If preferences on immigration policy respond to facts, widespread misinformation poses an obstacle to consensus. Does factual information about immigration indeed affect policy preferences? Are beliefs about immigration’s societal impact the mechanism through which factual information affects support for increased immigration? To address these questions, we conducted an original survey experiment, in which we presented a nationally representative sample of 2,049 Americans living in the United States with facts about immigrants’ English acquisition and immigrants’ impact on crime, jobs, and taxes—four domains with common misperceptions. Three of these factual domains (immigration’s impact on crime, jobs, and taxes) raise overall support for increased immigration. These facts also affect beliefs that are directly relevant to that information. Moreover, those beliefs mediate the effect of factual information on support for increased immigration. By contrast, information about English acquisition affects neither policy preferences nor beliefs about immigration’s impact. Facts can leverage social cognitions to change policy preferences.
AdidaClaire L.LoAdelinePlatasMelina R.2018. Perspective taking can promote short-term inclusionary behavior toward Syrian refugees. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences115 (38): 9521–26. doi:10.1073/pnas.1804002115.
2.
AlesinaAlbertoMianoArmandoStantchevaStefanie. 2018. Immigration and redistribution. NBER Working Paper 24733, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA. doi:10.3386/w24733.
3.
BarreraOscarGurievSergeiHenryEmeric HZhuravskayaEkaterina. 2020. Facts, alternative facts, and fact checking in times of post-truth politics. Journal of Public Economics182 (February): 104123. doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2019.104123.
4.
BisgaardMartin. 2019. How getting the facts right can fuel partisan-motivated reasoning. American Journal of Political Science63 (4): 824–39. doi:10.1111/ajps.12432.
5.
BloemraadIreneSilvaFabianaVossKim. 2016. Rights, economics, or family? Frame resonance, political ideology, and the immigrant rights movement. Social Forces94 (4): 1647–74. doi:10.1093/sf/sov123.
6.
CardDavidDustmannChristianPrestonIan. 2012. Immigration, wages, and compositional amenities. Journal of the European Economic Association10 (1): 78–119. doi:10.1111/j.1542-4774.2011.01051.x.
7.
ChandlerCharles R.TsaiYung-mei. 2001. Social factors influencing immigration attitudes: An analysis of data from the General Social Survey. Social Science Journal38 (2): 177–88. doi:10.1016/S0362-3319(01)00106-9.
8.
CitrinJackGreenDonald P.MusteChristopherWongCara. 1997. Public opinion toward immigration reform: The role of economic motivations. Journal of Politics59 (3): 858–81. doi:10.2307/2998640.
9.
CitrinJackSidesJohn. 2008. Immigration and the imagined community in Europe and the United States. Political Studies56 (1): 33–56.
10.
DancygierRafaela M.DonnellyMichael J.2013. Sectoral economies, economic contexts, and attitudes toward immigration. Journal of Politics75 (1). doi:10.1017/S0022381612000849.
11.
EnosRyan D.2014. Causal effect of intergroup contact on exclusionary attitudes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America111 (10): 3699–3704. doi:10.1073/pnas.1317670111.
12.
FinkJoshua J.BradyDavid. 2020. Immigration and preferences for greater law enforcement spending in rich democracies. Social Forces98 (3): 1074–1111. doi:10.1093/sf/soz024.
FussellElizabeth. 2014. Warmth of the welcome: Attitudes toward immigrants and immigration policy in the United States. Annual Review of Sociology40 (1): 479–98. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-071913-043325.
15.
GarandJames C.XuPingDavis.Belinda C.2017. Immigration attitudes and support for the welfare state in the American mass public. American Journal of Political Science61 (1): 146–62. doi:10.1111/ajps.12233.
16.
GerberAlanGreenDonald. 2012. Field experiments: Design, analysis, and interpretation. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
17.
GerberAlan S.HuberGregory A.BiggersDaniel R.HendryDavid J.2017. Self-interest, beliefs, and policy opinions: Understanding how economic beliefs affect immigration policy preferences. Political Research Quarterly70 (1): 155–71. doi:10.1177/1065912916684032.
18.
Gonzalez-BarreraAnaConnorPhillip. 2019. Around the world, more say immigrants are a strength than a burden. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
19.
GoodwinMatthewMilazzoCaitlin. 2017. Taking back control? Investigating the role of immigration in the 2016 vote for Brexit. British Journal of Politics and International Relations19 (3): 450–64. doi:10.1177/1369148117710799.
20.
GrigorieffAlexisRothChristopherUbfalDiego. 2020. Does information change attitudes toward immigrants?Demography57 (3): 1117–43. doi:10.1007/s13524-020-00882-8.
21.
HainmuellerJensHopkinsDaniel J.2014. Public attitudes toward immigration. Annual Review of Political Science17 (1): 225–49. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-102512-194818.
22.
HainmuellerJensHopkins.Daniel J.2015. The hidden American immigration consensus: A conjoint analysis of attitudes toward immigrants. American Journal of Political Science59 (3): 529–48.
23.
