Image Descriptions
Description for Figure 1.4
Voter Preferences for Four Groups in 2016 vs. 2020
The image shows four pairs of pie charts.
The first quadrant, in the upper left, is titled “Women Voting Republican or Democrat in the 2016 and 2020 Presidential Elections.” The left-side chart shows 2016 results, with a smaller, red section for Trump with 39% and a larger, blue section for Clinton with 54%. The right-side chart shows 2020 results, with a smaller, red section for Trump with 44% and a larger, blue section for Biden with 55%. Each chart has a white segment at the top of the “pie” that represents other voters.
The second, in the upper right, is titled, “Men Voting Republican or Democrat in the 2016 and 2020 Presidential Elections.” The left-side chart shows 2016 results, with a larger, red section for Trump with 52% and a smaller, blue section for Clinton with 41%. The right-side chart shows 2020 results, with a larger, red section for Trump with 50% and a smaller, blue section for Biden with 48%. Each chart has a white segment at the top of the “pie” that represents other voters.
The third, in the bottom left, is titled, “White Non-Hispanic Voters Voting Rep. or Dem. in 2016 and 2020 Presidential Elections.” The left-side chart shows 2016 results, with a larger, red section for Trump with 54% and a smaller, blue section for Clinton with 39%. The right-side chart shows 2020 results, with a larger, red section for Trump with 55% and a smaller, blue section for Biden with 43%. Each chart has a white segment at the top of the “pie” that represents other voters.
The fourth, in the bottom right, is titled, “White Evangelicals Voting Rep. or Dem. in 2016 and 2020 Presidential Elections.” The left-side chart shows 2016 results, with a larger, red section for Trump with 77% and a smaller, blue section for Clinton with 16%. The right-side chart shows 2020 results, with a larger, red section for Trump with 84% and a smaller, blue section for Biden with 15%. Each chart has a white segment at the right side of the “pie” that represents other voters.
Source and Attribution
Data is from Pew Research Center [Website]. Design is by Shanell Sanchez and Michaela Willi Hooper for Open Oregon Educational Resources and is licensed under CC BY 4.0.
Description for Figure 1.7
Family Living Arrangements between 1960 and 2014
The image shows a grouped column or bar chart titled, “For children, growing diversity in family living arrangements.” The subheadline reads, “Percent of children under 18 living with….”
The chart displays percentages for children in five different categories of living arrangements:
- Two parents in the first marriage, represented by light purple
- Two parents remarried, represented by dark purple
- Single parent, represented by a gray-and-white grid pattern
- No parent, represented by white dots on a black background
- Cohabiting parents, represented by black dots on a white background
The first set of bars is from 1960. The first bar reaches 73%. The second bar reaches 14%. The third bar reaches 9%. The fourth bar reaches 4%. There is no fifth bar. A note explains that data regarding cohabitation were not available for 1960, and that those children were included under “single parent.”
The second set of bars is from 1980. The first bar reaches 61%. The second bar reaches 16%. The third bar reaches 19%. The fourth bar reaches 4%. There is no fifth bar. A note explains that data regarding cohabitation were not available for 1980, and that those children were included under “single parent.”
The third set of bars is from 2014. The first bar reaches 46%. The second bar reaches 15%. The third bar reaches 26%. The fourth bar reaches 5%. The fifth bar reaches 7%.
Source and Attribution
Data is from Pew Research Center [Website]. Design is by Elizabeth Pearce and Michaela Willi Hooper for Open Oregon Educational Resources and is licensed under CC BY 4.0.
Description for Figure 1.8
Median Age at First Marriage
The image shows a line graph titled, “Median age at first marriage: 1890 to present.” Dots mark the values for each decade between 1890 to 1940. A line shows the values for years from 1947 to 2022. Age is marked in two-year intervals on the right side of the graph, starting at 18 and rising to 32.
