so," which refers tothe Jewish tendency to ennulate the Gentiles, but at the sametime to overdo things. This has been found among assimilantJews in Europe but has been documented extensively inAmerican Jewish religious, social, and business life. Onealmost feels as if the Jews had a compulsion to outdo theGentiles in all those activities and behavioral features theyfind attractive enough to emulate . . .On the personal level when it comes to the amenities theAmerican econo my makes available to the middle class, Jew-ish Americans acquire more of them, use them more fre-quently, and display them m ore ostentatiously than Gentiles.Studies exist which show this with reference to housing: itcertainly could be shown to be true in fum iture, clothing , theuse of cosmetics, and the like.

No claim is made here, however, that Mexican-Ameri-cans are trying to "outdo" Anglos: data concerning theattitudes and motivations producing these consumption pat-tems are not available in this study. Ethnographic and sur-vey data are needed in future research in order to addressthese issues more completely. Rather, it is proposed herethat the intemalized perception of American cultural styleheld by the Mexican-Americans may be at variance withactual Anglo pattems. The source, evolution over time, andmotivation for this variance remain to be explored. Thisnotion of intemalized perceptions that are at variance withreality may account for the findings: however, additionalresearch is needed to assess the specific reasons for thedifference.The finding that the assimilation process is not a linearprogression from the cultural style of the culture of originto that of the culture of residence is interesting for consumerbehavior. Advertisers and marketers tr)ing to reach assim-ilating immigrants might note that what will work beforeand after the assimilation process might not work duringthe process. The findings also suggest caution in general-izing across product categories. When immigrants' behav-ior pattems for a product are different from the culture oforigin and the culture of residence, research is necessaryto determine the norms and values that immigrants associatewith that product.

[Received February 1983. Revised Julv 1983.]

REFERENCESBands. Robert (1962). The Development of Marketing Thought.Homewood. IL: Richard D. Irwin.Beverage Industry (1983a). "De-caff Colas. Peppers 4'7f of To-day's Soft Drink Market." (Januars- 28). 1. 21. 27. ?,?i. 42 .(I98^b). "Diets. No-caffcines Lead lndustr\' Growth "(April 22). 1. 13-16.

(1983c). "Liquor Industry Declines for Third StraightYear," (May 6). 18.

(1983d), "Only Water. Soft Drinks Show Per Capita In-crease," (May 20), 1, 32.Beverage WorW (1983), "Top Ten Soft Drink Brands for 1982,"102 (March), 30- 31 .Braudel, Fernand (1967), Capitalism and Material Life,1400-1800, translated from French by Miriam Kochan in1973, New York: Harper and Row.

Brewster, Letitia and Michael F. Jacobson (1978), The ChangingAmerican Diet, Washington D . C : Center for Science in thePublic Interest.Cervantes, F. J. (1980), "The Forgotten Consumers: The Mexi-can-Americans," in Proceedings, 1980 American MarketingAssociation Educators' Con ference, 180-183.Chaney, Elsa M. (1980), "Women in Intemational Migration:Issues in Development Planning," report prepared for Officeof Women in Development, United States Agency for Inter-national Development, AID/OTR-147-80-46.Chemical Marketing Reporter (1983), "Caffeine Prices DropSharply as Stocks Mount, Users Switch," (January 3). 17.Diaz-Guerrero, R. (1975), Psychology of the Mexican: Cultureand Personality, Austin. TX: University of Texas Press.Duncan. Otis D. and Stanley Lieberson (1959). "Ethnic Segre-gation and Assimilation," American Journal of Sociology,64, 364-374.Fairchild. Henry Pratt (1970). Dictionary of Sociology, Totowa.NJ: Littlefield. Adams.Food and Nutrition Board (1974), Recommended Daily DietaryAllowances. National Academy of SciencesNational Re-search Council.Fromm. Erich and Michael Maccoby (1973). Social Character ina Mexican Village, Mexico (Cindad): Fondo de CulturaEconomica.Gillett. Peter L. and Richard A. Scott (1975), "Shopping Opin-ions of M exican-American Consumers: A Comparative Anal-ysis." in Combined Proceedings 1974 American MarketingAssociation Spring and Fall C onferences, 135-141.

Gordon. Milton M. (1964). Assimilation in American Life: TheRole of Race, Religion, and National Origin. New York:Oxford University Press.Graham. Robert J. (1981). "The Role of Perception of Time inConsumer Research," Jourtuil of Consumer Research. 7(March). 335-342.Greeley, Andrew M ., William C. McCready. and Gar>' Theisen(1980). Ethnic Dritiking Subcultures, New York: Praeger.Gurak, Douglas T. and Joseph P. Fitzpatrick (1982). "Intermar-riage Among Hispanic Ethnic Groups in New York City."American Journal of Sociology, 87 (Januar)'). 921-934.Hereford. Carl F ., Nina Selz. Walter Stenning. and Luiz Natalicio(1967). "A Cross-Cultural Comparison of the Activc-Pas.siveDimension of Social Attitudes," Inter-American Journal ofP s \ c h o l o g y ( R e v i s ta I n t e r a m e r i c a n a de P s i c o l o g i a ) . 1 ( 1 ) .33-39.Hollander. Kenneth (1978). "Audacious Audi Ad Echoes Parlin's\conoc\asm," Marketing News. II (January 27). 1 7 .Hoover. Robert J., Robert T. Green, and Joel Saegert (1978)."A Cross-National Study of Perceived Risk." Journal ofMarketing, 42 (July). 102-108.Hoyer. W. D. and Rohit Deshpande (1982). "Cross-Cultural In-fluences on Buyer Behavior: The Impact of Hispanic Ethnic-ity." in Proceedings. 1982 American Marketing AssociationEducator.^' Conference. 89-92.Jacoby. Jacob (1976 ). "Consumer Psychology: An O ctennium."Annual Review of Psychology, 27, 331-.358.Jerrey. Gay (1983). "Coffee Group Lines up Sports Stars forDrive,"" Advertising Age, (February 14), I. 63.


