“No Thanks, We're Full”: Individual Characteristics, National Context, and Changing Attitudes toward Immigration

Abstract

In this paper we examine how individual‐level characteristics and national context affect attitudes toward immigration. Although many previous studies have compared attitudes toward immigration across countries, little attention has been paid to how attitudes may be affected by changes within a country over time. We take advantage of seventeen national Canadian Gallup surveys to consider how differences in national economic conditions and changing immigration flows affect attitudes and changes in attitudes between 1975 and 2000. While the state of the national economy affects attitudes this is not the case for the rate of immigration. Rather than affecting some groups more than others the state of the economy has a relatively uniform effect across groups. Our results also show that far from being a continuum, being anti‐immigration and being pro‐immigration are qualitatively different. Interest, ideology, and the national economy affect anti‐immigration sentiments, but only ideology affects pro‐immigration sentiments.

Adapting to party lines: the effect of party affiliation on attitudes to immigration

“…Ivarsflaten (2005) finds that individuals who feel unsafe are more negative to immigration in countries where anti-immigrant elites are strong. Semyonov et al (2004Semyonov et al ( , 2006 and Wilkes et al (2008) show that electoral support for anti-immigrant parties is positively and strongly associated with anti-immigrant attitudes. However, the studies mentioned use (repeated) cross-sectional data and therefore cannot disentangle the causality of associations at the individual level.…”

Union members’ attitudes towards immigrant workers: A 14-country study

“…Harcourt et al (2008: 102) have proposed, in line with median voter theory, that union leaders are likely to respond to the preferences of the median union member -who typically belong to the majority ethnic group. 1 However, the issue of unionized workers' attitudes towards immigration and immigrants is, as we discuss below, under-theorized (Wilkes et al, 2008) and, in empirical terms (at least in Europe), under-studied, especially by means of systematic survey research.…”

Crisis económica y sentimiento antinmigrante: el caso de Andalucía

“…While "sociotropic concerns" (Sides and Citrin, 2007) mostly outweigh personal vulnerabilities, patterns of individual susceptibility were found to be reinforced amidst heightened objective threats, as predicated by out-group size and economic conditions (Quillian, 1995;Scheepers et al, 2002). A growing number of longitudinal studies (Coenders et al, 2005;Davidov and Meuleman, 2012;Hopkins, 2010;Lancee and Pardos-Prado, 2013;Meuleman et al, 2009;Semyonov et al, 2006;Wilkes et al, 2008) add weight to these findings. Existing evidence is predominantly regarded to support GTT; yet "the state of the economy appears to be a stronger predictor of ATII than immigrant concentration" (Ceobanu and Escandell, 2010: 322).…”

“…Mientras «preo-cupaciones sociotrópicas» (Sides y Citrin, 2007), relativas al grupo social, suelen prevalecer sobre vulnerabilidades personales, una mayor amenaza objetiva (más presencia del exogrupo; peor situación económi-ca) podría reforzar pautas de susceptibilidad individual (Quillian, 1995;Scheepers et al, 2002). Un número creciente de estudios longitudinales (Coenders et al, 2005; Davidov y Meuleman, 2012;Hopkins, 2010; Lancee y Pardos-Prado, 2013; Meuleman et al, 2009;Semyonov et al, 2006;Wilkes et al, 2008) acreditan estos hallazgos. El grueso de la evidencia avala la GTT, aunque «el estado de la economía parece ser un mejor predictor de las ATII que la concentración de inmigrantes» (Ceobanu y Escandell, 2010: 322).…”