Men are represented by blue dots and a blue line. Women are represented by red dots and a red line. The median age is marked at just over 26 years for men and 22 years for women in 1890. That number decreases slightly through 1920 and then begins to rise. The line, starting in 1947, is lower again, at just under 24 years for men and just over 20 years for women. At that point, the line stays relatively constant, with minor ups and downs, for men until nearly 1980. The line for women stays consistent and starts to rise after 1960. The lines show a trend of rising median ages for first marriage until just before 2022, when they fall slightly. In 2022, the median age of marriage for men was about 30 years, and for women, it was just above 28 years.
There is a note that starting in 2019, estimates for marriage now include same-sex married couples.
A U.S. Census Bureau logo and contact information are displayed in the lower left corner.
Source
U.S. Census Bureau, Decennial Censuses, 1890 to 1940, and Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplements, 1947 to 2022.
Description for Figure 1.14
Change in Race Reporting by People of Hispanic/Latino Origin
The image is titled, “Percentage Change in Race Reporting by Hispanic or Latino Origin: 2010 and 2020,” and shows two sets of bar graphs.
The first set of bar graphs shows results for “Hispanic or Latinx.”
- White alone: -52.9
- Black or African American alone: -6.4
- American Indian and Alaska Native alone: 115.3
- Asian alone: 27.8
- Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone: 16.3
- Some Other Race alone: 41.7
- Two or More Races: 567.2
The second set of bar graphs shows results for “Not Hispanic or Latino.”
- White alone: -2.6
- Black or African American alone: 6.0
- American Indian and Alaska Native alone: 0.2
- Asian alone: 35.6
- Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone: 29.2
- Some Other Race alone: 179.7
- Two or More Races: 127.1
A note below the graphs explains that data users should use caution when comparing 2010 Census and 2020 Census race data because of improvements to the question design, data processing, and coding procedures for the 2020 Census. It also provides a U.S. Census Bureau website link to review confidentiality protection, non-sampling errors, and definitions.
Source
U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File; 2020 Census Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File.
Description for Figure 1.15
A More Diverse Nation
This bar graph from the U.S. Census Bureau is titled “A More Diverse Nation,” with the subheadline “Asian Alone Population Was the Fastest-Growing Race Group from 2000–2019.”
The bar graph shows the percent change:
- Asian: 82.2
- Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander: 72.7
- American Indian and Alaska Native: 56.0
- Black or African American: 23.1
- White: 9.6
The total resident population,16.3, is represented by a red line running down the bar chart.
A note explains that Hispanic origin is considered an ethnicity, not a race. The population that is Hispanic may be of any race. As well, responses of “Some Other Race” from the 2010 Census are modified.
Source
2000 to 2010 Intercensal Estimates (2000–2009) and Vintage 2019 Estimates (2010–2019).
Description for Figure 1.16
White* and racial-ethnic minority contributions to county population change, 2010–2019
This map of the United States shows population gains and losses, with white and minority gains in red, white losses less than minority gains in orange, and white losses greater than minority gains in yellow.
Many areas in Texas, Florida, Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Nevada, Tennessee, the Carolinas, and coastal and metro areas are experiencing population gains of both white people and minorities.
Many parts of California, Arizona, Massachusetts, Maine, the DC Metro area, and the Pacific Northwest are experiencing white losses that are offset by minority gains.
Rural areas in states including Nebraska, Illinois, New York, Maine, and New Mexico are experiencing white population losses that are greater than minority gains.
* Whites do not identify as Latino or Hispanic.
Source
William H. Frey’s analysis of U.S. Census population estimates was released on June 25, 2020.
Description for Figure 2.5
Types of Racism
Different types of racism are briefly defined and represented with an icon.
- Color-blind racism is represented by a person with a blindfold and weights used to symbolize equal justice. Definition: Suggests that race or racial classification does not affect a person’s life chances or opportunities.
- Environmental racism is represented by a polluting coal plant. Definition: Deliberate targeting of communities of color for toxic waste disposal and pollution, and exclusion from decision-making.
