Five experiments (N = 2,251) and a meta-analysis examine how group labels shape Americans’ levels of prejudice, behavioral intentions, and policy preferences toward immigrants living in the US without authorization. These studies extend research documenting how the perceived negativity of group labels (e.g., those describing gay people) affects people’s downstream attitudes. To this end, Study 1 examines the perceived negativity of the five most commonly used labels to describe unauthorized immigrants. Study 2 found that relatively negative (vs. neutral) labels (e.g., illegal aliens vs. noncitizens) engendered more prejudice, punitive behavioral intentions, and greater support for punitive policies. Study 3 replicates these effects and examines the role of familiarity. People who personally knew members of the group were more positive towards them overall, but were nevertheless susceptible to the labels’ influence. Studies 4 and 5 provide additional replications and explore prejudice as a mediator of behavioral intentions and policy preferences.
BogardusE. S. (1967). A forty-year racial distance study. Los Angeles: University of Southern California Press.
5.
CarnaghiA.MaassA. (2007). In-group and out-group perspectives in the use of derogatory group labels: Gay versus fag. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 26, 142–156. doi:10.1177/0261927X07300077
6.
CarnaghiA.MaassA.GrestaS.BianchiM.CadinuM.ArcuriL. (2008). Nomina sunt omina: On the inductive potential of nouns and adjectives in person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 839–859. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.5.839
CummingG. (2011). Exploratory Software for Confidence Intervals Meta-Analysis: Version 3 [Computer software]. Boston, MA: Free Software Foundation.
9.
CummingG. (2012). Understanding the new statistics effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis. New York, NY: Routledge.
10.
Cunningham-ParmeterK. (2011). Alien language: Immigration metaphors and the jurisprudence of otherness. Fordham Law Review, 79, 1545–1599. Retrieved from https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol79/iss4/5/
11.
DaviesK.TroppL. R.AronA.PettigrewT. F.WrightS. C. (2011). Cross-group friendships and intergroup attitudes: A meta-analytic review.Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 332–351. doi:10.1177/1088868311411103
12.
DovidioJ. F.GaertnerS. L. (Eds.). (1986). Prejudice, discrimination, and racism. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
EssesV. M.HaddockG.ZannaM. P. (1993). Values, stereotypes and emotions as determinants of intergroup attitudes. In MackieD. M.HamiltonD. L. (Eds.), Affect, cognition and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception (pp. 137–166). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
15.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
16.
GarnerB. A. (2011). Garner’s dictionary of legal usage. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
17.
GomezL. E. (2007). Manifest destines: The making of the Mexican American race. New York, NY: New York University Press.
18.
GreenbergJ.PyszczynskiT. (1985). The effect of an overheard ethnic slur on evaluations of the target: How to spread a social disease. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 61–72. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(85)90006-X
HousleyM. K.ClaypoolH. M.Garcia-MarquesT.MackieD. M. (2010). “We” are familiar but “it” is not: In-group pronouns trigger feelings of familiarity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 114–119. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.08.011
KennedyJ. F. (1964). A nation of immigrants. New York, NY: Harper Collins.
25.
KnollB. R.RedlawskD. P.SanbornH. B. (2011). Framing labels and immigration policy attitudes in the Iowa caucuses: “Trying to out-Tancredo Tancredo.”Political Behavior, 33, 433–454. doi:10.1007/s11109-010-9141-x
LakoffG. (2009). The political mind: A cognitive scientist’s guide to your brain and its politics. New York, NY: Viking Penguin.
28.
LegomskyS. H. (2005). Immigration and refugee law and policy (4th ed.). St. Paul, MN: Foundation Press.
29.
MaassA. (1999). Linguistic intergroup bias: Stereotype perpetuation through language. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 79–121. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60272-5
NeumanG. L. (1995). Aliens as outlaws: Government services, Proposition 187, and the structure of equal protection doctrine. UCLA Law Review, 42, 1425–1452.
OmmundsenR.van der VeerK.LarsenK. S.EilertsenD. (2014). Framing unauthorized immigrants: The effects of labels on evaluations. Psychological Reports, 114, 461–478. doi:10.2466/17.PR0.114k20w0
PearsonM. R. (2010). How “undocumented workers” and “illegal aliens” affect prejudice toward Mexican immigrants. Social Influence, 5, 118–132. doi:10.1080/15534511003593679
36.
PettigrewT. F. (1998). Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 65–85. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.65
37.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2000). Does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Recent meta-analytic findings. In OskampS. (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 93–114). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
38.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751
SanchezG. R.VargasE. D.WalkerH. L.YbarraV. D. (2015). Stuck between a rock and a hard place: The relationship between Latino/a’s personal connections to immigrants and issue salience and presidential approval. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 3, 454–468. doi:10.1080/21565503.2015.1050415
WaltonG. M.BanajiM. R. (2004). Being what you say: The effect of essentialist linguistic labels on preferences. Social Cognition, 22, 193–213. doi:10.1521/soco.22.2.193.35463
ZajoncR. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 1–28. doi:10.1037/h0025848
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.
