What explains opposition to refugees? Aside from cultural, economic, and safety-related threats, existing research suggests that individuals are less tolerant when they think their state lacks the capacity to control external borders. Focusing solely on external borders, however, overlooks another dimension of migration management: reception and integration. I argue that perceptions of a state’s refugee reception capacity shape refugee-related attitudes. Three studies – focusing on Ukrainian refugees in Central and Eastern Europe – provide evidence. Study 1 analyzes opposition to Ukrainian refugees and the reception programs intended to benefit them. Study 2, a design-based analysis, shows that expanding a state’s capacity to manage refugee reception causes individuals to consider refugees less of a problem. Study 3, a pre-registered survey experiment, replicates this finding and investigates whether effects extend beyond problem perception. Findings suggest that investing in effective refugee reception may improve the lives of refugees while also reducing public opposition.
AbdelaatyL.SteeleL. G. (2022). Explaining attitudes toward refugees and immigrants in Europe. Political Studies, 70(1), 110–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321720950217
2.
AdidaC. L.LoA.PlatasM. R. (2019). Americans preferred Syrian refugees who are female, English-speaking, and Christian on the eve of Donald Trump’s election. PLoS One, 14(10), e0222504. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222504
3.
AfonsoA.NegashS. M.WolffE. A. (2024). Does the welfare entitlement of refugees reduce openness to refugee migration? A survey experiment on the welfare entitlement of Ukrainian refugees in the United Kingdom. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 50(14), 3415–3434. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2024.2311646
4.
AgerA.StrangA. (2008). Understanding integration: A conceptual framework. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21(2), 166–191. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fen016
5.
AlarianH. M.NeureiterM. (2021). Values or origin? Mandatory immigrant integration and immigration attitudes in Europe. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 47(5), 1006–1027. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2019.1668756
6.
AvdagicS.SavageL. (2024). Does the framing of immigration induce welfare chauvinism? The effects of negativity bias and motivated reasoning. Political Behavior, 46(4), 2169–2189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-024-09913-1
7.
BansakK.HainmuellerJ.HangartnerD. (2016). How economic, humanitarian, and religious concerns shape European attitudes toward asylum seekers. Science, 354(6309), 217–222. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aag2147
8.
BansakK.HainmuellerJ.HangartnerD. (2023). Europeans’ support for refugees of varying background is stable over time. Nature, 620(7975), 849–854. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06417-6
9.
BartramD.JarochovaE. (2022). A longitudinal investigation of integration/multiculturalism policies and attitudes towards immigrants in European countries. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 48(1), 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2021.1922273
10.
BriggsR. C.SolodochO. (2024). Changes in perceptions of border security influence desired levels of immigration. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 68(6), 1252–1275. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027231195066
11.
BusemeyerM. R.AbrassartA.NeziR. (2021). Beyond positive and negative: New perspectives on feedback effects in public opinion on the welfare state. British Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 137–162. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123418000534
12.
BuštíkováL.GuastiP. (2024). Migration and right-wing mobilization in the Czech Republic. In Migration and nationalism: Theoretical and empirical perspectives. Edward Elgar Publishing.
13.
CallensM. S.MeulemanB. (2017). Do integration policies relate to economic and cultural threat perceptions?International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 58(5), 367–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020715216665437
14.
CarolS.HelblingM.MichalowskiI. (2015). A struggle over religious rights? How Muslim immigrants and Christian natives view the accommodation of religion in six European countries. Social Forces, 94(2), 647–671. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sov054
CremaschiS.RettlP.CappellutiM.De VriesC. E. (2024). Geographies of discontent: Public service deprivation and the rise of the far right in Italy. American Journal of Political Science, 69(4), 1581–1599. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12936.
CzymaraC. S.Schmidt-CatranA. W. (2017). Refugees unwelcome? Changes in the public acceptance of immigrants and refugees in Germany in the course of Europe’s ‘immigration crisis. European Sociological Review, 33(6), 735–751. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcx071
19.