- Ideological racism is represented by a diagram of the brain. Definition: Groups are perceived to be superior or inferior based on physical characteristics linked to psychological or intellectual characteristics.
- Internalized racism is represented by someone covering their ears because of the words directed at them. Definition: Members of the target group are emotionally, physically, and spiritually battered, so they begin to believe that their oppression is deserved.
- Inter-group or interpersonal racism is represented by crossed swords. Definition: Occurs between individuals or groups; it is the holding of negative attitudes toward a different race or culture.
- Intra-group racism is represented by a person being excluded from a group. Definition: Racist attitudes and behaviors against people of your “same racial group.” Colorism is a type of intra-group racism based on skin tone.
- Modern racism is represented by someone with a question mark on their shirt,t shrugging. Definition: White people believe that serious racial discrimination does not exist today and that communities of color are making illegitimate demands.
- Structural/systemic racism is represented by an official building with pillars. Definition: Systemic factors that work to produce and maintain racial inequities in America today, including public policies and institutional practices.
- Subtle, covert racism is represented by theatrical masks. Definition: Hidden or camouflaged racism.
- Every day, racism is represented by a person with a shopping cart. Definition: Minorities’ lived experiences of racism with ideological and structural forces of racism in everyday life, such as the daily attitudes and interactions that minorities face.
- Individual racism is represented by a person raising their arm. Definition: People consciously expressing racist ideas.
Source and Attribution
Design by Shanell Sanchez and Michaela Willi Hooper is licensed under CC BY 4.0. Image attributions: Law (Color-blind Racism) by Creative Mahira from Noun Project is CC BY 3.0. Depression (Internalized Racism) by Gan Khoon Lay from Noun Project is CC BY 3.0. Racism (Intra-group Racism)by Amethyst Studio from Noun Project is CC BY 3.0. Shrug (Modern Racism) by JHgram from Noun Project is CC BY 3.0. All other clipart is in the Public Domain.
Description for Figure 2.10
Changes in Support by Whites for Segregated Housing, 1972–1996
The image is a line graph tracking the percentage of people who believe that Whites have the right to keep Black individuals out of their neighborhoods over time, from 1972 to 1996.
- The vertical axis represents the percentage, ranging from 0 to 45.
- The horizontal axis represents the years from 1972 to 1996.
- The line started at around 40% in 1972, fluctuated slightly to reach a peak above 40% in the late 1970s, and then began a steady decline through the 1980s and 1990s.
- By 1996, the percentage had declined to below 10%.
This graph visually shows a decline in support for the belief that Whites have a right to exclude Black individuals from their neighborhoods over 24 years.
Source
Data from the General Social Survey, 2008.
Description for Figure 2.11
Poverty Among Children and the Overall Population by Race
Estimated poverty rates using the U.S. Census Bureau Supplemental Poverty Measure, by age, race, and Hispanic ethnicity (2021).
The image is a bar chart displaying poverty rates in the United States by race and ethnicity for both children under age 18 and the total population. The poverty rates for children are represented by solid gray bars, while the poverty rates for the total population are represented by patterned bars.
The poverty rates by group are:
- Hispanic (any race):
- Children: 8.4%
- Total population: 11.2%
- Black:
- Children: 8.1%
- Total population: 11.3%
- American Indian/Alaska Native:
- Children: 7.4% (highlighted in blue)
- Total population: 12.4% (highlighted in blue)
- All people (national average):
- Children: 5.2%
- Total population: 7.8%
- Asian:
- Children: 5.1%
- Total population: 9.5%
- Two or more races:
- Children: 5.0%
- Total population: 7.3%
- White, not Hispanic:
- Children: 2.7%
- Total population: 5.7%
This shows that American Indian/Alaska Native populations have the highest poverty rates, with the total population at 12.4%. White, not Hispanic individuals have the lowest poverty rates across both categories.
