Abstract
AbstractThis research investigated whether and to what extent Dutch society is polarized in its attitudes towards refugees and migrants. We further investigated what factors were linked to polarization by testing an integrated three‐dimensional model. A latent profile analysis of a representative Dutch sample (N = 1897) suggested that society is indeed polarized, with two substantial groups—anti (16.5%) and pro (18.7%)—at opposite ends. The middle was also divided into people with critical (31.8%) and lenient (33%) attitudes. The three dimensions of our model, (1) the individual and social self (education, political orientation, relative deprivation), (2) perceptions and experience regarding refugees and migrants (perceived cultural distance and contact), and (3) the societal context (societal discontent), were all significantly associated with polarized attitudes. Interestingly, perceived cultural distance from Islam was most strongly linked to polarized attitudes. Organizing different factors into an integrated model offers new insights into the complexity of polarization in society.
Highlights
The number of people forced or choosing to leave their home countries has increased dramatically over the past decade, reaching a record high of 70.8 million refugees and 258 million migrants
The three dimensions of our model, (1) the individual and social self, (2) perceptions and experience regarding refugees and migrants, and (3) the societal context, were all significantly associated with polarized attitudes
To further our understanding of polarized attitudes towards refugees and migrants, we consider it useful to approach this phenomenon as an intergroup process, and we propose a model of attitudinal polarization in which we integrate and organize different lines of literature into three dimensions
Summary
The number of people forced or choosing to leave their home countries has increased dramatically over the past decade, reaching a record high of 70.8 million refugees and 258 million migrants Polarization can briefly be described as the presence of separated groups in society with opposing attitudes (DiMaggio et al, 1996; Jung et al, 2019) Polarization may have both positive and negative outcomes on societies; it can encourage social change by stimulating discussion, political engagement, and protest (Abramowitz & Saunders, 2008; McGarty et al, 2009), but it can undermine social cohesion by increasing the avoidance of conflicting opinions and information, the stigmatization of (minority) groups, and segregation in society (Frimer et al, 2017; McCoy et al, 2018; Moulaert et al, 2003), which may further increase attitudinal polarization. Given its potential serious impact on citizens in societies, it is important to understand the extent of attitudinal polarization within societies and the psychological factors that may explain it
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 call
