multicultural
Why Do Dallas-Area Public Officials Keep Fumbling the Ball on Programs Targeted to Multicultural Communities?

 Let’s give credit where credit is due. Dallas County and City of Dallas public officials have not won any accolades recently for decisions regarding programs that impact the quality of life for its multicultural community.The recent fiasco surrounding the distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine is the most recent example, but two other recent programs also come to mind – the Census 2020 Campaign and the lingering presence of food deserts in South Dallas.  As I will argue, these programs have one important thing in common that has posed a barrier to their success: the absence of quality research to guide decisions regarding public programs that are targeted to Black and Latino residents.

In 2020, I published a book entitled “The Culture of Research” that discusses the importance of conducting sound research in culturally and linguistically diverse communities and the consequences to decision making when such studies are missing or poorly conducted. Following are some insights derived from this book that should help the reader understand how sound research with multicultural communities could have produced improved outcomes in the management of the local COVID-19 vaccination program, the Census 2020 Campaign, and solving the mystery surrounding the persistence of food deserts in South Dallas.

COVID-19 Vaccine Awareness, Registration and Distribution

The local confusion and mismanagement associated with the COVID-19 vaccine distribution can be traced originally to the absence of guidance and transparency at the federal level, and the related decision by the previous administration to allow states to define their own independent strategies with a minimal financial support from the federal government.

Nonetheless, the COVID-19 vaccine distribution dilemma in Dallas County, Texas presents a good case study on decisions that public officials in urban communities should not make.   Indeed, the series of inconsistent and questionable decisions resulted in considerable public confusion and frustration with vaccine registrations, availability and distribution. Some of these missteps included the following:

  • Contradictory messages from county and city public officials;
  • Over-reliance on an Internet strategy to inform and register residents, many who lacked online access or own a computer, or were not comfortable with technology;
  • Inconsistent support in Spanish and other languages;
  • Placement of testing and vaccination sites in higher income while providing limited access in the more vulnerable areas; and  
  • Transportation barriers that prevented some residents to travel to testing or vaccination sites.
These missteps have resulted in higher numbers of white, higher-income residents getting vaccinated rather than the targeted, more vulnerable Black and Latino residents in the lower-income areas of South and Northwest Dallas. 

Figure 1:

Figure 1, published recently in The Dallas Morning News, clearly illustrates this pattern: [1]  whites comprised 62.2 percent of all persons vaccinated while representing 28.2% of the County population; Hispanics represented 19.5 percent of those vaccinated while comprising 40.8% of the population; and Blacks comprised 10.6 percent of those vaccinated although they represented 22.3% of the county population.  These disparities persist despite recent efforts by public officials to communicate more directly with civic leaders, churches and community organizations to improve vaccination rates for Blacks and Latinos in the South and Northwest part of Dallas.

The problem associated with vaccine distribution in communities of color is deeply concerning because they are the most likely to experience the more serious medical consequences from the coronavirus.  Importantly, these missteps in decision making could have been avoided with communications that were better coordinated by public officials and engagement of experts with significant experience engaging multicultural persons. 

The decision to use an Internet vehicle for the vaccination campaign is very likely the reason that white, higher income residents continue to be more successful in getting vaccinated. Although some public officials supported the idea of targeting zip codes in South Dallas that included some of the most vulnerable Black and Latino residents, the Texas State Health Department[2]immediately issued a threat to withhold vaccine doses allocated to Dallas County if the targeting was implemented.  This threat was a direct contradiction to recommendations by the National Academy of Sciences that support vaccine community intervention programs that are targeted to the most vulnerable communities. [3]  Thus, Dallas County and City of Dallas public officials learned the hard way that launching a public vaccination program in linguistically and culturally diverse communities require less reliance on technology and more reliance on outreach efforts that take the vaccines to the residents.  Ironically, while the state threatened to withhold vaccine doses if local officials employed a zip-code targeting approach in South Dallas, the use of an Internet strategy as the primary form of communication accomplished the same outcome by vaccinating higher numbers of white, higher-income residents who resided in the northern parts of Dallas County.