Notes: The figure uses racial and ethnic categories aligned with those presented in figures within the U.S. Census report cited above. Percentages for AIAN, Black, and Asian populations reflect estimates for the race-alone (rather than race-alone-or-in-combination) categories. Use of these categories does not imply a preferred method. The categories do not reflect the intersectional nature of racial and ethnic identities; however, they do provide a way to begin examining trends in poverty across subpopulations in the United States. Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders are not shown due to sample size.
Source
Creamer, J., Shrider, E.A., Burns, K., and Chen, F. (2022). Current population reports, P60-277, Poverty in the United States: 2021. U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-277.pdf
Description for Figure 3.4
Racialized Social Control
This quote is at the top of the image: “The enactment of specific policies to deter deviousness that disproportionately impacts people of color” (Patel, 2018).
Different types of racialized social control are briefly defined and represented with an icon.
- Genocide is visualized with a skull and crossbones. It is the deliberate, systemic act of killing an entire people or nation (for example, the Transatlantic Slave Trade).
- The War on Drugs is visualized by handcuffs. IT is a phrase used to refer to a government-led initiative begun in the 1970s, aiming to stop illegal drug use, distribution, and trade by dramatically increasing prison sentences for both drug dealers and users.
- Othering is visualized by a group of people excluding one person. Individuals from marginalized groups are treated as inferior to the dominant social group.
- New Jim Crow is visualized as a person behind bars. It is recent legislation created to enforce social control on Black individuals, leading to outcomes like mass incarceration.
- Internal Colonialism is visualized with a person shoveling. The dominant group exploits marginalized groups (for example, farm workers).
- Assimilation is visualized by three people in identical suits. It is the process by which a marginalized individual or group takes on the characteristics of the dominant group (for example, Asian immigrants changing names to sound more “American”).
- Profiling is visualized by a police officer arresting someone on their knees. It is suspecting someone of criminal behavior based on their characteristics. Racial profiling is based on racist stereotypes and tools built on cultural racism.
- Juan Jim Crow is visualized by a barbed wire fence. There are racial inequalities faced by Latino communities. Forms of social control regarding Latinos primarily focus on immigration policies.
Source and Attributions
Source: Patel, T. G. (2018). Race/Ethnicity, Crime and Social Control: An Introduction. Social Sciences, 7(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7120271
Design by Shanell Sanchez and Michaela Willi Hooper, Open Oregon Educational Resources, is licensed under CC BY 4.0. Attributions: Racism (Othering) and Arrest (War on Drugs) by Amethyst Studio from the Noun Project are CC BY 3.0. All other icons are in the Public Domain or under the Pixabay license.
Description for Figure 3.18
U.S. Private Prison Populations
The image is a statistical chart titled “U.S. Private Prison Populations,” which shows the number of prisoners held in private prisons under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities in the United States. The data is presented in a line graph format, covering the years 2000 to 2019.
- State prisoners are shown with a red line. The population started around 75,000 in 2000, peaked at nearly 100,000 around 2008 to 2012, and then declined to 88,545 by 2019.
- Federal prisoners are shown with a blue line. The population started below 15,000 in 2000, gradually increased to over 40,000 by 2013, and then declined to 27,409 by 2019.
Source
The data is from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The chart was created by Statista.
Description for Figure 3.19
Private Prisons in the United States
The image, titled “Private Prisons in the United States,” is a graphic with sections that use numerical data, bar charts, and pie charts to show statistics about privately run prisons in the United States.
Prisoner Population in Private Facilities:
- 8% of federal and state prisoners were held in private facilities in 2019.
- 73% of immigration detainees were held in private facilities in 2017.
Annual Mean Wage of Correctional Officers (2019):
- Federal: $57,870
- State: $50,530
- Local Jail: $49,890
- Private: $43,090
Annual Cost per Federal Inmate (2014):
- Public prisons: $25,251 per inmate.
- Private prisons: $22,159 per inmate.
Annual Infractions per 10,000 Federal Inmates (2014):
- Confiscated Cell Phones:
- Private prisons: 427
- Public prisons: 50
- Weapons, Tobacco, Drugs:
- Private: 91
- Public: 79
- Inmate-on-Inmate Assaults:
- Private: 39
- Public: 25
- Inmate-on-Staff Assaults:
- Private: 35
- Public: 21
The infographic is branded with the Statista logo at the bottom.
