@article{ebert_liao_park_2022, title={Migration and Racialization Part I: Constructing and Navigating a Hostile Terrain}, volume={4}, ISSN={["1552-3381"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00027642221083533}, DOI={10.1177/00027642221083533}, journal={AMERICAN BEHAVIORAL SCIENTIST}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Ebert, Kim and Liao, Wenjie and Park, Lisa Sun-Hee}, year={2022}, month={Apr} }
 @article{liao_ebert_park_2022, title={Migration and Racialization Part II: The Light and Shadow of Inclusion}, volume={5}, ISSN={["1552-3381"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00027642221083539}, DOI={10.1177/00027642221083539}, journal={AMERICAN BEHAVIORAL SCIENTIST}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Liao, Wenjie and Ebert, Kim and Park, Lisa Sun-Hee}, year={2022}, month={May} }
 @article{simpson_walter_ebert_2021, title={"BRAINWASHING FOR THE RIGHT REASONS WITH THE RIGHT MESSAGE": IDEOLOGY AND POLITICAL SUBJECTIVITY IN BLACK ORGANIZING}, volume={26}, ISSN={["1086-671X"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.17813/1086-671x-26-4-401}, DOI={10.17813/1086-671x-26-4-401}, abstractNote={Media outlets and academics often oversimplify and mischaracterize current manifestations of Black mobilization as a movement that opposes police violence against Black men, supports police reform, and desires assimilation and integration into the state. In reality, however, the movement is much more complex. We examine how Black Youth Project 100 (BYP100), a prominent organization in the Movement for Black Lives (M4BL), creates, teaches, and negotiates ideology. Drawing on fieldwork with Black organizers involved in the M4BL, in-depth interviews and conversations with Black organizers, and a content analysis of primary documents from the movement, we find that rather than promote assimilation, Black organizers use intersectional ideology to socialize members into an understanding of a racialized state. This socialization allows members to develop political subjectivity that not only challenges the state but also transforms their everyday lives and relationships.}, number={4}, journal={MOBILIZATION}, publisher={Mobilization Journal}, author={Simpson, Chaniqua D. and Walter, Avery and Ebert, Kim}, year={2021}, month={Dec}, pages={401–420} }
 @article{ebert_2021, title={Ideological Legitimacy, Color-blindness, and Racially Conservative Organizations}, volume={68}, ISSN={["1533-8533"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spz053}, DOI={10.1093/socpro/spz053}, abstractNote={Abstract Although scholars of racial inequality have investigated the transformation of racial ideologies in the post-Civil Rights Era, comparatively little research has been done on a corresponding transformation in racial advocacy organizing. Using an original dataset, I introduce racially conservative organizations, provide a history of their growth from 1960 to 2000, and estimate their formation in metropolitan areas over three decades to better specify the factors that led to their emergence. Measures of organizational strength, stability, and growth reveal that racially conservative organizations thrived relative to white extremist organizations in the second half of the 20th century, alongside the de-legitimation of explicit racism and rise of color-blind racism. The multivariate analysis indicates that metropolitan areas with increased political opportunities witnessed a greater likelihood of organizational formation among racial conservatives. In the 1970s, threats to dominant group interests emboldened racial conservatives and incited mobilization. However, in later decades, these conditions weakened dominant group interests in a way that deterred collective action. Racially conservative organizations are more likely to form in contexts that provide them with legitimacy to mobilize around racially sensitive issues. The findings challenge past research that conflates racial conservatism and white extremism and assumes that they share the same determinants.}, number={1}, journal={SOCIAL PROBLEMS}, author={Ebert, Kim}, year={2021}, month={Feb}, pages={19–40} }
 @article{liao_ebert_hummel_estrada_2021, title={The House Is on Fire but We Kept the Burglars Out: Racial Apathy and White Ignorance in Pandemic-Era Immigration Detention}, volume={10}, ISSN={["2076-0760"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10100358}, DOI={10.3390/socsci10100358}, abstractNote={Past research shows that crises reveal the sensitive spots of established ideologies and practices, thereby providing opportunities for social change. We investigated immigration control amid the pandemic crisis, focusing on potential openings for both challengers and proponents of immigration detention. We asked: How have these groups responded to the pandemic crisis? Have they called for transformative change? We analyzed an original data set of primary content derived from immigrant advocates and stakeholders of the immigration detention industry. We found as the pandemic ravaged the world, it did not appear to result in significant cracks in the industry, as evidenced by the consistency of narratives dating back to pre-pandemic times. The American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) criticisms of inhumane conditions in immigration detention resembled those from its pre-pandemic advocacy. Private prison companies, including CoreCivic and GEO Group, emphasized their roles as ordinary businesses rather than detention managers during the pandemic, just as they had before the crisis. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), however, manufactured an alternative storyline, emphasizing “COVID fraud” as the real threat to the “Homeland.” Although it did not call for radical change, it radically shifted its rhetoric in response to the pandemic. We discuss how these organizations’ indifference towards structural racism contributes to racial apathy and how the obliviousness and irresponsibility of industry stakeholders resembles white ignorance.}, number={10}, journal={SOCIAL SCIENCES-BASEL}, author={Liao, Wenjie and Ebert, Kim and Hummel, Joshua R. and Estrada, Emily P.}, year={2021}, month={Oct} }
 @article{ebert_liao_estrada_2020, title={Apathy and Color-Blindness in Privatized Immigration Control}, volume={6}, ISSN={["2332-6505"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2332649219846140}, DOI={10.1177/2332649219846140}, abstractNote={Despite several widely covered scandals involving the role of for-profit corporations in administering immigration policy, the privatization of immigration control continues apace with the criminalization of immigration. How does this practice sustain its legitimacy among the public amid so much controversy? Recent studies on the criminalization of immigration suggest that supporters would explicitly vilify immigrants to defend the privatization of immigration control. Research on racialized social control, on the other hand, implies that proponents would avoid explicit racism and vilification and instead rely on subtler narratives to validate the practice. Drawing on a qualitative analysis of over 600 frames derived from nearly 200 news media articles spanning over 20 years, we find that journalists and their sources rarely vilify immigrants to justify the privatization of immigration control. Instead, they frame the privatization of immigration detention as a normal component of population management and an integral part of the U.S. economy through what we call the apathy strategy—a pattern of void in which not only the systematic oppression of immigrants is underplayed, immigrant themselves also become invisible.}, number={4}, journal={SOCIOLOGY OF RACE AND ETHNICITY}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Ebert, Kim and Liao, Wenjie and Estrada, Emily P.}, year={2020}, month={Oct}, pages={533–547} }
 @article{estrada_ebert_liao_2020, title={Polarized Toward Apathy: An Analysis of the Privatized Immigration-Control Debate in the Trump Era}, volume={53}, ISSN={["1537-5935"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096520000785}, DOI={10.1017/S1049096520000785}, abstractNote={An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.}, number={4}, journal={PS-POLITICAL SCIENCE & POLITICS}, publisher={Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, author={Estrada, Emily P. and Ebert, Kim and Liao, Wenjie}, year={2020}, month={Oct}, pages={679–684} }
 @article{brooks_ebert_flockhart_2017, title={Examining the Reach of Color Blindness: Ideological Flexibility, Frame Alignment, and Legitimacy among Racially Conservative and Extremist Organizations}, volume={58}, ISSN={["1533-8525"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00380253.2017.1296340}, DOI={10.1080/00380253.2017.1296340}, abstractNote={Erinn Brooksa, Kim Ebertb* & Tyler Flockhartba Department of Sociology, Social Work, and Criminal Justice, Manchester University, North Manchester, Indiana, USAb Department of Sociology and Anthropology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USAErinn Brooks is an Assistant Professor of Sociology in the Department of Sociology, Social Work, and Criminal Justice at Manchester University, Manchester, Indiana. Her research examines the intersections of race, class, and gender inequality, emphasizing social justice in schools, workplaces, and nonprofit organizations.Kim Ebert is an Assistant Professor of Sociology in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at North Carolina State University. Her research investigates three dimensions of racial inequality: the ideological processes through which power is maintained, the causes and consequences of dominant group collective action and formal politics, and the politics of adaptation for immigrant groups.Tyler Flockhart is a PhD student in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at North Carolina State University. His research examines how LGBT youth and their parents talk with each other about sex, dating, and romantic relationships, and the extent to which these discussions reproduce, resist, and challenge race, class, and gender inequalities.}, number={2}, journal={SOCIOLOGICAL QUARTERLY}, publisher={Informa UK Limited}, author={Brooks, Erinn and Ebert, Kim and Flockhart, Tyler}, year={2017}, pages={254–276} }