South Dallas Food Deserts

Why have mainstream supermarkets avoided South Dallas food deserts that are populated by lower-income Blacks and Latinos?  [4]This question inspired me to conduct a geospatial analysis using crime, demographic and supermarket expenditure data to examine the common reasons cited by supermarket executives to explain the avoidance of communities like South Dallas – such as high crime, low population density, lower household median income and insufficient food expenditures.  The study revealed that crime patterns were often inflated by previous investigators and news stories, and that the annual food-at-home expenditures in several food deserts in South Dallas were adequate to sustain the annual sales of a mainstream supermarket.  Flawed crime analyses, stereotypes of urban retail, and an apparent disdain for Black and Latino customers appeared to drive site selection decisions in South Dallas.

Over the past two decades, the City has floundered millions of taxpayer dollars on ill- conceived investments that failed to produce positive changes in the supermarket options for this community. Worst yet, a market demand study of community residents – a traditional practice to measure supermarket opportunities — has never been conducted in South Dallas. Such a study would have provided supermarket and site selection executives the statistical evidence needed for an investment decision. In the meantime, South Dallas residents will be forced to continue shopping outside of their community for healthy, affordable food or visit the less desirable dollar stores.  Once City public officials decide that the South Dallas community is deserving of a high-quality supermarket experience, a professional, high quality market demand study is the best approach for making this a reality.  If supermarket redlining practices continue in South Dallas despite solid evidence of its retail potential, it might be a good idea to recruit a supermarket chain from outside of Dallas County or Texas that reveals a greater interest in serving Black and Latino consumers in urban communities. 

The Census 2020 Campaign

In January 2020, Dallas County and the City of Dallas funded a $1.9 million Census 2020 Campaign to provide a comprehensive strategy to boost response rates in hard-to-count communities that were populated by lower-income Blacks and Latinos. The team selected to conduct the campaign submitted a report summarizing the multitude of campaign activities that they conducted from February to August of 2020 to target these HTC communities.  To monitor progress on this campaign, I produced maps on a monthly basis that illustrated the cumulative self-response rates by census tracts that were provided by the Census Bureau.  Figure 2 below shows that the final self-response rates reported by the Census Bureau were decidedly lower in the southern and northwest parts of the city where HTC Blacks and Latinos resided.  In fact, the table of Overall Self-Response Rates indicates that Dallas County ended with one of the lowest self-response rates (63.9%) compared to other large Texas counties.  Consequently, the Census Bureau was required to deploy many more field interviewers in order to minimize the potential population under-count, an especially difficult task during the pandemic.  Despite its best intentions, the Census 2020 Campaign funded by the County and City appeared to fall short of its intended goal in hard-to-count communities and will likely lead to the loss of millions of federal dollars for local programs. Although the pandemic posed a barrier to response rates during this period, the burden on Dallas County was likely similar for all other counties considered here.

                 Figure 2: Dallas County 2020 Self-Response Rates by Census Tract and City Service Area

Part of the challenge in completing the Census 2020 questionnaires can be traced to the reliance that the Census Bureau placed on using an online survey as their major data collection strategy. In past censuses, the Census Bureau relied primarily on a mail questionnaire, while data collection for the annual American Community Survey has utilized a mixed mode strategy that included mail questionnaires, telephone interviews, personal interviews and online surveys.  Not surprisingly, Black and Latino respondents to the American Community Survey have opted for telephone and personal interviews more often than whites or Asians, while online surveys were the least chosen option.

Figure 3 below presents the percentage of Dallas County households that completed the Census 2020 using an online survey.  The map presents the cumulative Internet self-response rates for the 2020 Census as of October 28, 2020.  Of the seven City Service Areas (CSAs), the Central, Southeast, South Central, Southwest and Northwest CSAs are populated primarily by lower income Blacks and Latinos. It is clear that these CSAs included census tracts (highlighted in red) with the lowest online response rates, while the numerous other census tracts (highlighted in yellow) showed modest online response rates.  The highest online return rates were realized for census tracts in the northeast and north central CSAs that were populated primarily by white, higher-income residents.


Throughout 2020, public officials in Dallas County and City of Dallas were aware of the poor performance of the Internet to encourage poor Blacks and Latinos to complete the 2020 Census.  Why then was the Internet the main vehicle used for communications related to COVID-19 vaccine awareness, registration and distribution?  Good research and multicultural expertise would have been beneficial to decision makers during this period.

Based on my past 45 years of experience in conducting surveys of multicultural populations, it is my opinion that the Census 2020 Campaign sponsored by Dallas County and City of Dallas was not guided by the best expertise regarding the strategies for successfully engaging multicultural population segments in surveys and the biennial census.  If it had been, Dallas County might have experienced a higher ranking in Census self-response rates in comparison to the many Texas counties that did not allocate any funding for a Census 2020 campaign.