Sources
Data from the Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Immigration and Customs Enforcement via Detention Watch Network, and Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Description for Figure 4.10
Intersection Wheel
The image shows an intersection wheel, visually representing various identity elements. It consists of a circular diagram with two layers, surrounded by a rounded square border. Each element is in a different colored section.
- Inner Circle (core aspects of identity that are typically permanent):
- National Origin
- Race/Ethnicity
- Gender Identity or Expression
- Gender
- Age
- Mental/Physical Ability
- Sexual Orientation
- Outer Circle (external and organizational identifiers that can change):
- Work Experience
- Education
- Appearance
- Religion
- Income
- Language and Communication Skills
- Organizational Role
- Family
- Political Belief
Source
Dr. Remi Alapo from “7.3 Race and Ethnicity,” Diversity and Multicultural Education in the 21st Century.
Description for Figure 4.16
Neighborhood Home Values
In this illustration, two identical families are shown in front of their homes. The family with lighter skin has a real estate sign with the cost of $900,000 shown. The family with darker skin has a real estate sign with the cost of $450,000 shown. A circle in the center says, “In the average U.S. metropolitan area, homes in neighborhoods where the share of the population is 50 percent Black are valued at roughly HALF the price as homes in neighborhoods with no Black residents,” from the Brookings Institute.
Source and Attribution
Data from “The Devaluation of Assets in Black Neighborhoods: The case of residential property” [Website] by the Brookings Institution.
Design by Shanell Sanchez and Michaela Willi Hooper, Open Oregon Educational Resources, CC BY 4.0. Images adapted from Mohamed_hassan, OpenClipart-Vectors, and PlumePloume on pixabay.com.
Description for Figure 5.13
Stop and Frisk Data in New York City, 2002-2022
A line chart shows that stops and stops with no outcome rose from 2002 to 2012 under the Bloomberg administration. There were more than 600,000 stops and more than 500,000 stops with no outcome in 2012. Arrests were much lower, always falling under 100,000. Stops, arrests, and no outcome stops all declined under the late Bloomberg and De Blasio administrations (2012-2021), but stops began to rise again slightly under the Adams administration.
Source
Description for Figure 5.18
American Police Officer Race & Ethnicity
A pie chart shows the racial and ethnic breakdown of police officers in the United States.
- Non-Hispanic White: 69% (largest portion of the chart)
- Hispanic or Latino: 15%
- Black or African American: 13%
- Asian: 2%
- American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or other Pacific Islander: 1%
The chart shows that almost seven out of 10 U.S. police officers are non-Hispanic White, while officers of color collectively make up about 31 percent of the force.
Source
Data from U.S. Census Bureau, 2018. Graphic created by Jessica René Peterson.
Description for Figure 5.19
Americans’ Confidence in Police
A line graph tracks the percentage of U.S. adults who say they have “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in the police. The data comes from Gallup surveys of people aged 18 and older, collected between 1993 and 2020.
The vertical axis (y-axis) ranges from 0% to 100% confidence. The horizontal axis (x-axis) shows years from 1994 to 2020. A blue line represents the percentage of Americans with high confidence in police.
Confidence starts at just above 50% in 1994. It rises to nearly 60% in the early 2000s (2004). Confidence then moves between the low 50s and high 50s for most of the following years. By 2020, confidence declines to its lowest point – just under 50%.
A note at the bottom of the graph says that the question asked was: “How much confidence do you have in the police?” The margin of error was ±1.4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.
Source
Gallup surveys, August 1993–2020.
Description for Figure 5.20
Percentage of Americans by race who believe major changes are needed in policing, 2020
A grayscale vertical bar chart compares survey responses by racial group.
