ABSTRACT This study investigates how perceived societal threats interact with the social dominance orientation (SDO; an individual support for intergroup hierarchies and inequalities) to influence negative attitudes toward immigrants through essentialist beliefs. In particular, essentialist beliefs can function as a biased psychological device activated by societal threats when individuals report higher SDO. These beliefs restore confidence in social hierarchies promoting negative attitudes toward minorities (i.e., immigrants). Two correlational studies were conducted with Italian participants. In Study 1 ( N = 191), self‐report prejudice measures were employed, whereas in Study 2 ( N = 288), a resource allocation paradigm was used. A moderated mediation model was tested, in which perceived societal threats were associated with greater essentialist beliefs only among participants higher on SDO; essentialist beliefs were, in turn, associated with greater self‐reported prejudice (Study 1) and biased resource allocation that disadvantaged immigrants (Study 2). The results support our hypothesis that societal threats do not uniformly exacerbate prejudice but depend on a person's ideological posture. Specifically, under perceived threat, only high‐SDO individuals rely on essentialist beliefs, increasing negative attitudes toward minorities. The present findings emphasise the role of ideological belief systems in fostering prejudice when socio‐political contexts are perceived as mostly unstable.

This article presents moral dilemmas that arise when expressing an argument persuades citizens to support rights for migrants, but also persuades citizens to support rights for some migrants and not others. We draw upon an original survey experiment to illustrate versions of these dilemmas.

In this introduction to the second issue of a two-part series on Im/migrant Well-being, we discuss examples of how race, ethnicity, and a patchwork of current and proposed state and federal laws contribute to the exclusion of and discrimination of immigrants, hindering their incorporation and having harmful effects on their well-being. Articles discussed in this introduction zoom in into these issues by analyzing in detail how the well-being of immigrants in the United States is threatened by current U.S. immigration laws and policies: from the racial construction of the invasive “100-mile border enforcement zone” to the precarious legal statuses of unaccompanied migrant children, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipients, and farmworkers. Together, these empirical studies produce robust evidence demonstrating how the racialization and liminal legality of im/migrant communities in the United States adversely affect their belonging, incorporation, and overall well-being. In line with the findings from these articles, and in the absence of federal action on immigration reform in the horizon, the opening commentary following this introduction highlights how immigrant communities and scholars have the power to perform critical acts of brokerage to prevent harm and promote collective well-being by sharing resources and produce collaborative research that contributes toward evidence-informed policymaking.

Abstract Systemic disadvantages have led to adverse outcomes for immigrants and racially minoritized communities during the COVID-19 pandemic, including disproportionate rates of exposure, health-related discrimination, higher unemployment rates, lack of adequate health insurance, and stigmatization for the spread of the virus. This study explored the impact of perceived discrimination on the financial and psychological well-being of U.S.-based immigrants during the COVID-19 pandemic. Cross-sectional data were collected from 222 foreign-born adult immigrants between March and May 2021. Multiple linear and logistic regression was used to examine the impact of perceived everyday discrimination on immigrant stress levels and financial stability, controlling for sociodemographic factors. Study participants belonged to diverse racial groups: 43.2% White, 37.4% Asian, 9.9% Black, 5.9% Hispanic/Latinx; 3.6% identified as “other.” Findings showed that discrimination was associated with financial stability (OR = 0.27, p < .01), and stress (β = .19, p < .01). Perceptions of discrimination post-COVID-19 were also significantly associated with stress (β = .23, p < .01) Findings contribute to the limited research on immigrant experiences during COVID-19 and highlight adverse effects of discrimination on immigrants’ psychological and financial outcomes. Intervention efforts aimed at improving immigrant health and well-being should recognize, explore, and mitigate the intersectional factors that influence discriminatory experiences of immigrants in the United States.