Some Concluding Thoughts 

The challenges facing public officials to ensure a satisfactory quality of life for all community residents have become more complex and will require careful planning using the best expertise in understanding and engaging culturally and linguistically diverse communities.  Public officials must resist the temptation to take the path of least resistance by overlooking or dismissing the need for solid research to guide decisions that impact the quality of life of multicultural residents. Dallas County and City of Dallas public officials learned the hard way that engaging culturally and linguistically diverse residents is a complex task that requires multicultural expertise and support from community organizations. As the population of urban areas like Dallas County continues to grow and evolve demographically, the challenges to respond more effectively to important community needs and events will become more challenging.  Let’s hope that public officials will be better prepared to respond.

  

Reference Notes

[1] Garcia, N. and Jimenez, J. (2021, Jan. 28).  White Dallas residents outpace Blacks, Hispanics in registering for COVID vaccine.  Dallas Morning News, Accessed at:  https://www.dallasnews.com/news/public-health/2021/01/29/white-dallas-residents-outpace-blacks-hispanics-in-registering-for-covid-vaccine/

[2] Choi, J. (2021, Jan. 21).  Texas threatened to reduce vaccine supply to Dallas County over plan to focus on ‘vulnerable’ ZIP codes.  The Hill.   Accessed at: https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/535294-texas-threatened-to-reduce-vaccine-supply-to-dallas-county-over-plan-to

[3]National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (2020). Framework for equitable allocation of COVID-19 vaccine. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

[4] Rincón, E.T. and Tiwari, C. (2020, March 23). Demand metric for supermarket site selection:
 A case study. Papers in Applied Geography,  Accessed at: https://doi.org/10.1080/23754931.2020.1712555

Some Simple Truths About Language Usage Among U.S. Latinos
Give me a break  — 55 million Latinos in the U.S. and confusion still lingers about the best language to use when communicating with Latinos?  Corporate America continues to pour millions of dollars into Spanish-language media, documents, and campaigns despite the fact that Latinos are becoming increasingly more English-dominant, and audiences for Spanish-language television, radio and print have been losing audiences for some time. Apparently, few marketers have come to grips with the demographic reality that two-thirds of U.S. Latinos are native-born and depend primarily on English-language communications.

This paradox has lingered for two main reasons.  First, too many self-serving marketers and media shops have sold the Spanish language as the single gateway to the Latino community in the U.S., reinforced by a history of biased, self-serving research studies.  Secondly, our nation’s academic institutions continue to produce graduates with little knowledge about the language and other characteristics of U.S. Latinos. In short, the collective Latino IQ of Corporate America is embarrassingly low and unable to distinguish fact from fantasy.

To clear up some of this confusion, I would like to share some simple truths about language usage gleaned from my 36 years of practical experience in conducting surveys and experiments with Latinos for a broad spectrum of private, public and academic clients. I am not a linguistics expert, but have studied the use of language in these studies. This experience has been reinforced by teaching undergraduate and graduate courses on Hispanic marketing, survey research, statistics, and mass communications.  Thus, these simple truths are not just subjective impressions about language usage, but grounded in academic and real-world experiences.
1. Not all Latinos communicate in Spanish.
We have heard and read about it for many years – Latinos have better recall of advertisements in Spanish, Latinos make love in Spanish, the love affair with Spanish telenovelas, and so on.  As a result, marketers continue to pour millions of advertising dollars into Spanish-language media and communications believing that they are reaching all segments of Latinos. However, substantial research evidence confirms the following two facts:
·       Spanish-language audiences are comprised primarily of recent immigrants who are generally less educated, have lower incomes, are the least connected to the Internet, and primarily apartment dwellers.
·       By contrast, native-born Latinos are more dependent on English-language communications,  and generally include children, voters, higher income earners, homeowners, the more highly educated and Internet connected, and professionals.

