Immigration Attitudes Research Articles

Countering the trump effect in Canada: strengthening support for immigrants using national identity

ABSTRACT Social norms are based on expectations of what others believe and do, and so they can shift in response to what trendsetters—highly visible media or political leaders—say or do. There is evidence that former President Trump as a trendsetter has weakened norms against expressing anti-immigrant attitudes in the US. As such, we ask: can trendsetters affect anti-immigrant norms across national borders? Can such spillovers be mitigated by countervailing norms attached to a national identity? We conduct two survey experiments to determine if there is potential for a Trump spillover effect in Canada and whether it can be mitigated by norms attached to Canadian identity. We find that priming Trump can weaken norms against expressing anti-immigrant sentiment in Canada. We also find that priming Canadian identity can mitigate the Trump as trendsetter effect, and attaching pro-immigrant norms to Canadian identity can strengthen norms against expressing anti-immigrant attitudes. The potential for a political trendsetter to have effects on immigration attitudes across national borders and the potential for national identity norms to mitigate such effects are important to understand given the recent global spread of anti-immigrant sentiment.

The Wall between Latinas and Latinos? Gender and Immigration Enforcement Attitudes among U.S. Latina/o Voters

AbstractDonald Trump’s surprising level of support among U.S. Latina/o voters in 2016 and his improved performance in the 2020 election posed a puzzle for Latina/o politics scholars given his stridently anti-immigrant agenda. Although scholars have acknowledged the political gender gap between Latinas and Latino men, few studies have outlined the theoretical basis or explored the empirical existence of gender differences in Latina/o immigration enforcement attitudes. Building on the Latina politics literature documenting Latinas’ greater engagement in solidarity work with immigrants and their greater desire for cultural transmission and the maintenance of pan-ethnic identity, I test two hypotheses. The first (the Latina/o gender hypothesis) postulates that Latinas will exhibit more liberal attitudes on matters of immigration enforcement relative to Latino men. The second (the immigrant identity hypothesis) postulates that Latinas are more likely to rely on their sense of commonality with immigrants in the formation of their immigration enforcement attitudes. Bivariate and multivariate analyses of the 2020 Collaborative Multiracial Postelection Survey support both hypotheses, which suggests not only that immigration attitudes among Latinas and Latino men are meaningfully distinct, but also that there are important structural differences underlying Latina/o beliefs in this policy area.

Exposure to negative foreign COVID-19 news predicts lower support for immigration policy in China

We present a framework for studying the spillover effect of negative foreign COVID-19 news on attitudes towards immigration. Our framework proposes that exposure to negative COVID-19 news from foreign countries can activate negative associations with foreigners, reduce positive attitudes towards them, and increase perceived threat, ultimately leading to decreased support for immigration. We conducted three studies to test this framework. Study 1 found that exposure to negative COVID-19 news about a foreign country increased negative valence associations with that country. Study 2 showed that exposure to more negative COVID-19 news about foreign countries was associated with lower acceptance of immigration policies in real life. Study 3 replicated the spillover effect of negative news exposure using a scenario manipulation. The effects of negative news exposure on immigration policy acceptance in both Studies 2 and 3 were mediated by changes in foreigner attitudes and intergroup threat. Our results demonstrate the important spillover effect of negative foreign COVID-19 news exposure on immigration attitudes and highlight the association perspective as a foundation for understanding attitude changes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Exploring the ideational explanation for pro-immigrant sentiment: evidence from a South Korean survey