BackgroundResearch is needed to fully investigate the differential mechanisms racial and ethnic groups use to deal with ongoing intersectional racism in women’s lives. The aim of this paper was to understand how Asian American and Pacific Islander, Black, Latina, and Middle Eastern women experience racism—from personal perceptions and interactions to coping mechanisms and methods of protection.MethodsA purposive sample of 52 participants participated in 11 online racially/ethnically homogeneous focus groups conducted throughout the USA. A team consensus approach was utilized with codebook development and thematic analysis.ResultsThe findings relate to personal perceptions and interactions related to race and ethnicity, methods of protection against racism, vigilant behavior based on safety concerns, and unity across people of color. A few unique concerns by group included experiences of racism including physical violence among Asian American Pacific Islander groups, police brutality among Black groups, immigration discrimination in Latina groups, and religious discrimination in Middle Eastern groups. Changes in behavior for safety and protection include altering methods of transportation, teaching their children safety measures, and defending their immigration status. They shared strategies to help racial and ethnic minorities against racism including mental health resources and greater political representation. All racial and ethnic groups discussed the need for unity, solidarity, and allyship across various communities of color but for it to be authentic and long-lasting.ConclusionGreater understanding of the types of racism specific groups experience can inform policies and cultural change to reduce those factors.

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.

Çalışmanın amacı, Dünya genelinde meydana gelen göç hareketleriyle bağlantılı olarak artan göçmen ayrımcılığının seçilmiş Avrupa ülkeleri üzerinden karşılaştırmalı analizini gerçekleştirmektir. Hedef ülkelerin seçilmesinde Göçmen Entegrasyon Politikası Endeksi/The Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) sınıflandırma tablosu esas alınmış olup ilgili veriler Avrupa İstatistik Ofisi (EUROSTAT) çalışmalarıyla desteklenmiştir. Çalışma nitel bir araştırma yöntemi olan doküman analizine dayandırılmıştır. Ayrımcılıkla mücadele konusunda yapılan çalışmalara ek olarak ilgili konuda saygın kişi, kurum ve kuruluşların bağlantılı çalışmalarına da yer verilmiştir. Göçmen ayrımcılığıyla ilgili karşılaştırmalı veriler ortaya koyan ve entegrasyon süreçlerine ışık tutan çalışmanın artan göç ikliminde göçmenlerin yaşam kalitelerinin artırılmasına ve göç konusundaki kamu politikalarının uygulanma süreçlerine fayda sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir. Araştırma sonucunda farklı kategorilerden seçilmiş 4 farklı ülkenin (İsveç, Fransa, İspanya, İsviçre) MIPEX verileriyle uygulama alanı arasındaki sıralamalarının orantısız bir şekilde değiştiği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre ilgili 4 ülkede AB vatandaşlarına uygulanan standartların göçmen bireylere uygulanmadığı anlaşılmıştır. Göçmen bireylerin ülkelerde sosyal dışlanma başta olmak üzere sosyal ve ekonomik sorunları yaşadıkları sonucuna varılmıştır.

Abstract Discrimination of immigrants and racialized minorities as the Roma is increasing in Europe and elsewhere in the world. Different policy approaches to diversity management tackle this issue differently, both in terms of recognizing ethnic discrimination as a key obstacle to integration and in terms of defining the ideal forms of conviviality in superdiverse societies. In this special issue, we focus on interculturalism as a policy approach to diversity management that is applied mainly at the city level in numerous countries. It is expected to foster social cohesion and counteract racism and discrimination of immigrants and ethnic minorities, which makes anti‐discrimination a central part of its DNA. However, policies and measures to efficiently address ethnic/racial discrimination and the inequalities it produces have not been salient within the intercultural framework. This article, which defines the conceptual framework of the special issue, focuses on the ways in which discrimination and interculturalism are closely linked. We argue that discrimination is a central factor hindering the egalitarian forms of contact between people of diverse origins that are fundamental for the intercultural ideals of positive interethnic conviviality.