HarellAllisonSorokaStuartIyengarShantoValentinoNicholas. 2012. The impact of economic and cultural cues on support for immigration in Canada and the United States. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue Canadienne de Science Politique45 (3): 499–530. doi:10.1017/S0008423912000698.
24.
HayesAndrew. 2018. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
25.
HopkinsDanielSidesJ.Citrin.J.2019. The muted consequences of correct information about immigration. Journal of Politics81 (1): 315–20. doi:10.1086/699914.
26.
HopkinsDaniel J.TranVan C.WilliamsonAbigail Fisher. 2014. See no Spanish: Language, local context, and attitudes toward immigration. Politics, Groups, and Identities2 (1): 35–51. doi:10.1080/21565503.2013.872998.
27.
IyengarShantoSoodGauravLelkesYphtach. 2012. Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly76 (3): 405–31. doi:10.1093/poq/nfs038.
KallaJoshua L.Broockman.David E.2020. Reducing exclusionary attitudes through interpersonal conversation: Evidence from three field experiments. American Political Science Review114 (2): 410–25. doi:10.1017/S0003055419000923.
KuklinskiJames H.QuirkPaul J.JeritJenniferSchwiederDavidRich.Robert F.2000. Misinformation and the currency of democratic citizenship. Journal of Politics62 (3): 790–816.
32.
LawrenceEric D.SidesJohn. 2014. The consequences of political innumeracy. Research & Politics1 (2). doi:10.1177/2053168014545414.
33.
LeeTiane L.FiskeSusan T.2006. Not an outgroup, not yet an ingroup: Immigrants in the stereotype content model. International Journal of Intercultural Relations30 (6): 751–68. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2006.06.005.
34.
McLarenLaurenJohnsonMark. 2007. Resources, group conflict and symbols: Explaining anti-immigration hostility in Britain. Political Studies55 (4): 709–32.
35.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. The integration of immigrants into American society. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
36.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. The economic and fiscal consequences of immigration. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
37.
NewmanBenjamin J.HartmanTodd K.TaberCharles S.2012. Foreign language exposure, cultural threat, and opposition to immigration. Political Psychology33 (5): 635–57. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00904.x.
38.
NyhanBrendanReiflerJason. 2010. When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior32 (2): 303–30.
39.
Pardos-PradoSergiXenaCarla. 2019. Skill specificity and attitudes toward immigration. American Journal of Political Science63 (2): 286–304. doi:10.1111/ajps.12406.
40.
QuillianLincoln. 1995. Prejudice as a response to perceived group threat: Population composition and anti-immigrant and racial prejudice in Europe. American Sociological Review60 (4): 586–611. doi:10.2307/2096296.
41.
RenyTyler T.CollingwoodLorenValenzuela.Ali A.2019. Vote switching in the 2016 election: How racial and immigration attitudes, not economics, explain shifts in white voting. Public Opinion Quarterly83 (1): 91–113. doi:10.1093/poq/nfz011.
42.
RumbautRubén G.GonzalezRobertoKomaieGolnazMorgan.Charlie V.2006. Debunking the myth of immigrant criminality: Imprisonment among first- and second-generation young men. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute.
43.
SidesJohn. 2016. Stories or science? Facts, frames, and policy attitudes. American Politics Research44 (3): 387–414. doi:10.1177/1532673X15610190.
44.
SidesJohnCitrinJack. 2007. European opinion about immigration: The role of identities, interests and information. British Journal of Political Science37 (3): 477–504.
45.
SimesJessica T.Waters.Mary C.2014. The politics of immigration and crime. In The Oxford handbook of ethnicity, crime, and immigration. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
46.
SnidermanPaul M.HagendoornLoukPriorMarkus. 2004. Predisposing factors and situational triggers: Exclusionary reactions to immigrant minorities. American Political Science Review98 (1): 35–49.
47.
Southern Poverty Law Center. 2001. The immigrants: Myths and reality. The Intelligence Report. Montgomery, AL: Southern Poverty Law Center.
48.
Teaching Tolerance. 2011. Ten myths about immigration. Montgomery, AL: Southern Poverty Law Center.
49.
TingleyDustinYamamotoTeppeiHiroseKentaroKeeleLukeImaiKosuke. 2014. Mediation: R package for causal mediation analysis. Journal of Statistical Software59 (1): 1–38. doi:10.18637/jss.v059.i05.
50.
WoodThomasPorterEthan. 2019. The elusive backfire effect: Mass attitudes’ steadfast factual adherence. Political Behavior41 (1): 135–63. doi:10.1007/s11109-018-9443-y.
51.
WoodWendy. 2000. Attitude change: Persuasion and social influence. Annual Review of Psychology51 (1): 539–70. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.539.
52.
WrightMatthewCitrinJack. 2011. Saved by the stars and stripes? Images of protest, salience of threat, and immigration attitudes. American Politics Research39 (2): 323–43. doi:10.1177/1532673X10388140.
53.
ZúñigaHomero Gil deCorreaTeresaValenzuelaSebastian. 2012. Selective exposure to cable news and immigration in the U.S.: The relationship between FOX News, CNN, and attitudes toward Mexican immigrants. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media56 (4): 597–615. doi:10.1080/08838151.2012.732138.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