 @article{ebert_2017, title={Policing Immigrants: Local Law Enforcement on the Front Lines}, volume={46}, ISSN={["1939-8638"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0094306117725085ii}, DOI={10.1177/0094306117725085ii}, number={5}, journal={CONTEMPORARY SOCIOLOGY-A JOURNAL OF REVIEWS}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Ebert, Kim}, year={2017}, month={Sep}, pages={591–593} }
 @article{estrada_ebert_lore_2016, title={Apathy and Antipathy: Media Coverage of Restrictive Immigration Legislation and the Maintenance of Symbolic Boundaries}, volume={31}, ISSN={["1573-7861"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/socf.12262}, DOI={10.1111/socf.12262}, abstractNote={Although the government no longer explicitly establishes boundaries of whiteness, it continues to play a central role in shaping symbolic boundaries between immigrants and nonimmigrants through immigration lawmaking. However, the salience of these boundaries may depend on how the media disseminate them to the public. In this study, we investigate media framing of immigration lawmaking using an original data set of news coverage of six of the most widely recognized exclusionary immigration bills and laws at different levels of government. Two patterns emerged from an iterative frame analysis. First, in their coverage of frames critical of these bills and laws, outlets devoted more attention to the effects of exclusionary legislation for nonimmigrants. Second, in their coverage of frames supportive of the restrictive legislation, outlets provided more space to those who openly associated immigrants with criminality and terrorism. Regardless of outlets’ seemingly neutral stance toward restrictive legislation, their disparate coverage of exclusionary lawmaking demonstrates apathy and antipathy toward immigrants, which has repercussions for the maintenance of inequality.}, number={3}, journal={SOCIOLOGICAL FORUM}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Estrada, Emily P. and Ebert, Kim and Lore, Michelle Halla}, year={2016}, month={Sep}, pages={555–576} }
 @misc{okamoto_ebert_2016, title={Group Boundaries, Immigrant Inclusion, and the Politics of Immigrant-Native Relations}, volume={60}, ISSN={["1552-3381"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002764215607580}, DOI={10.1177/0002764215607580}, abstractNote={In multiethnic nation-states experiencing new flows of immigrants, political officials and citizens alike have expressed hostility in the form of demonstrations, campaigns, vandalism, and even policies. Yet local communities have also displayed public support for immigrants in the form of protests and advocacy efforts. Past literature has almost exclusively focused on anti-immigrant activity, using theories of group threat and competition, which suggest that new influxes or large concentrations of immigrants should prompt dominant groups to protect their interests, leading to anti-immigrant attitudes and behaviors. We extend the literature by focusing on pro-immigrant behavior, which we define as efforts initiated by established local residents and organizations to include immigrants in the larger community and/or to improve the lives of immigrants. In contrast to theories of group threat, we put forth the group inclusion model, and contend that demographic and political “threats” operate to break down rather than bolster group boundaries. We also find that when the increasing demographic and political presence of immigrants is coupled with the visibility of immigration, immigrant inclusion thrives. Using a data set of pro-immigrant collective action across 52 U.S. metropolitan areas, we generally find support for our model, and discuss the broader implications for immigrant–native relations.}, number={2}, journal={AMERICAN BEHAVIORAL SCIENTIST}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Okamoto, Dina and Ebert, Kim}, year={2016}, month={Feb}, pages={224–250} }