Video games are the digital entertainment resource most in demand by young people, which has led an increasing number of education experts to study their possible benefits. In particular, in this research, we set out to identify the potential of ‘Papers, Please’ to promote moral learning. Thus, we have tried to identify those objectives that go beyond the success in the video game and could favor moral learning. For this purpose, we have investigated what types of moral discourses arise from playing ‘Papers, Please’, a video game where you adopt the role of a customs inspector in a totalitarian state who must obtain the necessary money to fund their family. To do this, we analyzed the moral content of 1,560 player reviews. Results showed that only 4.94% of the reviews presented Moral Intuitions (moral content), which occurred more in the players who had played longer and had declared more Negative Emotions. As for the analysis of the Moral Intuitions, results showed that the players mainly made references to Care for both Family and Immigrants and point out the Authority of the State. However, Fairness/Cheating is less represented, despite the many events related to Immigrant discrimination. Through Exploratory Factor Analysis, we identified three dimensions, one of them pragmatic, oriented to success in the video game, and the others aimed at epistemic aspects beyond the objectives of the video game and that delve into the moral aspects of the game events. Hence, although spontaneous video game use is oriented toward pragmatic goals, ‘Papers, Please’ can guide players to think about the morality of the video game. Nevertheless, if we want to favor moral learning with ‘Papers, Please’, it is necessary to promote epistemic goals aimed at the explicitation of the morality that underlies the video game. To this end, we propose the application of scaffolding that favors these objectives.

The first part of the article briefly covers the history of immigration to France, social conflicts associated with migrants, and the results of French research on discrimination of immigrants in employment. In spite of the high unemployment rate, compared with other European Union countries, France remains one of the centres of migration and receives a significant number of migrants and refugees every year. The origins of immigration to France go back to the mid-19th century. Initially, it was mainly for political reasons, in order to find a job or receive an education. Between the First and the Second World Wars, France accepted both political (e.g. from Russia, Germany and Spain) and labour migrants (from Africa and Indo-China). After World War II, the French government actively invited labour migrants from the French colonies, primarily, from North Africa (Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco). When the Algerian War ended, the Harkis – Algerians who served in the French Army – found refuge in France. By the late 1960s, the Moroccan and Tunisian communities were formed. Up to the 1980s, labour migration was predominant. However, with time, the share of refugees and those who wanted to move to France with their families started to increase. This caused a growing social and political tension in French society resulting in conflicts (e.g. the 2005 riots in Paris). Moreover, the numerous terrorist attacks and the migration crisis of 2014–2016 had a particularly negative impact on the attitude towards migrants. All these issues have to a certain extent affected the employment of the Muslim population in France.

Exploring the Interface between Discrimination of Immigrants and Ubuntu Concept in South Africa: A Case of African Migrants in Alice Township of the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa

Reviewed by: American Philosophy: From Wounded Knee to the Present by Erin McKenna and Scott L. Pratt Gregory Fernando Pappas Erin McKenna and Scott L. Pratt American Philosophy: From Wounded Knee to the Present London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2015, xiv + 421 pages American Philosophy is the first introduction to the tradition of American philosophy that frames the history of the philosophical ideas in the history of America. This is an extraordinary accomplishment that [End Page 130] is long overdue. The book tells the story of a philosophical tradition that is shaped by, and critically reacts to, major events in the history of the USA. In their introduction, McKenna and Pratt explain what the American philosophical tradition stood for. For many of the philosophers mentioned in this volume any worthwhile philosophy “should be understood as an activity that arises from experience” (3) and must be committed to ongoing reconstruction of present circumstances as they are lived. Consistent with these commitments, the authors wrote a text that illustrates the ways in which philosophy was and continues to be relevant to lived experience. From its beginnings, the challenge of American philosophers was to critically examine their European inherited ideas in light of the new problems faced in the Americas. From the Wounded Knee massacre to the problems that we still face today, such as exploitation, racism, sexism, immigration, American philosophers have proposed views of reality and knowledge that directly or indirectly are relevant to these problems. These are the social problems that American Philosophy presents as the background of philosophizing in the Americas. The task of writing a review of such a lengthy manuscript is challenging. I will limit myself to providing, first, a brief summary of its structure and content, and after that some evaluation and critical remarks in regard to its pedagogical value and some of its philosophical assumptions about how to understand the history of American philosophy. There are a total of thirty-one chapters that follow a chronological order. Part I is from 1894 to 1918. The Wounded Knee massacre and the problematic World Columbia Exposition in Chicago sets the stage for the long history of American philosophers’ reaction and struggles against genocide, exclusion, imperialism, war, assimilation, and segregation. The authors outline the history of challenges the USA faced after the Civil War and the end of Reconstruction. Each of the classical figures get their individual chapters: James, Peirce, Royce, Dewey; as they should, and we expect from a textbook on American philosophy. However, Part I also includes Ida Wells-Barnett, Charles Eastman, Frederick Douglass, Anna Julia Cooper, Jane Addams, Emerson, Thoreau, and Emma Goldman, among many others. Their historical and philosophical importance of these neglected figures in the canon is explained and recognized. Part II covers 1918 to 1939. It covers the legacy and events after the World War One, such as the race riots and tensions, the problems of segregation, poverty (the great depression), exploitation, immigrant discrimination, and the issue of what to do about the unavoidable cultural pluralism the USA was facing. Hartley Alexander, Thomas Davidson, Morris Cohen. Mary Parker Follett are some of the main thinkers; but featuring predominantly W. E. B. Du Bois, Horace Kallen, and Alain Locke. Part III covers 1939 to 1979. The events around and after the [End Page 131] World War Two and the great depression, and McCarthyism provide the historical backdrop to the rise of what we know today as “analytic philosophy” and some American philosophers like Neurath, Jacob Loewenberg, Henry Sheffer, C.I. Lewis, and Charles Morris. There are chapters on the Linguistic Turn and resistance to it that discuss the role of Gustav Bergmann, W. V. O. Quine, Richard Rorty, Donald Davidson, and Wilfrid Sellars. The remaining parts of the book continue a historical progression, or at least the readers get a sense that the authors are taking us on a journey through some of the events and problems in the second half of the 20th century until today (from the Civil Rights to 9/11), but there are mostly centered on themes. Part IV is titled “Applying Philosophy” and covers important American philosophers that addressed environmental problems (John Muir, Aldo Leopold...

The article investigates, theoretically and empirically, the mechanisms underlying the link between the normative and affective dimensions of national identity, perceived threats (realistic and symbolic), and outgroup trust‐related emotions as predictors of support for migrant employment policy based on the nativist argument. The National Identity Threat Trust model (NITT) is theorized and tested. Empirically, structural equation modelling was performed on survey data from the last wave of EVS Italy (2017). The analysis showed that the ethnic majoritarian conception has a positive impact on perceived collective threats (realistic and symbolic) and trust‐related emotions, which in turn influence support for discriminatory migrant employment policy. The civil conception contributes indirectly to increasing support for native employment priority via positive association with the perception of economic and symbolic threats. Citizens close to right-wing nativist parties exhibit a similar relationship structure to the rest of population. However, the “nativist” politicization of attitudes towards immigrants makes the symbolic threat a particularly salient factor.

We examined whether zero-sum thinking explains White Australian-born people's majority-culture perceptions of discrimination towards their ingroup and an outgroup (immigrants), and the relationships among perceived discrimination and support for multiculturalism and immigration. Two correlational cross-sectional studies were conducted among self-identified White Australians (Study 1, N=517), and White Americans (Study 2, N=273), as well as an experiment among White Australians (Study 3, N=121) in which we manipulated discrimination towards immigrants over time. Our findings did not support a zero-sum account but revealed that perceptions of group discrimination were positively correlated: a case of 'they're discriminated against, but so are we' rather than 'if they gain, we lose'. Moreover, concerns about future discrimination of the ingroup were most predictive of opposition to multicultural policy and immigration. We argue our findings are more consistent with a competitive victimhood account of intergroup relations than a zero-sum thinking account.

