The term model minority refers to a minority group, defined by factors such as ethnicity, race, or religion, whose members are perceived to be achieving a higher socioeconomic status in comparison to the overall population average. Consequently, these groups are often regarded as a role model or reference group for comparison to external groups (outgroups). This success is typically assessed through metrics including educational attainment, representation within managerial and professional occupations, household income, and various other socioeconomic indicators such as criminal activity and strong family and marital stability.^[1] The prominent association of the model minority concept is with Asian Americans within the United States.^[2] Additionally, analogous concepts of classism have been observed in numerous European countries, leading to the stereotyping of specific ethnic groups.^[3][4]

The concept of the model minority has generated controversy due to its historical application to suggest that economic intervention by governments is unnecessary to address socioeconomic disparities among particular racial groups.^[5] Primarily evident in the American context, this argument has been employed to draw contrasts between Asian Americans (particularly those of East and some South Asian origins) and Jewish Americans in comparison to African Americans and Indigenous peoples. Consequently, this perpetuates the propagation of a 'model minority myth', asserting that Asian and Jewish Americans are exemplary law-abiding and productive citizens or immigrants, while concurrently reinforcing the stereotype that Indigenous and African American communities are predisposed to criminal behavior and dependent on welfare.^[6]

Issues

The concept of a model minority is heavily associated with U.S. culture, due to the term's origins in American sociologist William Petersen's 1966 article.^[7] Many European countries have concepts of classism that stereotype ethnic groups in a manner which is similar to the stereotype of the model minority.^[3][4] Generalized statistics, such as higher education attainment rate, high representation in white-collar professional and managerial occupations, and a higher household income than other racial groups in the United States are often cited in support of model-minority status.

A common misconception is that the affected communities typically take pride in being labeled as a model minority. However, the model minority stereotype is considered detrimental to relevant minority communities because it is used to justify the exclusion of such groups in the distribution of (public and private) assistance programs, and it is also used to understate or slight the achievements of individuals within that minority.^{[citation needed]}

There are a wide variety of theories categorizing types of prejudices, and different types of prejudices are believed to be more at play towards different particular groups, one such model being the stereotype content model. Generally speaking, within the American and European social context, groups such as those with Asian heritage or Jewish heritage are believed to score high on perceived competence but low on perceived warmth and thus are thought to fall into the category of the 'envied outgroup'^[8] within the context of this stereotype. Additional studies have shown that when describing a group with the term 'model minority' and associated attributes, responses towards the out-group were significantly more negative than those using other positive attributes.^[9] Other scholars have discussed the potential for the stereotype to be the 'positive spin' on the money-mad, stealing and/or greedy Jew or Asian.^[10] Recent additional studies have delved into the role of jealous prejudice in instigating certain historical mass casualty events, such as the Holocaust, noting that the theory of the venting of frustrations on an innocent but weak target is a notion that is part of popular "folk psychology" and should be re-examined, arguing instead that envious prejudice plays a relevant role in scapegoating^[11] in some social contexts.

The concept of the model minority has generated controversy due to its historical application to suggest that economic intervention by governments is unnecessary to address socioeconomic disparities among particular racial groups.^[5]

Furthermore, the notion of the model minority pits minority groups against one another through the implication that non-model groups are at fault for falling short of the model minority level of achievement.^[12] The concept has been criticized by outlets such as NPR and EU Scream for potentially homogenizing the experiences of Asian communities on one side and Hispanics and African Americans on the other, despite the fact that individual groups experience racism in different ways.^[13][14] Critics also argue that the idea perpetuates the belief that any minority has the capability to economically rise without assistance because it ignores the differences between the history of Asian Americans and the history of African Americans, as well as the history of Hispanics, in the United States.^[15] It has also been pointed out that the concept, which also has been criticized for over generalizing the success of some community members, has been used to invalidate and render less visible the racism faced by model minorities.^[16] Additionally, over generalizing based on a measure success for some members to make the point that racism is over and anyone stating otherwise is "making excuses" is not exclusive to those groups who have been called model minorities, and became a problem for some members of the African American community after Barack Obama's Presidential election. ^[17]

United States

One of the earliest uses of the term model minority was in the 9 January 1966 edition of The New York Times Magazine by sociologist William Petersen to describe Asian Americans as ethnic minorities which, despite their marginalization, have achieved success in the United States. In his essay titled "Success Story: Japanese American Style", he wrote that the Japanese cultures have strong work ethics and family values which, consequently, lift them above "problem minorities".^[5][18] Petersen believed that the success of Asian Americans paralleled the success of Jewish Americans.^[18] A similar article about Chinese Americans was published in U.S. News & World Report in December 1966.^[19][20]

Asian Americans

Although the term was first coined to describe the socioeconomic success of Japanese Americans, "model minority" eventually evolved to become associated with American Jews and Asian Americans in general,^[21][22] more specifically with East Asians (Japanese, Chinese, and Korean Americans)^[23] as well as Indian Americans and other South Asian Americans.^[24][25] By the 1980s, almost all major U.S. magazines and newspapers printed success stories of Asian Americans.^[26]: 222 Racial attacks were reported since the early 1980s.^[27]

Some scholars have described the creation of the model minority theory as a partial response to the emergence of the civil rights movement, in which African Americans fought for equal rights and the discontinuation of racial segregation in the United States. In reaction to the success of the movement, white America, citing the accomplishments of Asian Americans, argued that African Americans could raise their communities up by focusing on education and accepting and conforming to the racial segregation, institutional racism and discrimination which were all being practiced at that time.^[28][29][30] At that time however, Asian Americans were also marginalized and racially segregated, which meant that they also represented lower economic levels and faced the same social issues which other racial and ethnic minorities faced.^[30]