 @article{ovink_ebert_okamoto_2016, title={Symbolic Politics of the State}, volume={2}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2378023116647969}, DOI={10.1177/2378023116647969}, abstractNote={A symbolic politics approach contends that the meanings policy proposals convey, and the audiences they attract, may matter more than whether they become law. Yet, we know little about the sociopolitical conditions prompting lawmakers to engage in symbolic politics. Using a new data set, we analyze proposals to expand or restrict in-state college tuition for undocumented students and find that national events—House of Representatives Bill 4437 and concurrent immigrant rights protests—encouraged state lawmakers to introduce exclusionary proposals, particularly in states with low shares of immigrants. Our findings indicate that “big events” moderate the influence of state sociopolitical conditions on symbolic political activity.}, journal={Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Ovink, Sarah M. and Ebert, Kim and Okamoto, Dina}, year={2016}, month={Jan}, pages={237802311664796} }
 @article{ebert_okamoto_2015, title={Legitimating Contexts, Immigrant Power, and Exclusionary Actions}, volume={62}, ISSN={["1533-8533"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spu006}, DOI={10.1093/socpro/spu006}, abstractNote={In multi-ethnic nation-states, opposition to immigration has manifested itself in attitudes and behaviors. Past research has typically focused on anti-immigrant attitudes, and relied on threat and competition theories to explain patterns in such attitudes. These theories suggest that perceived threats stemming from new influxes or large concentrations of immigrants should prompt dominant groups to protect their interests, leading to anti-immigrant attitudes. We extend the literature with a focus on anti-immigrant activity, and introduce the legitimating contexts model, which argues that dominant groups may actually hesitate to engage in exclusionary public actions in places where the political and demographic strength of immigrant and ethnic groups is strong. In contrast to theories of group threat, we contend that in contexts with low levels of immigrant political power and demographic strength, anti-immigrant activity is less likely to be noticed, let alone challenged, and thus more likely to become part of the status quo. Extending political opportunity theory, we also claim that conservative elites and voters in local areas coupled with low levels of threat further legitimate anti-immigrant activity. We test these ideas using a new data set of exclusionary action targeted at immigrants in over 50 U.S. metropolitan areas. In support of the legitimating contexts model, we find that low levels of demographic and political threat—when immigrants enjoy less power—alone and coupled with a higher share of conservative voters act to legitimate and encourage restrictive events on the part of noninstitutional actors. En naciones multiétnicas la oposición a la inmigración se ha manifestado en actitudes y conductas. La mayoria de investigaciones previas se han concentrado en teorías de amenaza y de competencia para explicar estas actitudes anti-inmigrantes. De acuerdo con estas teorías, la percepción de amenaza que surge de la llegada o incremento en la concentración de población inmigrante lleva a los grupos dominantes a proteger sus intereses y a desarrollar actitudes anti-inmigrantes. En este artículo analizamos las actitudes anti-inmigrantes a través del modelo del contexto legitimador que sostiene que los grupos dominantes vacilan en ejercer acciones públicas excluyentes en lugares donde los inmigrantes y grupos étnicos tienen poder político y demográfico. A diferencia de las teorías de amenaza colectiva, nosotros argumentamos que en contextos donde los inmigrantes tienen poco poder político y demográfico, es menos probable que las actitudes anti-inmigrantes sean visibles y también desafiadas, manteniendose así el status quo. Basados en la teoría de la oportunidad política, también argumentamos que en áreas con bajo nivel de amenaza, las élites y los votantes conservadores legitiman las actitudes anti-inmigrantes. Examinamos estas ideas sobre la base de un nuevo conjunto de datos sobre acciones excluyentes dirigidas a la población inmigrante en más de 50 áreas metropolitanas en los Estados Unidos. En concordancia con el modelo del contexto legitimador, encontramos que cuando existen bajos niveles de amenaza demográfica y política -es decir cuando los inmigrantes tienen menos poder- y cuando a la par existe una masa importante de votantes conservadores, estos factores, solos o de manera conjunta, legitiman y fomentan eventos restrictivos por parte de actores no-institucionales.}, number={1}, journal={SOCIAL PROBLEMS}, publisher={Oxford University Press (OUP)}, author={Ebert, Kim and Okamoto, Dina}, year={2015}, month={Feb}, pages={40–67} }