Survey research finds that millennials have less prejudiced views of racial/ethnic minorities than other generations, leading some to label millennials as postracial. However, attitudinal survey research may be subject to social desirability bias because it documents statements or beliefs instead of actions. Moreover, most audit studies focus on people who make hiring decisions or own rental property and are therefore often older than millennials. This study uses a correspondence audit to investigate discrimination among millennials via “roommate wanted” advertisements. We sent over 4,000 emails and found a tiered pattern of discrimination against Asian (Indian and Chinese), Hispanic, and Black room-seekers. However, whether Asian and Hispanic room-seekers face significant discrimination varies based on whether they use predominantly White first names or traditional first names. Our findings shed light on the future of our racial system, expand our knowledge of discrimination beyond the traditional Black/White binary, and illustrate the persistence of anti-Blackness.

We integrated models of discrimination of immigrants by combining established approaches to prejudice and discrimination towards immigrants (proximate explanations) using assumptions of Evolutionary-Coalitional Theory (ultimate explanations). Based on this perspective, right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), social dominance orientation (SDO), and multicultural ideology (MCI) were considered as sociofunctional motives for attitudes towards immigrants. We examined relationships between individual differences in beliefs about the social world (dangerous worldview and competitive worldview) as more distal antecedents, and RWA, SDO, and MCI as more proximal antecedents, and the endorsement of discrimination of immigrants in the socioeconomic domain by Russian majority group members as the outcome. Data were collected among 576 participants from 33 regions in Russia, using online social media. MCI predicted endorsement of discrimination of immigrants by Russian majority group members better than did RWA and SDO. SDO predicted only economic aspects of the endorsement of discrimination. The results are discussed within the Russian context, with its ethnically diverse composition of the population and high migration rates.

Assessing Immigrant Generational Status from Names: Evidence for Experiments Examining Racial/Ethnic and Immigrant Discrimination

Using data from a representative sample of Chinese adults who were surveyed in the Hong Kong Panel Study of Social Dynamics (HKPSSD), we estimate the effects of neighborhood discrimination towards immigrants from Mainland China on the mental health of Chinese residents in Hong Kong. Contrary to our expectations, discrimination towards immigrants from Mainland China measured at the neighborhood level is not associated with the poor mental health of post-1997 immigrants; instead, a higher level of immigrant discrimination is associated with a lower level of psychological distress for both post-1997 Mainland immigrants and other Chinese residents in Hong Kong. A functional family also appears to be a consistent predictor of better mental health for both groups. Our findings, therefore, suggest that immigrant discrimination can signify a prejudice that leads to social distance or avoidance and that the post-1997 Mainland immigrants do not have extensive contact with other local residents in Hong Kong. Although local residents’ discriminatory attitudes may not result in aggressive behaviors that have a negative impact on newcomers’ mental health, the social distance between the immigrants and the local residents is still an issue that requires further research and practical attention.

Searching for a Roommate: A Correspondence Audit Examining Racial/Ethnic and Immigrant Discrimination among Millennials

Due to their state of unbelonging, many immigrants across Africa have, in times of turmoil, been stereotyped or constructed as unpatriotic outsiders, with adverse consequences on their welfare in foreign spaces. Such has been the case of migrant descendants (aliens) in Zimbabwe, who were victimised during the country’s agrarian reform and electoral processes in the new millennium. While literature on the discrimination of immigrants in post-2000 Zimbabwe is rich, there is little work on its historical roots. Therefore, using life histories, archival data and secondary literature, this article seeks to provide historical insights into the emergence and evolution of hostility in Zimbabwe towards African immigrants from the north from the 1920s to 1979. It historicises the antecedents of the anti-migrant sentiments, focusing mainly on people of Malawian ancestry in Zimbabwe who, because of various historical configurations and dynamics, became associated with the unpatriotic tag. Central to this characterisation was the immigrants’ alleged collusion with settler ‘domestic’ regimes, capital and power; their hegemonic influence over urban space, trade unionism and proto-nationalism during a period when they demographically dominated the Rhodesian African labour force; and their alleged disruption of local gender dynamics. All this became part of an anti-Malawian discourse that could be drawn upon in independent Zimbabwe to legitimise their economic and political exclusion.