Borders of Compassion: Immigration Preferences and Parochial Altruism

Kustov, Alexander

doi:10.1177/0010414020938087

Cited by 30 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The underlying assumption of most sociotropic and group‐threat accounts of immigration attitudes—regardless of the particular mechanism at work—is that people favor or oppose a certain policy if they believe it poses an opportunity or threat to their national ingroup (Kustov ). Perceived “national interests,” however, are often contested, and thus the notion of group threat is limited by the vast individual differences in threat perceptions.…”

Section: Group Threat Of Immigrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is There a Backlash Against Immigration From Richer Countries? International Hierarchy and the Limits of Group Threat

Kustov

2019

Political Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why do immigrants from particular countries systematically face more opposition? To resolve inconsistencies of prevailing group‐threat theories, I reintroduce a long‐standing hypothesis stipulating that people have a disposition for maintaining status hierarchy between ethnic groups. Accordingly, independent of perceived economic or cultural threat, natives are more likely to prefer immigrant groups of higher status based on the development level of the group's national origin. To test this argument, I exploit a substantial provincial variation of immigration flows and attitudes in Spain—one of the only countries that has received immigrants from both less and more developed countries. Consistent with my hypothesis, I demonstrate that anti‐immigration attitudes are more widespread in areas with immigrants from less developed countries regardless of their economic and cultural characteristics. I further document that many voters perceive stable group hierarchies and that these preferences are more predictive of anti‐immigration attitudes in lower‐status immigration contexts. Overall, these results suggest that even culturally similar and economically beneficial immigrant groups from poorer countries can face public opposition due to their lower‐status national origin, highlighting the independent role of group‐status perceptions in politics.

show abstract

Section: Group Threat Of Immigrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is There a Backlash Against Immigration From Richer Countries? International Hierarchy and the Limits of Group Threat

Kustov

2019

Political Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In times of crisis, such as natural disasters, parochial concerns may be particularly salient (Chang 2010). These more parochial interests may lead Americans to place a higher value on the actions of solidarity taken by refugees in their own communities over actions that benefit individuals in other parts of the United States (Kustov 2020). This leads to our second hypothesis, tested in the context of COVID-19.…”

Section: Research Design and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 97%

Refugees to the Rescue? Motivating Pro-Refugee Public Engagement During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Adida

Prather

et al. 2021

J Exp Polit Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Migrants are often scapegoated during public health crises. Can such crises create opportunities for migrant inclusion instead? As the COVID-19 pandemic unfolds, many refugee organizations have stepped up their outreach with stories of refugees helping out in the crisis. We have partnered with the country’s leading refugee advocate organizations to test whether solidarity narratives increase public engagement with refugee advocates. We employ a Facebook experimental design to evaluate the effectiveness of refugee narratives. We test whether (1) migrant narratives framed in the context of COVID-19, (2) COVID-19 migrant narratives targeted to more or less local communities, and (3) COVID-19 migrant narratives labeled as refugee vs. immigrant efforts, enhance public engagement with refugee organizations. Our results indicate that migrant narratives framed in the context of COVID-19 do not motivate greater engagement than those that make no mention of the pandemic. Our results provide suggestive evidence that locally-targeted efforts motivate greater engagement. Finally, we find no difference between the “refugee” and “immigrant” label, but we show that both labels can motivate greater engagement than ads that include neither. Importantly, this is true even in the context of COVID-19, an uncertain environment where worries of backlash might be warranted. These results suggest promising strategies for migrant policy organizations to promote engagement during and possibly after the pandemic.

show abstract

“…Valentino et al (2019) offer similar results supporting a sociotropic economic thesis against a labour market competition thesis. Kustov (2021) theorises that "parochial altruists"-citizens who are both nationalistic and altruistic, which he shows to be a high proportion of the population of the UK-fit their immigration policy preferences according to the effect that they perceive it to have on their fellow citizens. This study undermines the argument that anti-immigration sentiment is rooted in ethnic animus or selfishness but instead suggests that immigration will be positively received if citizens can be convinced that it is good for their fellow citizens, particularly those less well off.…”

Section: Emphasising Self-interest and Common Interestmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of experimental evidence of how communication affects attitudes to immigration

Dennison

2022

CMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The need for strategic communication in migration policymaking is increasingly widely recognised. Whereas until recently there was relatively little academic evidence of what forms of immigration communication are effective, the past few years have seen a large amount of new experimental evidence. This article overviews 68 experimental studies, as well as other relevant studies, categorising their findings into nine common communication strategies. Appealing to common interest rather than self-interest, appealing to conformity rather than diversity, migrant descriptions, appealing to common ground, and appealing to empathy are consistently shown to be effective. Fact-checking of the effects of migration and appealing to emotions are mostly shown to be effective, as is appealing to identity where applicable. By contrast, appealing to diversity is consistently shown to be ineffective, while correcting information about migrant stocks and appeals to self-interest are mostly shown to be ineffective. Overall, this review article supports psychological findings regarding attitudinal formation that emphasise sociotropic considerations of the effects of immigration, economic or otherwise, on the collective while offering weaker support for egocentric approaches.

show abstract

Borders of Compassion: Immigration Preferences and Parochial Altruism

Cited by 30 publications

References 67 publications

Is There a Backlash Against Immigration From Richer Countries? International Hierarchy and the Limits of Group Threat

Is There a Backlash Against Immigration From Richer Countries? International Hierarchy and the Limits of Group Threat

Refugees to the Rescue? Motivating Pro-Refugee Public Engagement During the COVID-19 Pandemic

A review of experimental evidence of how communication affects attitudes to immigration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About