Abstract
National identities are often conceived of as factors that lend structure and stability to citizens’ political opinions on issues such as immigration. While citizens who define national membership in ethno-cultural terms are less likely to support immigration, those with a civic conception are more likely to do so. The authors propose that defining national identity along both ethno-cultural and civic lines may give rise to conflicting considerations, leading people to experience ambivalence, implying that national identities may serve less as a stabilizing force than suggested by previous research. Findings from heterogeneous choice models and a unique survey experiment show that German citizens with mixed conceptions of national identity had more variable and more malleable opinions than individuals with ideal-type conceptions during the 2015/2016 European refugee crisis. The findings point to an identity-based source of ambivalence and extend current understandings of how people form attitudes towards immigration.
Highlights
National identities are often conceived of as factors that lend structure and stability to citizens’ political opinions on issues such as immigration
This implies that national identities may serve less as a stabilizing force than suggested by previous research, an important possibility given that many recent events and political debates hint at both civic and ethno-cultural notions of national identity
Building on the idea that citizens may subscribe to two ideal-typical conceptions of the nation, we demonstrate that while some ‘constellations’ of national identities lend structure and stability to political opinions, others are more likely to give rise to ambivalence and – as a consequence – fickle and changing opinions
Summary
National identities are often conceived of as factors that lend structure and stability to citizens’ political opinions on issues such as immigration. When considering the role of national identities as a source of political attitudes, prior research often distinguishes between two ideal-typical notions of national identity: civic and ethno-cultural understandings (Bonikowski and DiMaggio 2016; Kunovich 2009; Theiss-Morse 2009; Wright, Citrin and Wand 2012). Studying individual-level data from two different surveys, employing a survey experiment and a panel set-up, we find that attitudes towards immigration are more positive (negative) among those who have a civic (ethno-cultural) conception of the nation, and that opinions are less stable and more malleable among those who believe both ethno-cultural and civic criteria matter This implies that national identities may serve less as a stabilizing force than suggested by previous research, an important possibility given that many recent events and political debates hint at both civic and ethno-cultural notions of national identity. Public opinion may represent less of a constraint on elite decision making than suggested by conventional wisdom; elite politics on identityrelated issues reflect deeply held convictions, but are effective at shaping public opinion
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