Although many marketers may prefer to bury their heads in the sand and remain loyal to their Spanish-language strategies, the organizations that are paying for advertising and media placements should be informed that their Spanish-language advertisements may not be reaching a sizeable segment of Latino consumers.
2. Do you understand what I am saying?
It is often the case that a Latino customer is presented a form to complete a transaction or register for a program or service.  Attorneys, healthcare providers, and mortgage companies often present documents that need signatures on documents that involve important decisions. In such circumstances, Latinos are typically asked if they understand what is being explained or what they are reading, and a head nod or “yes” response is usually accepted as confirmation that the information was “understood.”  But is this type of confirmation a valid one?   Perhaps not in some cases,  because there is no follow-up evidence that the information was really understood.  Latinos, especially immigrants, will often confirm that they understand an instruction or a document to save face and not admit that they lack the ability to read or understand that language. Consequently, it is important to ask a Latino customer to explain or demonstrate their comprehension of an instruction by asking them to repeat in their own words what the instruction means, or asking them to physically demonstrate their comprehension. In a healthcare setting, for example, it would be advisable to ask a Latino to repeat, in their own words, the instructions for taking their medication(s)  – clearly a more valid measure of comprehension than a simple head nod.
3. Translators are not the last word on language decisions.
Over the past years, I have used translators for a variety of tasks and languages, and appreciate the function that they serve. With few exceptions, I always use a certified translator with experience in the subject matter at hand, whether legal, healthcare, insurance, etc. – which helps to affirm the accuracy of the translation. However, it is a mistake to think that your job is done when a translator submits their finished product.  In addition to the accuracy of the translated document, it is equally important to know who the intended audience will be and their ability to read and understand the document.  Translators do not always know who the intended audience is, and sometimes produce documents whose reading difficulty level is too high, or include words or phrases that are unfamiliar to the intended audience. By copy testing or pilot testing the translated document, one can have the added assurance that the appropriate communication has been established with the Latino consumer.    
Hence, your customer, not the translator, should have the last word on the acceptability of translated documents.

4. The use of Spanish is decreasing, not increasing.
Although media stories often talk about the large numbers of Latinos that watch Spanish-language television, the media hype contradicts what has been known by demographers for the past decade. That is, the number of Latino immigrants in the U.S. – the primary audience for Spanish-language media – has been decreasing in recent years. As explained by the Pew Research Center, the demand for Spanish-language communications of all types is expected to decrease in the coming years, while the demand for English-language communications will increase as the children of the immigrants comprise a larger component of future population growth.  Of course, this does not mean that an organization should not offer or eliminate Spanish-language support; on the contrary, it underscores the importance of also including English-language communications when reaching out to Latino consumers.
5. Speaking Spanish is not an automatic qualifier for reading or writing in Spanish.
Naïve marketers are often surprised to observe that Latinos can be conversing in Spanish quite comfortably, but may have difficulty when asked to read or write in Spanish. What some marketers fail to understand is that a language usually has at four basic functions or components —  reading, speaking, writing, and listening —  and proficiency in one of these functions does not necessarily mean proficiency in the other functions. In addition, many immigrants from Mexico lack formal education and cannot read or write in Spanish, while other immigrants from Latin America tend to be more highly educated and literate.  By better understanding the origins and educational background of Latinos, marketers can develop communications that will be understood by Latinos in their target audience. Thus, one should always consider the language function being utilized when evaluating a translated document.
6. While the U.S. Census Bureau collects language data, it can be misleading.
Organizations often quote language statistics collected by the Census Bureau as evidence about the number of Spanish-speaking households that reside in the U.S. at any point in time.  The quality of this language data, however, is limited in several ways.  First, one question in the American Community Survey (2015) asks:  “Does this person speak a language other than English at home?” If the question is answered “yes,” then the next question that follows is:  “What is this language?  Thus, we learn from these two questions the number of persons that speak Spanish and other languages as well.  But it does not ask how well Spanish is spoken, or the extent to which that person uses Spanish in any given task.  Presumably, if a person utters one word in Spanish, then they are considered a “Spanish speaker.”

The only other language question included is:  “How well does this person speak English?” – to which one is provided four options:  “Very well,” “Well,” “Not well,” and “Not at all.”  While this type of language proficiency question is useful in providing some guidance on how well a person speaks the English language, other research that I have summarized elsewhere shows that Latinos tend to over-estimate their language skills on self-reported measures like the one used by the Census Bureau – a consequence of social desirability.  That is, native-born Latinos who are more English-language proficient often want others to think that they speak Spanish better than they actually do.  Immigrants, who are more Spanish-language proficient, often want others to think that they speak English better than they actually do.  Even when they claim proficiency in both languages, 9 in 10 native-born Latinos will choose an English-language interview when given a choice, while 9 in 10 immigrants will choose a Spanish-language interview.  Hence, the language that a Latino chooses when provided a choice is a more valid indicator of their language dominance than their self-reported language proficiency.  Our experience suggests that Latinos should always be provided the choice of English or Spanish when asked to complete a task – such as an interview or a written document. This simple procedure will usually assure that you will get a more valid response.  These Census Bureau language questions, while useful, are crude measures of language behavior that should be used cautiously when evaluating the language behavior of U.S. Latinos. Click on this link to read the white paper entitled “Are Latinos Over-Estimating Their Language Abilities with Self-Reported Measures?”  https://www.rinconassoc.com/category/publications  
7. Employers take great risks when using Latino employees for translations or language advice. 