11/12

302 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEAROHLieberson, Stanley (1961), "The Impact of Residential Segrega-tion on Ethnic Assimilation," Social Forces, 40. 52-57.Lieberson, Stanley (1963), Ethnic Patterns in American Cities,New York: The Free Press.Longman, Douglas S. and Henry O. Pruden (1971), "Alienationfrom the Marketplace: A Study in Black, Brown, andWhite," in Combined Proceedings 1971 American Market-

ing Association Spring and Fall Conferetices, Chicago:American Marketing Association, 616-619.Massey, Douglas S. (1979), "Effects of Socioeconomic Factorson the Residential Segregation of Blacks and Spanish Amer-icans in U.S. Urbanized Areas," American Sociological Re-view, 44, 1015-1022.McGuire, Randall H., Wilson Hughes, and William Rathje(1982), "The Garbage Project Report on Recycling Behav-ior," report to the United States Environmental ProtectionAgency, Solid Waste Branch.Mirowsky, John, II, and Catherine E. Ross (1980), "Minor-ity Status, Ethnic Culture, and Distress: A Comparisonof Blacks, Whites, Mexicans, and Mexican-Ameri-c ans ," American Journal of Sociology, 86 (November),479-495 .Montero, Dairel (1981), "The Japanese Americans: ChangingPattems of Assimilation Over Three Generations," AmericanSociological Review, 46 (December), 829-839.Nicosia, Francesco M. and Robert N. Mayer (1976). "Toward aSociology ofConsumption," Journat of Consumer Research,

3 (September ) , 65-75.Pachon, Harry P. and Joan W. M oore (198 1) . "Mex ican-Am er-icans," Annals of the American Academy of Political andSocial Sciences, 454 (March), 111-124. 'Patai, Raphael (1977), The Jewish Mind, New York: CharlesScribner's Sons.Pniden. Henry- 0 . and Douglas S. Longman (1972 ). "R ace. Al-ienation and Consumerism," Journal of Marketing. 36(July), 58-63.Przybyla, Ann (1983), "Natural Grain-based Foods Fit Con-sumers' Healthy Tastes." Processed Prepared Foods. 152(; January'), 13 4-13 5.Rathje, William L. (1978) "Archaeological Ethnography." inExplorations in Ethnoarchaeology, ed. R. A. Gould. Uni-versity of New Mexico Press, 49-76.and Gail G. Harrison (1 978 ), "Monitoring Trends in FoodUtilization: Application of an Archaeological Method," in

Proceedings of the Federation of Am erican Societies for Ex-perimental Biology, 37, 49-54.and Wilson W. Hughes (1978), "Socioeconomic Cone-lates of Household R esiduals: Phase 2 ," report to the Na-tional Science Foundation, Directorate for Applied Scienceand Research Applications.Royce, Anya Peterson (1982), Ethnic Identity: Stategies of Di-versity, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Schoen, Robert and Lawrence E. Cohen (1980), "Ethnic Endo-gamy Among Mexican-American Grooms: A Reanalysis ofGenerational and Occupational Effects," American Journalof Sociology, 86 (September), 359-366.Scudder, Thayer (1982 ), No P lace To Go: Effects of CompulsoryRelocation on Navajos, Philadelphia, PA: Institute for theStudy of Human Issues.Semling, Harold V. (1983), "1983 Food Industry Outlook,"Food Processing, 44 (February), 36-46.Shanken, Marvin R. (1982), "What Americans Will Be DrinkingDuring the Next Decade and Why: An Analysis of CurrentTrends in Alcoholic Beverage Consumption," RestaurantHospitality, 66 (FebruarjO. 77-78.Spanish USA: A Study of the Hispanic Market in the U.S., byYankelovich, Skelly, and White for SIN Spanish TelevisionNetwork, as cited in "Hispanics: Markets within a Market,"Sales and Marketing Managem ent. July 27, 1981. p . A-33.

Spicer . Edward H. (1980) . The Yaquis: A Cultural Histor\\ Tuc-son. AZ: The University of Arizona Press.Standard and Poors' Itidustry Surveys (1983). Vol. 1. January'.U.S. Bureau of the Census (1980). Current Population Reports,Series P-20, No. 345, "Persons of Spanish Origin in theUnited States: March 19 79," Washington, D .C : U.S . Gov-emment Printing Office.USDA (1980), Sugar and Sweetener Report, Vol. 5, No. 5. Sep-tember.(1982). Food Consumption. Prices, and E.xpenditures1960-81, Economic Research Service. Stati.stical BulletinNo . 694. November.Wall Street Journal (1980), "White Bread Continues to Take Lessand Less of U.S. Wheat Production." (March 13). I.(1981). "White Bread Makers Struggle to Maintain TheirShipping Market Share." (August 20), 1.Zaltman. Gerald and Melanie Wallendorf (1977), "Sociology:The Missing Chunk or How We've Missed The Boat." Con-temporary Marketing Thought, 235-238.


12/12

Documents

Cytkova Wallendorf Migration Assimilation Consumption