De ConinckD. (2020). Migrant categorizations and European public opinion: Diverging attitudes towards immigrants and refugees. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46(9), 1667–1686. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2019.1694406
20.
De ConinckD. (2023). The refugee paradox during wartime in Europe: How Ukrainian and Afghan refugees are (not) alike. International Migration Review, 57(2), 578–586. https://doi.org/10.1177/01979183221116874
21.
DennisonJ.GeddesA. (2021). Thinking globally about attitudes to immigration: Concerns about social conflict, economic competition and cultural threat. The Political Quarterly, 92(3), 541–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.13013
22.
De VriesC. E.BakkerB. N.HoboltS. B.ArceneauxK. (2021). Crisis signaling: How Italy’s coronavirus lockdown affected incumbent support in other European countries. Political Science Research and Methods, 9(3), 451–467. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2021.6
23.
DražanováL. (2022) Why are Ukrainian refugees welcomed in Central and Eastern Europe?EUI Robert Schuman Centre, 23.
24.
DražanováL.GeddesA. (2023). Attitudes towards Ukrainian refugees and governmental responses in 8 European countries. EU Responses to the Large-Scale Refugee Displacement, 135.
25.
DückE.WeisnerZ.TheveninE. (2025). Female, deserving, and European? The changing European migration discourse in the face of the Russia–Ukraine war. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 66(1), 101–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11615-024-00573-8
26.
DziadykN. (2025). The battleground of migration politics in Prague amid the (Poly) crisis. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 23(3), 436–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2025.2480604
27.
Ennser-JedenastikL. (2018). Welfare chauvinism in populist radical right platforms: The role of redistributive justice principles. Social Policy and Administration, 52(1), 293–314.
28.
European Court of Auditors. (2025). Cohesion’s action for Refugees in Europe: Increased flexibility but insufficient data hinders future assessment of effectiveness. European Court of Auditors. Retrieved August 26, 2025, from:https://www.eca.europa.eu/ECAPublications/SR-2025-05/SR-2025-05_EN.pdf
29.
FindorA.HruškaM.HlatkyR.HrustičT.BošeľováZ. (2023). Equality, reciprocity, or need? Bolstering welfare policy support for marginalized groups with distributive fairness. American Political Science Review, 117(3), 805–821. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055422001046
30.
FloresR. D. (2017). Do anti-immigrant laws shape public sentiment? A study of Arizona’s SB 1070 using Twitter data. American Journal of Sociology, 123(2), 333–384. https://doi.org/10.1086/692983
GoodmanS. W. (2019). Indexing immigration and integration policy: Lessons from Europe. Policy Studies Journal, 47(3), 572–604. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12283
GoodmanS. W.WrightM. (2015). Does mandatory integration matter? Effects of civic requirements on immigrant socio-economic and political outcomes. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(12), 1885–1908. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2015.1042434
37.
GreenE. G.VisintinE. P.SarrasinO.HewstoneM. (2020). When integration policies shape the impact of intergroup contact on threat perceptions: A multilevel study across 20 European countries. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46(3), 631–648. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2018.1550159
38.
HagerA.HilbigH.RiazS. (2024). Refugee labor market access increases support for immigration. Comparative Political Studies, 57(5), 749–777. https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140231178733
HarderN.FigueroaL.GillumR. M.HangartnerD.LaitinD. D.HainmuellerJ. (2018). Multidimensional measure of immigrant integration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(45), 11483–11488. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1808793115
41.
HarellA.SorokaS.IyengarS. (2017). Locus of control and anti-immigrant sentiment in Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Political Psychology, 38(2), 245–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12338
42.
HelblingM.IvarsflatenE.TraunmüllerR. (2025). Zero-sum thinking and the cultural threat of Muslim immigrants’ religious rights. Comparative Political Studies, 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414025136934
43.