 @article{ebert_ovink_2014, title={Anti-Immigrant Ordinances and Discrimination in New and Established Destinations}, volume={58}, ISSN={["1552-3381"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002764214537267}, DOI={10.1177/0002764214537267}, abstractNote={Immigrants and their children come to the U.S. in search of upward mobility, but in many contexts they experience discrimination and restrictive political climates. Contexts vary widely, however, given the growing number of new immigrant destinations. Past studies tend to focus on what immigrants and their children are (or are not) doing to adapt to local contexts, a focus that strengthens the perception that immigrants are a “problem” group. In this article, we move the debate away from more familiar economic analyses to assess how destination type and exclusionary ordinances, defined as laws that restrict the rights of and services accorded to immigrant groups, influence “subjective” outcomes, including reports of discrimination among Mexican Americans. Our results reveal three main findings that illustrate the importance of local context. First, individuals living in a county with a greater share of co-ethnics report fewer experiences with discrimination. Second, in counties with an exclusionary ordinance, share of co-ethnics increases reports of discrimination. Finally, being born in the U.S. and speaking English do not provide protection from discrimination; rather, such characteristics shield Mexican Americans from discrimination only in contexts with larger shares of co-ethnics.}, number={13}, journal={AMERICAN BEHAVIORAL SCIENTIST}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Ebert, Kim and Ovink, Sarah M.}, year={2014}, month={Nov}, pages={1784–1804} }
 @inbook{new rural immigrant destinations: research for the 2010s_2014, booktitle={Rural America in a globalizing world}, year={2014} }
 @article{ebert_estrada_lore_2014, title={WHEN ORGANIZATIONS MATTER Threatening Demographics, Supportive Politics, and Immigration Lawmaking}, volume={11}, ISSN={["1742-0598"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1742058x14000125}, DOI={10.1017/s1742058x14000125}, abstractNote={Abstract Increasingly, scholars have argued that immigration politics are inseparable from racial politics, which implies that organizations and individuals who mobilize around racial group interests influence racial and immigration attitudes and behaviors. How does the racial-political context influence anti-immigration lawmaking? In what ways does this influence vary at different stages of lawmaking? To address these questions, we combine comprehensive datasets of racially conservative organizations and state immigrant legislation and use negative binomial regression to estimate the count of anti-immigrant bills and laws in the fifty states from 1991 to 2010. We find that the presence of racially conservative organizations encourages the introduction of exclusionary proposals, but only in contexts with a Republican-dominated government. At the approval stage, on the other hand, racially conservative organizations foster the passage of exclusionary laws, and this effect is heightened in contexts with a growing foreign-born population or where a majority of voters report anti-immigrant opinions or identify as conservative. This indicates that the institutionalization of the colorblind racial ideology (in the form of racially conservative organizations) resonates with lawmakers, but in a different manner when the stakes are higher. These findings have important implications and challenge previous research on the conditions under which advocacy organizations influence lawmaking and additional forms of group behavior.}, number={2}, journal={DU BOIS REVIEW-SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH ON RACE}, publisher={Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, author={Ebert, Kim and Estrada, Emily P. and Lore, Michelle Halla}, year={2014}, pages={387–417} }
 @article{ebert_okamoto_2013, title={Social Citizenship, Integration and Collective Action: Immigrant Civic Engagement in the United States}, volume={91}, ISSN={["1534-7605"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sf/sot009}, DOI={10.1093/sf/sot009}, abstractNote={Collective action has been examined in studies of worker insurgency, homeless protest, the Civil Rights movement and white backlash against racial minorities. Relatively few studies, however, focus on noncontentious forms of immigrant collective action. Utilizing a new data set comprising over 1,000 immigrant civic events, we examine whether the civic and political environment within metropolitan areas affect civic engagement. Our results indicate that political opportunities and resources did not have uniform effects, but that institutional threats to immigrants deterred civic activity. Furthermore, we find that local restrictive efforts instigated solidarity events, while outreach efforts directed at immigrants facilitated community improvement projects. These findings suggest that conditions intensifying group boundaries between immigrants and natives and encouraging collective efficacy are important predictors of immigrant civic engagement.}, number={4}, journal={SOCIAL FORCES}, publisher={Oxford University Press (OUP)}, author={Ebert, Kim and Okamoto, Dina G.}, year={2013}, month={Jun}, pages={1267–1292} }
