RCMD: Resource Center for Minority Data
Really Cool
    Minority Data

Sit-ins and Desegregation in the U.S. South in the Early 1960s (ICPSR 35630)

Version Date: May 8, 2015

Cite this study |

Principal Investigator(s):
Kenneth T. Andrews, University of North Carolina; Michael Biggs, University of Oxford

https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR35630.v1

Version V1

Slide tabs to view more

Summary

This study examines the causes and consequences of sit-ins in the American South. It was motivated by four questions: (1) Why did sit-ins occur in some cities rather than others in the spring of 1960? (2) Did movement organizations grow faster where sit-ins occurred? (3) Why did desegregation occur in some cities but not others in 1960-1961? (4) Was desegregation more likely where sit-ins occurred? To answer these questions, data was collected on cities in the states of the former Confederacy plus Maryland, Kentucky, and West Virginia. All urban places with a population of at least 10,000 and a Black population of at least 1,000 are included. These provide the 334 observations. Variables include dates of sit-in protest and of the desegregation of lunch counters, social and economic characteristics from the 1960 Census, geographical location, Civil Rights organizations, newspaper circulation, and athletic affiliations of Black colleges.

Citation

Andrews, Kenneth T., and Biggs, Michael. Sit-ins and Desegregation in the U.S. South in the Early 1960s. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2015-05-08. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR35630.v1

Export Citation:

  • RIS (generic format for RefWorks, EndNote, etc.)
  • EndNote

Subject Terms

Geographic Coverage

Smallest Geographic Unit

City

Restrictions

No

Distributor(s)

Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
Hide

Time Period(s)

1960 -- 1961
Hide

Study Purpose

This study examines the causes and consequences of sit-ins in the American South. It was motivated by four questions: (1) Why did sit-ins occur in some cities rather than others in the spring of 1960? (2) Did movement organizations grow faster where sit-ins occurred? (3) Why did desegregation occur in some cities but not others in 1960-1961? (4) Was desegregation more likely where sit-ins occurred?

Study Design

Data was collected on cities in the states of the former Confederacy plus Maryland, Kentucky, and West Virginia. All urban places with a population of at least 10,000 and a Black population of at least 1,000 are included.

Sample

All urban places with a total population of at least ten thousand and a nonwhite population of at least one thousand in 1960.

Time Method

Cross-sectional

Universe

Cities in the American South, defined as states of the former Confederacy plus Maryland, Kentucky, and West Virginia

Unit(s) of Observation

Metropolitan Area

Data Type(s)

Description of Variables

Variables include dates of sit-in protests and of the desegregation of lunch counters, social and economic characteristics from the 1960 Census, geographical location, Civil Rights organizations, newspaper circulation, and athletic affiliations of black colleges.

Hide

Original Release Date

2015-05-08

Version History

2018-02-15 The citation of this study may have changed due to the new version control system that has been implemented. The previous citation was:
  • Andrews, Kenneth T., and Michael Biggs. Sit-ins and Desegregation in the U.S. South in the Early 1960s. ICPSR35630-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2015-05-08. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR35630.v1

2015-05-08 ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:

  • Performed consistency checks.
  • Created variable labels and/or value labels.
  • Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.
Hide

Notes