A consistent finding in the public opinion literature shows that individuals who attain higher levels of education are more likely to express pro-immigrant attitudes. The ideational hypothesis suggests that ideas learned during formal education drive this empirical relationship. In this article, we develop this hypothesis further by asking, "What types of ideas socialize pro-immigrant attitudes?" We argue that exposure to social theories during higher education promotes social inclusivity and tolerance, leading to positive views toward immigrants. This article draws theoretical insights from attitudinal-based theories of immigrant sentiment to construct a mediation model linking ideas from the classroom to attitudes toward immigrants. Using original data from a population-based survey in South Korea, we examine the relationship between respondents’ prior enrollment in different academic courses and their attitudes toward immigrants. We measure exposure to social theories as enrollment in social science and arts & humanities and find that only social science courses are positively associated with pro-immigrant attitudes. We also examine whether enrollment exhibits indirect effects via previously identified attitudinal determinants of immigrant sentiment. Results from our mediation analysis show that enrollment in social science courses is associated with stronger cosmopolitan views and negatively correlates with isolationist attitudes. In contrast, we find that enrollments in courses unrelated to social theories, like math & science and engineering, are not statistically significant predictors of immigrant attitudes. We interpret our results as observational evidence consistent with ideational-based explanations for pro-immigrant attitudes.

The Everyday Crusade: Christian Nationalism in American Politics. By Eric L. McDaniel, Irfan Nooruddin, and Allyson F. Shortle

Over three decades ago, Andrew Greeley, in The Catholic Myth (1990), argued that one’s imagination of how God relates to the world drives a person’s outlook and conduct on political, social, and economic issues. McDaniel, Nooruddin, and Shortle update this argument in their current text and like Greeley, test their normative rendering of Christian nationalism through nine quantitative surveys. In structure, the introduction and the first two chapters provide a substantive and methodological overview. The ensuing five chapters make applications to: (1) who belongs to the nation, (2) immigration attitudes, (3) the evangelical role of foreign policy, (4) how hierarchical the structure of government should be, and (5) the outlooks of racial and religious minorities. At the outset, the authors contend that a primary myth of US political culture is the notion of religious exceptionalism: that God has given the United States a special blessing—“God shed his grace on thee,” for example, in “America the Beautiful.” Consequently, by this myth, this country has a responsibility to spread this imperative in global affairs. They trace this notion from its Puritan inception through thinkers such as Thomas Paine, concepts such as manifest destiny, and the conduct of US foreign policy, especially during the George W. Bush era.

Democracy and discontent: institutional trust and evaluations of system performance among core and peripheral far right voters

ABSTRACT This article contributes to the debate about democratic discontent and far right party support taking into account the heterogeneity of the far right voter pool. Distinguishing between peripheral far right voters driven by discontent, and core far right voters driven by nationalism, we argue that citizens’ evaluations of the democratic process are associated with their electoral behaviour; but this relationship varies depending on their immigration attitudes. Using data from 9 waves of the European Social Survey (2002-2018), we confirm that whereas among the general population positive evaluations of the democratic process may serve as a deterrent for far right party support, the same assessments are unlikely to deter the far right's core ideological voters. In some circumstances, they might have a galvanising effect, prompting a backlash among some core voters. Our findings add nuance to voting behaviour theories, and illustrate why scholars should pay more attention to far right intra-partisan heterogeneity.

Economic Shocks and the Development of Immigration Attitudes

AbstractHow do immigration attitudes form? Drawing on the political socialization literature, I argue that growing up in a recession causes a lasting increase in anti-immigration attitudes. I delineate two mechanisms that emphasize the negative consequences of recessions for young workers and the anti-immigration narrative that often emerges during economic turmoil. Young adults are particularly vulnerable to these external shocks because they have minimal political experience and are developing their core political attitudes. Support is provided for this argument with evidence from the European Social Survey. An economic shock during young adulthood causes a significant increase in anti-immigration attitudes, a relationship not found for other ages. I find tentative evidence that growing up in a recession has a larger effect on the racial and cultural dimensions of immigration and causes a broader sociotropic response. Results highlight how economic crises affect the socialization of young adults and underscore their lasting political consequences.