 @article{okamoto_ebert_violet_2011, title={¿El Campeón de Los Hispanos? Comparing the coverage of Latino/a collective action in Spanish- and English-language newspapers}, volume={9}, ISSN={1476-3435 1476-3443}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/lst.2011.21}, DOI={10.1057/lst.2011.21}, number={2-3}, journal={Latino Studies}, publisher={Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, author={Okamoto, Dina and Ebert, Kim and Violet, Carla}, year={2011}, month={Jul}, pages={219–241} }
 @article{okamoto_ebert_2010, title={Beyond the Ballot: Immigrant Collective Action in Gateways and New Destinations in the United States}, volume={57}, ISSN={["1533-8533"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/sp.2010.57.4.529}, DOI={10.1525/sp.2010.57.4.529}, abstractNote={Most studies that attempt to understand immigrant political incorporation focus on patterns of electoral participation and citizenship acquisition. Given that nearly 60 percent of the foreign-born population in the United States is comprised of noncitizens, we argue that past studies miss an important dimension of the immigrant political incorporation process. In this article, we move beyond the ballot by documenting patterns of immigrant protest and conducting an analysis of the conditions under which immigrant organizing occurs in traditional gateways and new destinations. In addition to political opportunities and resources, we argue that conditions heightening group boundaries between immigrants and natives—what we call boundary markers—should play an important role in encouraging immigrants to develop a shared minority status and make collective claims on behalf of the larger group. Using hurdle models, we test our theoretical ideas with a new data set comprised of over 200 immigrant protest events in 52 metropolitan areas across the United States. Our results challenge past studies of immigrant mobilization because we find that inclusionary contexts characterized by greater access to formal political and economic incorporation both hinder and facilitate immigrant organizing, while boundary markers—measured here as threats and segregation—tend to encourage immigrant protest.}, number={4}, journal={SOCIAL PROBLEMS}, publisher={Oxford University Press (OUP)}, author={Okamoto, Dina and Ebert, Kim}, year={2010}, month={Nov}, pages={529–558} }
 @article{ebert_2010, title={Newcomers, Outsiders, and Insiders Immigrants and American Racial Politics in the Early Twenty first Century}, volume={89}, ISSN={["0037-7732"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/sof.2010.0094}, DOI={10.1353/sof.2010.0094}, abstractNote={Journal Article Newcomers, Outsiders, and Insiders: Immigrants and American Racial Politics in the Early Twenty-first Century By Ronald Schmidt Sr., Yvette M. Alex-Assensoh, Andrew L. Aoki and Rodney E. Hero University of Michigan Press. 2009. 336 pages. $70 cloth, $24.95 paper Get access Kim Ebert Kim Ebert North Carolina State University Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Social Forces, Volume 89, Issue 1, September 2010, Pages 357–359, https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2010.0094 Published: 01 September 2010}, number={1}, journal={SOCIAL FORCES}, publisher={Oxford University Press (OUP)}, author={Ebert, Kim}, year={2010}, month={Sep}, pages={357–359} }
 @article{okamoto_ebert_2009, title={Inheriting the City: The Children of Immigrants Come of Age}, volume={38}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009430610903800524}, DOI={10.1177/009430610903800524}, number={5}, journal={Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Okamoto, Dina and Ebert, Kimberly}, year={2009}, month={Sep}, pages={427–428} }
 @inbook{halfmann_rude_ebert_2005, title={The Biomedical Legacy in Minority Health Policy-Making, 1975–2002}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0275-4959(05)23012-0}, DOI={10.1016/s0275-4959(05)23012-0}, abstractNote={Through content analysis, the study traces the relative prominence of “biomedical” and “public health” approaches in congressional bills aimed at improving the health of racial and ethnic minorities over a 28-year period. It documents a surge of interest in minority health during the late 1980s and early 1990s and highlights the dominance of biomedical initiatives during this period. Drawing on historical methods and interviews with key informants, the paper explains these patterns by detailing the ways in which policy legacies shaped the interests, opportunities, and ideas of interest groups and policy-makers.}, booktitle={Research in the Sociology of Health Care}, publisher={Emerald (MCB UP )}, author={Halfmann, Drew and Rude, Jesse and Ebert, Kim}, year={2005}, pages={245–275} }
 @inbook{demystifying color-blind ideology: denying race, ignoring racial inequalities_2004, booktitle={Skin/deep: How race and complexion matter in the “color-blind” era}, year={2004} }