HelblingM.MaxwellR.TraunmüllerR. (2024). Numbers, selectivity, and rights: The conditional nature of immigration policy preferences. Comparative Political Studies, 57(2), 254–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140231178737
44.
HellwigT.SinnoA. (2017). Different groups, different threats: Public attitudes towards immigrants. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 43(3), 339–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2016.1202749
HlatkyR. (2023). The politicization of European integration and support for restrictive migration policies. European Union Politics, 24(4), 684–707. https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165231185269
47.
HlatkyR. (2025). Replication data for: State capacity, refugee reception, and attitudes towards refugees. Harvard Dataverse. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/OBTOD4
48.
HonakerJ.KingG.BlackwellM. (2011). Amelia II: A program for missing data. Journal of Statistical Software, 45(7), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v045.i07
KallaJ. L.BroockmanD. E. (2023). Which narrative strategies durably reduce prejudice? Evidence from field and survey experiments supporting the efficacy of perspective‐getting. American Journal of Political Science, 67(1), 185–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12657.
52.
KnappertL.Van DijkH.YuanS.EngelY.van ProoijenW. J.KrouwelA. (2021). Personal contact with refugees is key to welcoming them: An analysis of politicians’ and citizens’ attitudes towards refugee integration. Political Psychology, 42(3), 423–442. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12705
53.
KoganV. (2021). Do welfare benefits pay electoral dividends? Evidence from the national food stamp program rollout. The Journal of Politics, 83(1), 58–70. https://doi.org/10.1086/708914
54.
KootstraA. (2016). Deserving and undeserving welfare claimants in Britain and the Netherlands: Examining the role of ethnicity and migration status using a vignette experiment. European Sociological Review, 32(3), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcw010
55.
KustovA. (2023). Do anti-immigration voters care more? Documenting the issue importance asymmetry of immigration attitudes. British Journal of Political Science, 53(2), 796–805. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123422000369
56.
KustovA. (2025). In our interest: How democracies can make immigration popular. Columbia University Press.
57.
LancasterC. M. (2022). Immigration and the sociocultural divide in Central and Eastern Europe: Stasis or evolution?European Journal of Political Research, 61(2), 544–565. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12474
58.
LarsenE. G. (2019). Policy feedback effects on mass publics: A quantitative review. Policy Studies Journal, 47(2), 372–394. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12280
59.
LeeS. Y. (2025). Procedure matters: The distinct attitudinal feedback effects of immigration policy. Political Behavior, 47(1), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-024-09947-5.
60.
LefcourtH. M. (1982). Locus of control: Current trends in theory and practice (2nd ed). Psychology Press.
61.
LevyM.WrightM. (2025). Integration Policy specifics and public support for increasing immigration. Available at SSRN 5147786.
62.
MettlerS.SossJ. (2004). The consequences of public policy for democratic citizenship: Bridging policy studies and mass politics. Perspectives on Politics, 2(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592704000623
63.
MoiseA. D.DennisonJ.KriesiH. (2023). European attitudes to refugees after the Russian invasion of Ukraine. West European Politics, 47(2), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2023.2229688
64.
MuñozJ.Falcó-GimenoA.HernándezE. (2020). Unexpected event during survey design: Promise and pitfalls for causal inference. Political Analysis, 28(2), 186–206. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2019.27
65.
MykhailyshynaD.SamoiliukM.TomilinaM.MyronenkoO.LevchenkoY. (2024). Ukrainian refugees after three years abroad: How many and who will return? The fourth wave of the research. Centre for Economic Strategy. Project Manager: Hlib Vyshlinsky. https://ces.org.ua/en/refugees-fourth-wave/
66.
NeureiterM. (2022). The effect of immigrant integration policies on public immigration attitudes. International Migration Review, 56(4), 1040–1068. https://doi.org/10.1177/01979183211063499
67.