- Non-Hispanic White: 51%
- Hispanic: 63%
- Black: 88%
Black Americans were most likely to say that major changes in policing are needed, followed by Hispanic Americans, while just over half of non-Hispanic White Americans agreed.
Source
Data from Crabtree, 2020 – Gallup surveys of U.S. adults. Chart created by Jessica René Peterson.
Description for Figure 5.21
Percentage saying that deaths of Black people in encounters with police are signs of a broader problem, by race, 2016
A grayscale horizontal bar chart compares survey responses between the public and police officers, compared by race.
- Non-Hispanic Black Public: 79%
- Non-Hispanic Black Police Officers: 57%
- Non-Hispanic White Public: 54%
- Non-Hispanic White Police Officers: 27%
Black citizens and officers were more likely than their white counterparts to say that deaths of Black people in encounters with police were signs of a broader problem.
Source
Data from Pew Research Center Survey of Law Enforcement Officers, 2016. Chart created by Jessica René Peterson.
Description for Figure 6.3
World Population in Cities
This bar graph is titled “54% of the World’s Population Now Lives in Cities” with the subtitle “% of the population living in urban areas.” The chart compares urban population percentages by region for the years 1990 (dark blue), 2014 (light blue), and projected for 2050 (green). The data is visualized using building-shaped bars.
North America:
- 1990 – 75%
- 2014 – 81%
- 2050 – 87%
Latin America:
- 1990 – 71%
- 2014 – 80%
- 2050 – 86%
Europe:
- 1990 – 70%
- 2014 – 73%
- 2050 – 82%
Oceania:
- 1990 – 71%
- 2014 – 71%
- 2050 – 74%
Asia:
- 1990 – 32%
- 2014 – 48%
- 2050 – 64%
Africa:
- 1990 – 31%
- 2014 – 40%
- 2050 – 56%
Worldwide:
- 1990 – 43%
- 2014 – 54%
- 2050 – 66%
The chart highlights significant urban growth projections, especially in Asia and Africa.
Source
United Nations. Chart provided by Mashable and Statista.
Description for Figure 6.4
Rural Americans of Color in 2020
This is a color-coded map of the United States (including Alaska and Hawaii) that displays the racial and ethnic composition of rural counties based on data from the 2020 U.S. Census. The map is divided by county and uses color shading to show which non-white racial or ethnic group is the largest in each rural county, and what proportion of the population they represent.
Each racial/ethnic group is represented with three shades, indicating the percentage of people of color in that county:
- Black (green shades):
- Light green: <10% People of Color
- Medium green: 10–50% People of Color
- Dark green: Majority People of Color
- Latino (yellow/brown shades):
- Light yellow: <10%
- Medium yellow: 10–50%
- Dark yellow/brown: Majority
- Indigenous (blue shades):
- Light blue: <10%
- Medium blue: 10–50%
- Dark blue: Majority
- Asian (red shades):
- Light pink: <10%
- Red: 10–50%
- Dark red: Majority
- Gray indicates Non-Rural counties (which are excluded from this analysis).
Some patterns can be seen in the map.
- Black rural populations dominate the rural Southeast and parts of the Mid-Atlantic, especially in counties with medium to high percentages of people of color.
- Latino rural populations are prominent throughout the Southwest, West, and parts of the Great Plains, especially in Texas and California.
- Indigenous populations are most prevalent in Alaska, the Four Corners region, and the Northern Plains.
- Asian populations are a small portion of rural residents, but are highest in Hawaii.
Source
Data from Brookings’ analysis of 2020 U.S. Census data. The graphic was created by the Metropolitan Policy Program at Brookings.
Description for Figure 6.6
Rural Images
This photo collage shows several images that might be used to represent life in rural areas. Clockwise from top left:
- A tractor pulls baling equipment in a hay field.
- Three cows with ear tags stand in a barn or similar structure.
- Three figures who appear to be men wearing hats or hoods carry shotguns through a field. The sun behind farm equipment can be seen in the background.
- A large red barn with an American flag hanging down from the top center window. A gravel road runs up to the barn.
