U.S. Citizens’ Current Attitudes Toward Immigrants and Immigration: A Study From the General Social Survey*

Abstract

Objective This study tests U.S. citizens’ attitudes toward immigrants and immigration. Immigrants and immigration educe strong, divergent sentiments in the U.S. population. While these sentiments, which are tied to public policy, have been examined in prior studies, it is important to test them regularly in empirical studies to observe any changes in attitudes toward immigrants and immigration. Methods I rely on the 2014 General Social Survey and employ hierarchical multivariate regression models to test the effects of patriotism, nationalism, xenophobia, and “world citizenship” on pro‐immigration attitudes. Results Females, respondents with higher education, and respondents who were more patriotic were more likely to hold pro‐immigration attitudes. Conversely, older respondents and respondents who held greater xenophobic attitudes were less likely to hold pro‐immigration attitudes. Finally, respondents who viewed themselves more as citizens of the world than citizens of a particular country were more likely to hold pro‐immigration attitudes. Conclusion The study's results are generally consistent with findings from prior research, and point to a general invariability in Americans’ views about immigrants and immigration. The policy implications of the findings are discussed.

Perception of Immigrants in Europe: A Multilevel Assessment of Macrolevel Conditions

“…Future studies should expand on this by studying how cultural variations across generations mediate anti‐immigrant attitudes, broadly construed. Elsewhere, scholars have found that older respondents tend to have more anti‐immigrant views, on average, compared to younger respondents (Chandler and Tsai, 2001; Espenshade and Hempstead, 1996; Pryce, 2018).…”

“…In this sense, real increases in crime may be attributed to either real or perceived increases in immigration. The belief that immigrants increase crime is an old, but dubious sentiment, as many native-born citizens worry that immigrants' entry into the country will not only undermine the dominant culture, but also cause crime to increase (Pryce, 2018). This "issue" has been examined extensively by American scholars, with most of the findings showing that immigrants (or immigration) do not increase crime (Chenane and Wright, 2018;Lyons, Vélez, and Santoro, 2013;Ousey and Kubrin, 2018;Ramey, 2013).…”

“…Immigration remains a threat to some community members who see it as an affront to self‐identity and community cohesion (Stephan and Stephan, 2000). As Pryce has observed, “native‐born citizens wonder if their government's decision to admit the newcomers will deprive native‐born citizens of jobs, increase the crime rate, undermine the dominant culture, and/or significantly alter public policy” (2018:1467, 1468). Conversely, immigrants must learn to adapt to their new environment, and must also learn to navigate the perils that come with overt and covert opposition by native‐born citizens in their host nations.…”

“…Ethnic competition theory has its roots in realistic group conflict theory and social identity theory (Brown, 2000; Esses, Jackson, and Armstrong, 1998; Pryce, 2018; Scheepers, Gijsberts, and Coenders, 2002; Sherif, 1966; Sherif and Sherif, 1969; Tajfel and Turner, 1979; Tajfel, 1982). Realistic group conflict theory, which maintains that competition over scarce resources between groups would lead to negative intergroup relations and possibly conflict (Bobo, 1988; Esses, Jackson, and Armstrong, 1998; LeVine and Campbell, 1972) and social identity theory, which assumes that a central mechanism for negative attitudes toward others is the propensity to perceive one's group as superior to other groups, both undergird ethnic competition theory.…”

Pathways to Permanence: Legal Status Transitions as a Key Mechanism in Skilled Migrant Selection and Settlement

“…Conventional theories of the state and migration emphasize the key role of immigration policy in nation building (Zolberg, 2006 ; Khoo and Hugo, 2008 ; FitzGerald and Cook-Martín, 2014 ; Czaika and de Haas, 2016 ). In constructing policies of admission, states differentiate between “desirable” and “undesirable” immigrants, revealing implicit biases about who constitutes an in-group member along lines of race, national origin, class and criminal background (Bean, 2016 ; Flores and Schachter, 2018 ; Pryce, 2018 ). A longstanding debate in the scholarship on immigration policy questions the extent to which governments can control the flow of immigrants.…”