The shifting issue content of left–right identification: cohort differences in Western Europe

Over the last decades, the rising salience of new issues has transformed politics in Western Europe. How has this transformation affected citizens’ left–right identities? This study shows how new issues have become integrated into the meaning of left–right among Western Europeans through generational replacement. Mechanisms of political socialisation and elite cue taking imply that how strongly an issue is associated with left–right identities should reflect this issue’s politicisation during a cohort’s formative years. In line with this, an analysis of the European Social Survey for 12 Western European countries from 2002 to 2018 reveals that environmental protection and immigration attitudes are more strongly associated with left–right positions among those born later. Attitudes towards redistribution tend to be less relevant within more recent cohorts in some countries, though period effects after the European debt crisis point in the opposite direction. This study enhances our understanding of the evolution of political conflict.

Experimenting with List Experiments: Interviewer Effects and Immigration Attitudes

Abstract List experimentation is a common survey methodology that purports to reduce or eliminate social desirability bias. While some studies have assessed list experimentation’s effectiveness in achieving that goal, to our knowledge, this is the first ever experimental evaluation of interviewer effects on list experiment performance. We embedded a list experiment about immigration attitudes in an in-person survey administered to 718 white respondents. Randomly assigning Caucasian and Latinx interviewers, we find strong evidence that responses to the list experiment differed by interviewer ethnicity, thus failing to fully eliminate social desirability bias. A follow-up survey of 1,460 online respondents revealed similar difference-in-differences when merely priming the ethnic identities of survey researchers through pictures. The results of this study shed light on patterns of interpersonal communication about sensitive issues and how social context shapes the reporting of political attitudes, even when methodology specifically meant to mute sensitivity biases is employed.

Chinese Immigrants’ Perceptions of Community Justice in the USA: An Exploratory Study

Abstract An increasing body of research has highlighted the significance of coll aboration between criminal justice practitioners and residents to enhance the quality of life in communities. As an innovative practice model, this collaborative concept maximizes the effectiveness of three core factors of community justice (community policing, community courts, and community corrections) by maintaining community order and enhancing neighbourhood quality of life. However, as many cities and municipalities have invested time and resources into developing positive relationships with immigrants, little research has been focused on the nexus between immigrant communities within the community justice movement model. Using data collected from Chinese immigrants in the US, the current study is the first pilot investigation on perceptions of the new pattern of Chinese immigrants toward their communities and their collaboration with the criminal justice system. This study suggests positive attitudes of immigrants toward community justice, but criminal justice agencies must tailor their interaction to the unique characteristics of each immigrant community. What constitutes good community justice practices in one community may not be effective in another.

Stability of National‐Identity Content: Level, Predictors, and Implications

A neglected topic in empirical research on national identity is its stability at the individual level, and this is especially true for its content, that is, the meaning elements that people associate with the concept of nation. In this article, we study the stability of key dimensions of national‐identity content. We ask three simple questions: How stable is national‐identity content—as captured in the ethnic/civic framework—at the level of individual citizens? Are there clear differences in stability across subgroups? What are the implications of interindividual differences in stability? Analyzing data from four waves of a large‐scale panel survey of German citizens (N = 4,654) collected over a five‐year period (2016–21), we show that there is high but not perfect stability of the degree to which individuals subscribe to ethnic and civic criteria of nationhood. Second, we find little difference in stability as a function of several theoretically selected characteristics. Third, we show that the association between national‐identity content and relevant political attitudes (immigration attitudes and far‐right party support) increases with intraindividual stability. These findings have important implications for our understanding of how national‐identity content is shaped and mobilized and how it can influence political attitudes and behaviors.

Politically motivated interpersonal biases: Polarizing effects of partisanship and immigration attitudes

We demonstrate effects of political preferences on interpersonal interactions in the environment of the highly unstable and volatile party system of the Czech Republic. The effects of partisanship on interpersonal relations are compared to the effects of attitudes on a salient issue. Two experiments confirm the potential of political partisanship to affect the individual’s ingroup preferences and outgroup biases, which can influence willingness to converse with others in the context of an unstable party system. In a conjoint experiment, dis/agreement on immigration has comparable effects on interpersonal interactions. Avoidance of interactions with out-partisans is amplified when out-partisans talk about politics often. The patterns of ingroup preferences and outgroup biases are replicated in a trust game experiment. Both partisanship and immigration attitudes influence how subjects interact with others. Given the political context, the study provides a hard test of politically motivated ingroup and outgroup biases stemming both from party and policy preferences.