PenninxR.Garcés-MascareñasB. (2016). The concept of integration as an analytical tool and as a policy concept. In Integration processes and policies in Europe: Contexts, levels and actors (pp. 11–29). Springer International Publishing.
PepinskyT.ReiffÁ.SzabóK. (2024). The Ukrainian refugee crisis and the politics of public opinion: Evidence from Hungary. Perspectives on Politics, 22(4), 989–1014. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592724000410
70.
PiersonP. (1993). When effect becomes cause: Policy feedback and political change. World Politics, 45(4), 595–628. https://doi.org/10.2307/2950710
71.
RotterJ. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0092976
72.
SchlueterE.MassoA.DavidovE. (2020). What factors explain Anti-Muslim prejudice? An assessment of the effects of Muslim population size, institutional characteristics and immigration-related media claims. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46(3), 649–664. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2018.1550160
Schmidt-CatranA. W.CzymaraC. S. (2023). Political elite discourses polarize attitudes toward immigration along ideological lines. A comparative longitudinal analysis of Europe in the twenty-first century. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 49(1), 85–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2022.2132222
75.
SchwartzC.SimonM.HudsonD.van-Heerde-HudsonJ. (2021). A populist paradox? How Brexit softened anti-immigrant attitudes. British Journal of Political Science, 51(3), 1160–1180. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123419000656
76.
SinclairS.GranbergM.NilssonT. (2024). Love thy (Ukrainian) neighbour: Willingness to help refugees depends on their origin and is mediated by perceptions of similarity and threat. British Journal of Social Psychology, 63(2), 499–517. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12691
77.
SobolewskaM.GalandiniS.Lessard-PhillipsL. (2017). The public view of immigrant integration: Multidimensional and consensual. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 43(1), 58–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2016.1248377
78.
SohstR.TiradoT.SalgadoL.SlootjesJ. (2025). Exploring refugees’ intentions to return to Ukraine: Data insights and policy responses. Migration Policy Institute Europe and International Organization for Migration.
79.
SolanoG.HuddlestonT. (2021). Beyond immigration: Moving from Western to global indexes of migration policy. Global Policy, 12(3), 327–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12930
80.
SolodochO. (2021). Regaining control? The political impact of policy responses to refugee crises. International Organization, 75(3), 735–768. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0020818321000060
ThravalouE.MartinovicB.VerkuytenM. (2021). Humanitarian assistance and permanent settlement of asylum seekers in Greece: The role of sympathy, perceived threat, and perceived contribution. International Migration Review, 55(2), 547–573. https://doi.org/10.1177/0197918320949826
83.
TraunmüllerR.HelblingM. (2022). Backlash to policy decisions: How citizens react to immigrants’ rights to demonstrate. Political Science Research and Methods, 10(2), 279–297. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2020.44
van der BrugW.HarteveldE. (2021). The conditional effects of the refugee crisis on immigration attitudes and nationalism. European Union Politics, 22(2), 227–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/1465116520988905
87.
Van HeerdenS.De LangeS. L.van der BrugW.FennemaM. (2014). The immigration and integration debate in the Netherlands: Discursive and programmatic reactions to the rise of anti-immigration parties. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(1), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2013.830881
88.
VermeerschP. (2012). Reframing the Roma: EU initiatives and the politics of reinterpretation. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 38(8), 1195–1212. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2012.689175
89.
Von HermanniH.NeumannR. (2019). ‘Refugees welcome?’ the interplay between perceived threats and general concerns on the acceptance of refugees. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 45(3), 349–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2018.1459183
90.
VrânceanuA.PetrovaB. (2025). Welfare policy and immigration attitudes in Western Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 64(4), 1783–1804. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.70006.
91.
Zogata-KuszA.Öbrink HobzováM.CekieraR. (2025). Deserving of assistance: The social construction of Ukrainian refugees. Ethnopolitics, 24(3), 278–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2023.2286779
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.