As a shortcut, some companies will utilize Latino employees to translate documents or interpret on the spot when the situation demands it.  Unless you know the training and education of that employee, you are taking unnecessary risks in assigning them this responsibility. Latinos that are born in the U.S. rarely study Spanish formally in school and rely on the Spanish that they have heard or used growing up in their communities – often a mixture of English and Spanish.  Important documents that relate to employee personnel procedures, healthcare, safety, insurance or legal matters should only be translated by a certified translator and copy-tested to ensure that employees understand the translated documents or other visual aids.  Experience also suggests that graphic symbols, such as those used in hazard warning signs, also have cultural components that may not communicate the same message to culturally-diverse groups. Copy testing is especially important with signage that relies on graphic symbols since they are often used to warn or prevent injuries or accidents. 
8. Knowing a language does not necessarily mean that you know the culture. 
In the employment world, many occupations require proficiency in one or several languages.  While proficiency in a language other than English is a definite asset in many jobs, it should not be confused with knowledge of a particular culture.  It is not uncommon, for example, for a foreign-born Latino with an excellent command of the Spanish language to receive more consideration for a job than a similarly educated Latino whose Spanish proficiency is not as well polished —  the assumption being that a higher language proficiency also means more knowledge of the culture.  This assumption may not necessarily be a valid one since a native-born Latino may indeed have more knowledge of the U.S. Latino culture than a foreign-born Latino who happens to communicate well in Spanish. If the job  involves responsibilities with U.S. Latino consumers, then knowledge of the Latino culture in the U.S. should be just as important in employment decisions as proficiency in a language.
9.  Are Latinos really diverse?
I often hear statements about the wide diversity in Latino communities, a reference to the numerous countries of origin represented throughout the U.S.   Indeed, the U.S. Census Bureau tells us that about 22 countries are represented in the category known as Hispanic or Latino.  A look at the Latino population in some geographic areas, however, would lead one to re-think the use of the word “diversity.”  For example, the State of Texas included  10.1 million Latinos in 2013, representing a broad variety of Spanish-speaking countries.  However, fully 88 percent of Texas Latinos were of Mexican origin – not exactly the picture of diversity. Decisions regarding language usage should consider the primary countries of origin represented by the Latinos living in a particular community since the type of Spanish utilized can vary by country of origin.  How can you find out about the country of origin for a particular community?  It’s easy – just visit the Census Bureau Factfinder web site at http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtmlto obtain the Latino country of origin for any city, county, metropolitan area or state.

10.  Language ability depends on sight and sound as well.

My experience in conducting hundreds of focus groups with Latinos has shown that their ability to understand a written document or verbal instruction is sometimes influenced by limitations related to their visual acuity and hearing impairments.  Latinos will not readily admit when they are unable to see very clearly, but an astute observer will notice non-verbal cues that suggest a vision problem.  Similarly, hearing impairments can be subtle and not usually something that will be readily apparent.  As a moderator, I have addressed such issues by reading a document out loud so that everyone can hear and understand the instruction, and ensure that any written documents are provided in large fonts to enhance their readability. Rather than embarrass a person because they cannot see or hear very well, it makes more sense to offer options that will allow all persons to participate in the task or activity. 
Segmenting Multicultural Consumers: Old Dinosaurs Die Slowly

Eventually, any organization that plans a marketing program comes to grips with the realization that their product or service cannot please everyone. Consequently, the need to define a target segment – those customers whose needs are most likely to be satisfied with a product or service – becomes a critical decision for the marketing program. Indeed, it makes little sense to introduce a product and spend significant advertising dollars only to discover later that the customers that you had hoped would buy the product are not interested.