- Two figures wearing hats ride horses toward animals and farm equipment.
- A young pig looks up from a spot between several other pigs.
- A figure in a hat stands in a harvested field.
- The sun peeks out from a tree next to a rural house. A barn can be seen in the background.
- A figure in a hat and overalls watches over a group of bison.
Description for Figure 6.15
Majority-Black Counties
This map of the United States shows counties where more than 50 percent of the population is Black, based on the 2020 U.S. Census. Counties or county equivalents are included for all 50 states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico.
Counties shaded in dark green represent areas with more than 50% Black Alone.
Counties shaded in light green represent areas with more than 50% Black Alone or in combination with another race.
The image shows that most majority-Black counties are concentrated in the Southeast, particularly in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and South Carolina, with smaller clusters in North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland. There are no majority-Black counties in most western and northern states. A small inset shows the location of New York City for reference.
Source
2020 United States Census, Summary File 1.
Description for Figure 6.16
Appalachian Counties
A regional map of the eastern United States shows counties categorized by their inclusion in the cultural definition of Appalachia. The map shows an area from southern New York through Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, Virginia, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and into northern Alabama and Mississippi. The map shows the following color coding for each county:
- Dark brown: Always included in Appalachia.
- Medium brown: Usually included in Appalachia.
- Dark pink: Sometimes included in Appalachia.
- Light pink: Rarely included in Appalachia.
- Grey with blue outline: Physically contains Appalachian Mountains or associated features, but not culturally considered Appalachian.
The dark brown region runs diagonally from southwestern New York to northeastern Mississippi and Alabama, with dense coverage in West Virginia, eastern Kentucky, southwestern Virginia, eastern Tennessee, and northern Alabama. Areas in medium brown include portions of western Virginia, western North Carolina, and northern Georgia. Pink-shaded areas extend into parts of central Alabama, northern Georgia, and western South Carolina, indicating weaker cultural identification with Appalachia. Counties with only blue outlines physically contain Appalachian mountain features but are not considered culturally Appalachian, such as areas in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and New Jersey.
Several major cities, including Pittsburgh, Knoxville, Chattanooga, Asheville, Birmingham, Roanoke, and Charleston, are marked for geographic reference.
Source
Counties included in the Appalachia map by Leviavery are in the Public Domain.
Description for Figure 6.18
Political Cartoon
This political cartoon is an illustration of a white-haired man with light skin dressed in a blue suit jacket with no tie and seated at a desk with some papers in front of him. He has his eyes closed and his hands raised. Behind him is a map of the state of West Virginia in the form of an optical illusion often used to show if someone is color blind: It has the state represented by multiple orange and yellow-shaded circles, with a set of green circles in the middle that spell out “BLM.” Also behind the man is part of an American flag. A speech bubble showing the man’s words says, “I don’t see color!”
Source
Description for Figure 6.22
Majority-Hispanic and Latinx Counties
This map of the United States shows counties where a majority of the population is Hispanic or Latinx, based on the 2020 U.S. Census.
Counties shaded in orange represent areas with a majority Hispanic or Latinx population. The image shows that most majority-Hispanic or Latinx counties are concentrated in the Southwest, particularly in Texas and New Mexico, with smaller clusters in Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho, and Nevada. There are also small clusters of Hispanic- or Latinx-majority counties on the West Coast in California, Oregon, and Washington, and on the East Coast in Florida. There are a few majority-Hispanic or Latinx counties in the upper Midwest or most East Coast states.
Source
2020 United States Census.
Description for Figure 7.2
Wrongful Convictions by Race
The graphic shows Innocence Project cases where a wrongful conviction was found, identified by race. An Innocence Project logo outlined in blue sits on the left side of the image, with lines to blue circles with each race and percentage of wrongful convictions listed inside.
- Black: 58%
- White: 33%
- LatinX: 8%
- Asian American, Native American, or self-identified “other”: 2%
In the Innocence Project cases that were examined, more than half of black defendants were wrongfully convicted.
