Intergenerational Mobility in Metropolitan Los Angeles
(IIMMLA) survey. Respondents were
randomly selected from households with survey-eligible individuals using the “most-recent
birthday” method. The survey was conducted by Field Survey Research. All Latino respondents
had the option of completing the survey in English or Spanish, and interviews were carried out
from April 28 to October 11, 2004. The full survey includes 4,780 respondents, of whom 3,448
were 1.5 and 2
nd
generation. The 1.5 generation includes immigrants who first migrated to the
United States prior to the age of 15. The 1.5 and 2
nd
generation respondents include 844
Mexicans, 376 Salvadorans or Guatemalans
, 401 Chinese, 401 Korean, 400 Vietnamese, 400
Filipino, and 626 people of other births/ancestries.
The Mexican 1.5 and 2
nd
generation respondents were identified through random digit
dialing. Approximately 45 percent of the Salvadoran/Guatemalan sample resulted from random
digit dialing. The remainder were identified through calls to households with Spanish-surnamed
respondents and to areas with high concentrations of Salvadoran and Guatemalan residents. For
comparison purposes, the survey also includes 1,207 3
rd
generation respondents (approximately
400 Mexicans, non-Hispanic whites, and non-Hispanic blacks) and 125 Mexican immigrants
who migrated as adults. In the analysis presented in this paper, we focus exclusively on the
Mexican and Salvadoran/Guatemalan 1.5 and 2
nd
generation respondents. Within those groups,
we limit our analysis to respondents who had two foreign born parents, at least one of whom
migrated to the United States.
2
We express our appreciation to the IIMMLA team for the design of the IIMMLA survey: Rubén Rumbaut, Frank
Bean, Leo Chávez, Susan Brown, Min Zhou, and Louis DeSipio.
3
The IIMMLA sample design called for a single quota for Salvadorans and Guatemalans in the five county Los
Angeles area. This decision was made based on available funds and the relative size of 1.5 and 2
nd
generation ethnic
communities in the five county area. Clearly, these national origin populations are distinct and have different
immigration and immigrant incorporation experiences. We do not, however, have a sufficiently large sample of
either community to analyze its experience separately. The full sample includes 253 Salvadorans and 123
Guatemalans. These numbers are reduced for the purposes of the analysis presented in this paper to 236
Salvadorans and 115 Guatemalans.
2
Convention