Although market segmentation is a well-established concept in the marketing world, I am often amazed at the many companies who invest considerable financial resources to launch a multicultural campaign with little more than their own personal insights or advice from ethnic employees to guide these campaigns. To such marketers, segmentation research is not a priority because, for all intents and purposes, ethnic consumers tend to think alike, speak the same language, watch similar media, desire the same products, and shop at similar places. Ironically, when the campaign struggles or just fails, consumers are readily blamed for their lack of interest.

Even marketers who understand the need to segment multicultural consumers have been misguided by the industry’s preoccupation with language segmentation or “language buckets,” as I like to call it. Language buckets are created from responses to questions about the language that a person speaks most often at home. In the case of Hispanics, the language buckets typically used are Spanish all the time, Spanish most of the time, Spanish and English equally, English most of the time, and English all of the time. Marketers often use these language buckets to select a segment of Hispanics that they believe will be more responsive to their advertising campaigns, such as Spanish-dominant Hispanics (i.e., speaks Spanish all the time or most of the time). Despite the often biased and self-serving nature of their research, Spanish-language advocates have been successful in convincing Corporate America to spend nearly 90 percent of all Hispanic-targeted media expenditures on Spanish-language media – quite a remarkable achievement given that 60 percent of U.S. Hispanics are native-born and primarily use English-language media. It is not difficult to understand why some industry stakeholders would not want to change how language segmentation is currently practiced.

Nonetheless, choosing potential customers based on their self-reported home language speaking skills is problematic for two important reasons. First, it makes little sense to select a target segment of consumers based on their language abilities without first determining whether a product or service will meet their needs – like putting the cart before the horse – a practice that overlooks other consumer segments that may also find the product appealing. As a case in point, it seems reasonable to assume that most Hispanic homeowners need home improvement supplies, regardless of their language skills. Rather than focus on Hispanic consumers in a specific language bucket, it makes more sense to identify segments of Hispanic homeowners according to their propensity to buy home improvement supplies, and then design the marketing mix that reaches the desired segments effectively – which may include a combination of English and Spanish-language media. The home improvement company could clearly lose sales if their advertising agency recommended a specific linguistic strategy without first understanding the home improvement needs of all Hispanic consumers and then selecting the most desirable target segment.

Secondly, it is disturbing although not surprising to observe how the marketing industry has embraced such a vague and simplistic concept as home language usage to segment Hispanic consumers. The credit goes to The Nielsen Company for popularizing the use of language buckets to segment Hispanics. Nielsen sponsors national telephone surveys each year of U.S. Hispanics to create the needed information for their television ratings, and shares these universe language estimates with other research firms like Arbitron to compare or adjust their language data on Hispanics.

But the language behavior of Hispanics is not as simplistic as The Nielsen Company would have us believe. Based on various studies of U.S. Hispanics, our research shows that the language that one speaks at home varies considerably within any one Hispanic household – it depends on the subject matter under discussion, the age of the individuals engaged, their country of origin, the task at hand, and general proficiency with the language. In a typical Hispanic household, Spanish or English may be used when talking to specific family members but may take a different path when viewing television, completing homework assignments, listening to radio, playing games, talking to friends, and other activities. Because the language that one speaks at home is influenced by many factors, it lacks the stability needed to reliably segment Hispanic consumers and highly questionable when used to adjust television and radio ratings.

Language usage among multicultural consumers can lead to some unexpected surprises. In recruiting consumers for focus groups, we have learned that consumers who speak proficiently in one language do not necessarily know how to read or write in that language. In telephone interviews, we find that respondents often over-state their proficiency in one language as they try to impress the interviewer with their language skills – a social desirability response set. A more valid and practical measure of language ability can be achieved by being more specific about the language skill needed for a particular task or situation. For example:

  • How often do you speak English when talking to friends?
  • How often do you read Spanish when reading a newspaper?
  • How well did you understand the English-language advice provided by your doctor?

Going forward, I believe that multicultural marketers should re-evaluate their campaigns to ensure that they have taken the appropriate steps to identify their target segment(s), and that their marketing strategies are aligned with the needs of the segments that appear the most attractive. Although language segmentation has been a popular way to identify target segments, the quality of the language data used is suspect and distracts attention away from more useful segmentation bases such as product usage, benefits, and lifestyles. Level of acculturation, which is typically defined by language usage and country of origin, has also been used in the past to understand and segment multicultural consumers; however, it has the same potential as language segmentation to mislead marketers by focusing on a specific linguistic strategy rather than one that is based on product consumption.