A few years after The New York Times Magazine article about Asian Americans being the model minority was published, Asian Americans formed their own movement, in which they fought for their own equal rights and the resolution of their own specific social issues. It would be modeled after the Civil Rights Movement, thus, it would effectively challenge White America and the social construct of racial discrimination.^[31]

Those who resisted the emergent stereotype in the 1960s–1980s could not gain enough support to combat it due to its so-called "positive" connotations. At the time, this led many, even within the Asian American community, to either view it as a welcomed label in contrast to years of negative stereotypes, or view it as a euphemistic stereotype that was no more than a mere annoyance. Many believe that the stereotype comes with more positives than negatives. In contrast, many critics believe that there are just as many negatives as there are positives, or they believe that stereotypes should never be regarded as "good," no matter how "positive" they are intended to be. Scientific studies have revealed that both socially and psychologically, positive stereotypes have many negative and damaging consequences.^{[32][33][34][35]} According to Marita Etcubañez, a director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Los Angeles, misconceptions about Asian Americans have an effect on government policy, as "politicians won't talk about our community's needs if they assume people don't require assistance."^[36] According to Yanan Wang writing for the Washington Post, since the 1960s, "the idea that Asian Americans are distinct among minority groups and therefore immune to the challenges which are faced by other people of color is a particularly sensitive issue in the community, which has recently fought to reclaim its place in social justice conversations with movements like #ModelMinorityMutiny."^[36] In his paper, "Education and the Socialization of Asian Americans: A Revisionist Analysis of the 'Model Minority Thesis'", B. Suzuki, a researcher of multicultural and Asian American studies at University of Massachusetts Amherst, disagrees with how the media has portrayed Asian Americans. Explaining the sociohistorical background of the contemporary social system, Suzuki argues that the model minority stereotype is a myth.^[37]: 3

Since the creation of the model minority stereotype, Asian Americans have exceeded White Americans in terms of their level of education, as well as many other racial and ethnic groups in American society. As of 2012^[update], Asian Americans as a whole are considered as having obtained the highest educational attainment level and the highest median household income of any racial and ethnic demographic in the country, a position which African immigrants, and their first generation descendants, have just started to outperform them in.^[38][39] These statistics vary among the Asian American population. Historically, achieving economic and educational success was, and at times still is, seen as a gateway by different groups into greater social acceptance.^[40] This notion was shattered at different times for some people within American communities, for example within the Muslim American community dramatically in the wake of 9/11.^[41]

Statistics

There has been a significant change in the perceptions of Asian Americans. In as little as 100 years of American history, stereotypes of East Asian Americans have changed from them being viewed as poor uneducated laborers to being portrayed as a hard-working, well-educated, and upper-middle-class minority.^[42] Proponents of the model minority model erroneously assumed that Asian Americans' perseverance, strong work ethic, and general determination to succeed were extensions of their supposedly quiet natures, rather than common characteristics among most immigrants.^[43] Among Indian Americans, an example of the model minority stereotype are phenomena such as the high rates of educational attainment and above average household incomes in the Indian American community. Pointing to generalized data, another argument for the model minority stereotype is generalized data such as from the United States Census Bureau, where the median household income of Asian Americans is $68,780, higher than that of the total population ($50,221).^[44] Although some Asian American subgroups including East Asians and South Asians are economically successful, other Asian American subgroups such as Southeast Asian Americans which include Hmong, Laotians, Cambodians, and Vietnamese, are less socioeconomically successful.^[45] Asian Americans have developed the greatest income inequality gap in comparison to major racial and ethnic groups in the U.S. The economic gap in the standard of living between higher- and lower-income Asians nearly doubled; the ratio of income earned by Asians at the 90th percentile to income earned by Asians at the 10th percentile increased from 6.1 to 10.7 between 1970 and 2016, respectively.^[46]

The model minority model also points to the percentage of Asian Americans at elite universities.^[47] Model minority proponents claim that while Asian Americans are only 5% of the U.S. population, they are over-represented at all these schools. Additionally, Asian Americans go on to win a high proportion of Nobel Prizes.^[48] Of the 20 American physicists to win a Nobel Prize in the 21st century, East Asian Americans, who represent less than 4% of the U.S. population, have won 15% of prizes.^[48] Additionally, three science Nobel prizes have been won by Indian-Americans.^[48] Asian American students are concentrated in a very small percentage of institutions, in only eight states (and half concentrated in California, New York and Texas).^[49] Moreover, as more Asian Americans become Americanized and assimilated, more Asian American students are beginning to attend two-year community colleges (363,798 in 2000) than four-year public universities (354,564 in 2000), and this trend of attending community college is accelerating.^[49] West Coast academic institutions are amongst those that have the highest concentrations of Asian Americans.

The most highly educated group of Asian immigrants are Taiwanese.^[50] Education rates of Southeast Asians are low, but these numbers can be considered misleading, as a large percent comes from adult immigrants who came to the United States without any college education due to war. For ages 25 to 34, 45% of Vietnamese Americans have a bachelor's degree or higher compared to 39% of Non-Hispanic Whites.^[51]

Due to the impacts of the model minority stereotype, unlike other minority-serving institutions, Asian American Pacific Islander-serving institutions (AAPISI) did not receive federal recognition until 2007, with the passage of the College Cost Reduction and Access Act, which federally recognized the existence of AAPISIs, making them eligible for federal funding and designation as minority serving institutions.^[52] According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's 2003 report Crime in the United States, Asian Americans have the lowest total arrest rates^[53] despite a younger average age, and high family stability.^[54]