What’s Islam got to do with it? Attitudes toward specific religious and national out-groups, and support for EU policies

Azrout, Rachid; Wojcieszak, Magdalena

doi:10.1177/1465116516678080

Cited by 23 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is ample evidence for the connection between anti‐EU and anti‐immigrant attitudes (Azrout & Wojcieszak, ; de Vreese & Boomgaarden, ). The tension between immigration policies of the EU and national interest was the core argument for Brexit (Meleady, Seger, & Vermue, ), and disidentification with Europe predicted higher anti‐immigrant sentiments around the time of the Brexit referendum (Abrams & Travaglino, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inglorious glorification and attachment: National and European identities as predictors of anti‐ and pro‐immigrant attitudes

Kende

Hadarics

Szabó

2018

British J Social Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anti-immigrant attitudes are not only widespread among Eurosceptic nationalists, but also among people who feel that immigration threatens European values and identity. We therefore assumed that the connection between nationalism and xenophobia can only partially explain the rise of hostile attitudes in the post-2015 period. In two online surveys (N = 1,160), we compared how (a) glorification versus attachment and (b) national versus European identity can predict anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim attitudes in Hungary. In the first study, national and European glorification predicted higher anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim prejudice. However, attachment with Europe predicted positive, while attachment with Hungary predicted negative attitudes towards immigrants. We replicated this pattern in a second study and found that the different predictions of national versus European identities were mediated by attitudes towards the EU. Eurosceptic attitudes were associated with increased hostility towards both immigrants and Muslim people and reflected a perceived contradiction between the interest of the nation and that of the EU. We conclude that for a better understanding of intergroup hostility towards Muslim immigrants in Europe, we need to simultaneously consider the psychological phenomenon of ingroup glorification and the values and norms of the social categories with which people identify.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inglorious glorification and attachment: National and European identities as predictors of anti‐ and pro‐immigrant attitudes

Kende

Hadarics

Szabó

2018

British J Social Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Threat perceptions, in turn, often depend on perceptions of who immigrants are. Public opinion distinguishes among immigrants according to their level of education or job skills (Hainmueller and Hiscox, 2010); reason for immigrating (Blinder, 2015); and racial, ethnic, national, or religious identities (Bansak et al., 2016; Ford, 2008; Gorodzeisky and Semyonov, 2016), all of which may relate to the degree and nature of threats that people perceive from immigration (Azrout and Wojcieszak, 2017).…”

Section: Explaining European or Eu Inclusionismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acceptable in the EU? Why some immigration restrictionists support European Union mobility

Blinder

Markaki

2019

European Union Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why do some Europeans support immigration from within the European Union, while rejecting immigration from elsewhere? Acceptance of intra-European Union mobility—even by those who wish to restrict immigration more generally—is important for popular support for the European Union itself. This paper identifies and attempts to explain the preferences of “EU-only inclusionists”: EU nationals who support relatively high levels of immigration, but only from within the European Union. We analyze an underexplored experimental module in the European Social Survey to explore European Union inclusionism in relation to other preference profiles. We find that identification with the European Union helps explain specific support for European Union mobility, while subnational (racial and religious) identities are associated with a preference for European migrants over non-Europeans, but not with specific support for intra-European Union movement.

show abstract

“…Scholars have found that anti‐immigrant sentiments and stereotypes are actually a key predictor to explain contestation on EU integration (De Vreese & Boomgaarden ; Hobolt et al. ; Azrout & Wojcieszak ; Kentmen‐Cin & Erisen ) and support for exclusionary asylum policies (Canetti et al. ).…”

Section: Research Questions and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sharing the burden in a free riders’ land: The EU migration and asylum policy in the views of public opinion and politicians

Basile

Olmastroni

2019

European J Political Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New divisions have emerged within the European Union over the handling of the recent migration crisis. While both frontline and favoured destination countries are called upon to deal with the number of migrants looking for international protection and better living conditions, no consensus has been reached yet on the quota-based mechanisms for the relocation of refugees and financial help to exposed countries proposed by the EU. Such mechanisms pose a trade-off for member states: the EU's response to the crisis offers help to countries under pressure, but it inevitably requires burden-sharing among all EU members and a limitation of their national sovereignty. Within this scenario, the article compares how public opinion and political elites in ten different EU countries view a common EU migration policy grounded on solidarity and burden-sharing. By tracing both within-and cross-national patterns of convergence (and divergence), the article shows that contextual factors influence policy preferences, with support for solidarity measures being stronger in countries with higher shares of illegal migrants and asylum seekers. While individuals' predispositions, identity and ideological orientations account for both masses' and elites' attitudes towards burden-sharing measures, subjective evaluations and beliefs concerning the severity of the crisis provide additional and alternative explanations when looking at the public's preferences. In particular, it is found that concern about the flow of migrants to Europe consolidates the impact of contextual factors, whereas the overestimation of the immigrant population fosters hostility against solidarity measures, with both effects more pronounced as the country's exposure to the crisis increases. In the light of these results, the main implication of this study is that EU institutions have to primarily address entrenched beliefs and misperceptions about immigrants to enhance public support for a joint approach to migration.

show abstract

What’s Islam got to do with it? Attitudes toward specific religious and national out-groups, and support for EU policies

Cited by 23 publications

References 41 publications

Inglorious glorification and attachment: National and European identities as predictors of anti‐ and pro‐immigrant attitudes

Inglorious glorification and attachment: National and European identities as predictors of anti‐ and pro‐immigrant attitudes

Acceptable in the EU? Why some immigration restrictionists support European Union mobility

Sharing the burden in a free riders’ land: The EU migration and asylum policy in the views of public opinion and politicians

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About