Does Social Mobility Matter? The Kafala System and Anti-Immigrant Sentiment

Existing studies argue that anti-immigrant sentiment stems from threat perception. Yet, conventional theoretical approaches cannot fully explain hostility toward immigrants in the Middle East and North Africa, where low-skilled foreign workers occupy an inferior social and legal status vis-a-vis natives under the kafala system. Building on existing studies of immigration politics, we theorize how immigration policies can either facilitate or prevent the social mobility of foreign workers. Exploring immigration attitudes in 14 Middle East and North Africa countries using an original dataset that matches survey responses with host country-specific factors, we find that extreme rights-restricting immigration policies (such as the kafala system) encourage wealthier natives to be more hostile than their lower-class counterparts. Our study suggests that anti-immigrant sentiment is context-specific and influenced by local institutions.

Divergent responses to local diversity: Outgroup differences and the impact of personality

Research has shown that differences in personality can help explain attitudes towards immigration. Personality may also moderate the impact of local immigrant levels. Using attitudinal measures from the British Election Study, this research confirms the importance of all Big Five personality traits in predicting immigration attitudes in the UK and finds consistent evidence of an interaction between extraversion and local immigrant concentrations. In areas with high levels of immigrants, extraverted individuals are associated with more supportive immigration attitudes. Moreover, this study shows that the response to local immigrant levels varies by immigrant group. Levels of nonwhite immigrants and immigrants from predominantly Muslim countries are associated with greater levels of immigration hostility, whereas this is not the case for white immigrants or immigrants from Western and Eastern Europe. These findings demonstrate that an individual's response to local immigration levels depends on both their personality and the immigrant group in question.

How Social Context Affects Immigration Attitudes

Selection bias represents a persistent challenge to understanding the effects of social context on political attitudes. We attempt to overcome this challenge by focusing on a unique sample of individuals who were assigned to a new social context for an extended period, without control over the location they were sent: missionaries for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We interviewed a sample of 1,804 young people before and after their mission service in a diverse set of locations around the world and find strong evidence that the policy views of respondents became more tolerant toward undocumented immigrants when respondents were assigned to places where contact with immigrants was more likely. Within the United States, missionaries who served in communities with larger Hispanic populations, and those assigned to speak a language other than English, experienced the largest increases in pro-immigrant attitudes.

Communicating Economic Evidence About Immigration Changes Attitudes and Policy Preferences

Existing studies demonstrate that threat perceptions matter for immigration attitudes. However, while these perceptions are potentially sensitive to information about immigrants’ impacts, questions remain about whether inserting such information into public debates changes attitudes and policy preferences—especially on polarizing issues like immigration. Moreover, few studies have considered messages featuring the type of nonphotorealistic visual elements that increasingly appear in media. Using a survey experiment fielded in the United Kingdom, we examined whether evidence about European Union immigrants’ modestly positive economic impacts on the United Kingdom—presented either as text, with visualizations, or as an animated film—changed immigration attitudes and policy preferences. Although visual elements did not have an effect over and above text, all the informational treatments moved attitudes and preferences in positive directions, even among Leave voters. Our study brings together research on immigration public opinion and visual media and has implications for policymaking and journalism practice.