Source
Data from Innocence Project, 2025. Graphic created by Jessica René Peterson.
Description for Figure 7.6
A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words
This graphic illustrates racial disparities in the types of images used for defendants in media coverage.
A chart on the left side of the graphic compares the percentage of image types used for white defendants (blue) versus Black defendants (black) in news coverage.
- Mug shot: White defendants – 9%; Black defendants – 45%
- Jumpsuit: White defendants – 0%; Black defendants – 8%
- Suit: White defendants – 13%; Black defendants – 6%
On the right side of the graphic, a split photo shows two defendants: (Left) A white male defendant wearing a suit and glasses stands in a courtroom. The caption reads, “Photo from ‘Mesa police try to fire officer accused of murder’ (3/15/16).” (Right) A Black male defendant in a red jail jumpsuit, with hands restrained, looking over his shoulder. The caption reads, “Photo from ‘Recording between suspected Seminole Heights killer and his family won’t be released’ (5/6/2019).”
The graphic shows that Black defendants are more likely to be depicted in mug shots or jail clothing, while white defendants are more often shown in suits or professional clothing.
Source
Global Strategy Group, Equal Justice Initiative. All rights reserved, included with permission.
Description for Figure 7.10
Path Through the Criminal Justice System
The graphic visually depicts the path a typical defendant will take through the U.S. criminal justice system. Blue circles each list a step in the process, with gray arrows showing the order of the steps. The steps are:
- Crime
- Investigation
- Arrest
- Prosecution
- Indictment
- Arraignment
- Pre-trial detention
- Plea bargaining
- Trial
- Sentencing
- Appeals
- Punishment
Source
Graphic created by Taryn VanderPyl.
Description for Figure 8.6
Status Offenses: A Path into the Justice System for Juveniles
Definition: A status offense is something that is not allowed for a child but is allowed for an adult.
Types of status offenses:
- Staying out after curfew
- Using alcohol
- Using cannabis
- Using tobacco
- Being out of a parent/guardian’s control
- Running away
Status offenses make up about 20% of juvenile arrests each year.
Status offenses in Oregon in 2022 (represented by pie chart):
- Curfew: 125
- Tobacco: 214
- Marijuana: 643
- Runaway: 1801
Source
“Data & Evaluation Report, Dispositions Statewide (2022)” by the Oregon Juvenile Justice Information System.
Description for Figure 9.7
Lifetime Likelihood of Imprisonment of U.S. Residents Born in 2001
This graphic uses different colors of simple human figures to show how many people are likely to be imprisoned during their lifetime, if born in 2001. The unaffected people are represented by dark gray figures and the affected people are indicated by orange figures. The following categories are examined:
- All men: 1 in 9
- White men: 1 in 17
- Black men: 1 in 3
- Latinx men: 1 in 6
- All women: 1 in 56
- White women: 1 in 111
- Black women: 1 in 18
- Latinx women: 1 in 45
Source
Description for Figure 9.9
Three Waves of Opioid Overdose Deaths
Chart with x axis from 1999-2020; y axis shows deaths per 100,000 and the scale is from 0-24.
Wave 1 starts in 1999: rise in prescription opioid overdose deaths
Wave 2 starts in 2010: Rise in heroin overdose deaths
Wave 3 starts in 2013: Rise in synthetic opioid overdose deaths
There are four lines on the chart. The topmost line is for deaths from any opioid.
Deaths from other synthetic opioids, e.g. tramadol or fentanyl, prescribed or illicitly manufactured, start close to 0 and rise steeply to be the second-highest line on the chart by 2020 in the third wave.
Deaths from commonly prescribed opioids, e.g. natural and semi-synthetic opioids and methadone, start a little above 0 and are initially the second-highest line on the chart, but stabilize and in 2020 are the third-highest line on the chart.
Deaths from heroin start close to 0 and rise during the second wave but remain the lowest of the four lines on the chart for almost all years represented.
Source
National Vital Statistics System Mortality File.