Is the unhappy citizen a populist citizen? Linking subjective well-being to populist and nativist attitudes

AbstractEconomic grievances, globalization, and voter discontent are among the usual explanations for the surge in right-wing populism (RWP) across Western democracies. However, subjective well-being has recently been introduced as an overlooked psychological factor explaining citizens’ democratic support, immigration attitudes, and populist vote choice. Yet we know little about how general well-being, instead of specific negative sentiments, relates to populist and nativist attitudes. This study examines the well-being bases of populist and nativist attitudes in Finland where, similar to other European countries, populism and anti-immigration attitudes have increased since the early 2000’s. Using the Finnish 2019 National Election Study, we demonstrate that life dissatisfaction, and not only economic concerns, relates to populist attitudes, setting an agenda for future populism research. We suggest that past research has not fully accounted for all psychological factors in explaining support for RWP.

Racial and gender stereotypes in immigration attitudes: evidence from China

ABSTRACT How do racial and gender stereotypes affect immigration attitudes? Studies on this topic have focused primarily on developed rather than developing countries. To close the gap, we explore the phenomenon in China, a developing economy that is evolving from a source of emigration to a destination of immigration with its citizens having little direct experience with immigrants. Via two waves of survey experiments with over 4,000 respondents, we find that gender cues of female immigrants increase public approval of immigration and liberal immigration policies, while racial cues of Black immigrants discourage them. Further analysis reveals that gender bias is likely the product of sociopsychological concerns over cultural threats and that racial bias stems from concerns over public safety. Our findings contribute to the literature on the racial stratification and discrimination of immigrants in the context of developing countries.

Gender attitudes of immigrants in Russia (on the example of concepts of equal educational opportunities)

Attitudes towards gender equality have significant differences in different countries of the world. These differences are especially felt in migratory movements, when people are faced with different gender regimes. This article is devoted to the study of ideas about gender equality of immigrants from post-Soviet countries in Russia, as well as their comparison with similar attitudes of Russians. The empirical basis of the study was a survey of immigrants from the CIS countries, Ukraine and Georgia (autumn 2020, 700 respondents). Data on Russians is taken from the seventh wave of the World Values Survey (2017, 1810 respondents). Despite the common historical past, the gender attitudes of immigrants and Russians differ — the former more often agree with the thesis that higher education is more important for a boy than for a girl. Predictors of influence on gender attitudes were identified. For Russians, gender, position in the labor market and the number of children turned out to be significant. For immigrants, predictors of patriarchal gender perceptions were older age, lower levels of education, and adherence to the Muslim religion. An extended regression model for immigrants also led to the conclusion that it is not the length of time migrants live in the host country that affects the transformation of their gender attitudes, but the intention to connect their lives with Russia, the formation of an all-Russian identity (a sense of community with the citizens of the Russian Federation). At the same time, the position of Russia as a country that has not overcome the problem of gender inequality (50th place in the world ranking), coupled with the patriarchal ideas of some Russians, may allow immigrants not to rush to revise their own gender attitudes.

Why are U.S. business students afraid of immigrants? Values and attitudes

Xenophobia (fear of immigrants) is increasing in many developed countries. Given the prominent role of immigrants in the workforce, xenophobia can shape how managers treat diverse employees and business partners. However, immigration has largely been overlooked in higher business education, thereby not preparing our students for the workplace. With a lack of relevant literature and understanding of student immigration views, we survey U.S. business undergraduates to assess the antecedents of xenophobia of legal and undocumented immigrants. Under the lens of social identity theory, we consider self-transcendence values in universalism (appreciation of others) and benevolence (helping others) as well as immigration attitudes of resource competition (jobs and wages) and economic benefits (costs and labor gaps). We compare partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to a configural study via qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). PLS-SEM, which relies on a one-size-fits-all function, generalizes both resource competition and economic benefit attitudes as having stronger influence on xenophobia than values for legal and undocumented immigrants. QCA, which allows different functions (configurations), more effectively captures subtle differences in personal immigration stances, highlighting the importance of one or the other attitude (resource competition or economic benefits). The results, thus, reveal the relevancy of QCA in better capturing variability among personal stances with complex, polarizing topics like immigration. We close with discussion of how scholars can begin to develop pedagogical research and tools to help students process their immigration attitudes and xenophobia.