The Muslim population is rapidly growing worldwide. Five experiments show that Republicans and Democrats respond to this demographic change with divergent reactions in three domains: perception of threats, celebratory reactions, and emotional responses. In terms of threat perceptions, Republicans tend to perceive Muslim population growth as a threat to Christians and the U.S. society in terms of American culture, legal norms, and peace. Furthermore, Republicans are less likely to have celebratory reactions to Muslim population growth (a theoretically novel reaction). They experience less hope and pride, along with more anxiety and anger. The divergent responses from partisans are partially explained by their ideological orientation and media exposure, but they are not explained by any racial mechanisms or the partisans’ religious identity. Together, these studies reveal that political leaning can be an antecedent to reactions to the demographic change in many complex ways beyond the dominant group’s concern for their status.
BaiH.FedericoC. M. (2020). Collective existential threat mediates White population decline’s effect on defensive reactions. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 23, 361–377. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430219839763
3.
BaiH.FedericoC. M. (2021). White and minority demographic shifts, intergroup threat, and right-wing extremism. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 94, Article 104114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104114
4.
BartelsL. M. (2002). Beyond the running tally: Partisan bias in political perceptions. Political Behavior, 24, 117–150. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021226224601
5.
BlumerH. (1958). Race prejudice as a sense of group position. Pacific Sociological Review, 1, 3–7. https://doi.org/10.2307/1388607
6.
BoboL. D. (1999). Prejudice as group position: Microfoundations of a sociological approach to racism and race relations. Journal of Social Issues, 55(3), 445–472.
7.
BrandtM. J.ReynaC.ChambersJ. R.CrawfordJ. T.WetherellG. (2014). The ideological-conflict hypothesis: Intolerance among both liberals and conservatives. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721413510932
8.
CohenJ. E. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2014a). More diverse yet less tolerant? How the increasingly diverse racial landscape affects White Americans’ racial attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 750–761. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214524993
10.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2014b). On the precipice of a “majority-minority” America: Perceived status threat from the racial demographic shift affects White Americans’ political ideology. Psychological Science, 25, 1189–1197. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614527113
11.
DanboldF.HuoY. J. (2015). No longer “all-American”? Whites’ defensive reactions to their numerical decline. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6, 210–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614546355
12.
DruckmanJ. N.PetersonE.SlothuusR. (2013). How elite partisan polarization affects public opinion formation. American Political Science Review, 107, 57–79. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055412000500
13.
FischerP.GreitemeyerT.KastenmüllerA. (2007). What do we think about Muslims? The validity of Westerners’ implicit theories about the associations between Muslims’ religiosity, religious identity, aggression potential, and attitudes toward terrorism. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 10, 373–382. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430207078697
14.
GhummanS.RyanA. M. (2013). Not welcome here: Discrimination towards women who wear the Muslim headscarf. Human Relations, 66, 671–698. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726712469540
HackettC.McClendonD. (2017). Christians remain world’s largest religious group, but they are declining in Europe. Pew Research Center. https://pewrsr.ch/2o5CXFL
17.
HarthN. S.KesslerT.LeachC. W. (2008). Advantaged group’s emotional reactions to intergroup inequality: The dynamics of pride, guilt, and sympathy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 115–129. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207309193
18.
HuiI. (2013). Who is your preferred neighbor? Partisan residential preferences and neighborhood satisfaction. American Politics Research, 41, 997–1021. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X13482573
19.
HuntC. V. (2011). When worldviews collide: The role of emotion in reactions to symbolic threats [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Minnesota Twin Cities.
20.
HuntingtonS. P. (2004). Who are we?: The challenges to America’s national identity. Simon & Schuster.
21.
IyengarS.SoodG.LelkesY. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76, 405–431. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfs038
22.
JostJ. T.FedericoC. M.NapierJ. L. (2009). Political ideology: Its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annual review of psychology, 60, 307–337.
23.
KalkanK. O.LaymanG. C.UslanerE. M. (2009). “Bands of others”? Attitudes toward Muslims in contemporary American society. The Journal of Politics, 71, 847–862. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381609090756
LajevardiN. (2020). Outsiders at home: The politics of American Islamophobia. Cambridge University Press.
26.
LaymanG. C.CarseyT. M. (2002). Party polarization and “conflict extension” in the American electorate. American Journal of Political Science, 46, 786–802. https://doi.org/10.2307/3088434
27.
LeachC. W.SniderN.IyerA.SmithH. (2002). Poisoning the consciences of the fortunate. The experience of relative advantage and support for social equality. In WalkerI.SmithH. (Eds.), Relative deprivation: Specification, development and integration (pp. 136–163). Cambridge University Press.
MajorB.BlodornA.Major BlascovichG. (2018). The threat of increasing diversity: Why many White Americans support Trump in the 2016 presidential election. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21, 931–940. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430216677304
30.
MasonL. (2015). “I disrespectfully agree”: The differential effects of partisan sorting on social and issue polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59, 128–145. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12089
31.
MossA. J.BlodornA.van CampA. R.O’BrienL. T. (2019). Gender equality, value violations, and prejudice toward Muslims. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 22, 288–301. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217716751
32.
OuttenH. R.SchmittM. T.MillerD. A.GarciaA. L. (2012). Feeling threatened about the future: Whites’ emotional reactions to anticipated ethnic demographic changes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211418531
33.
PerkinsK. M.Toskos DilsA.FlusbergS. J. (2020). The perceived threat of demographic shifts depends on how you think the economy works. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220951621
ScheepersP.GijsbertsM.CoendersM. (2002). Ethnic exclusionism in European countries. Public opposition to civil rights for legal migrants as a response to perceived ethnic threat. European Sociological Review, 18, 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/18.1.17
38.
SherifM. (1966). In common predicament: Social psychology of intergroup conflict and cooperation. Houghton Mifflin.
39.
SkitkaL. J.BaumanC. W.MullenE. (2004). Political tolerance and coming to psychological closure following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks: An integrative approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 743–756. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204263968
40.
SmeekesA.VerkuytenM. (2014). When national culture is disrupted: Cultural continuity and resistance to Muslim immigrants. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 17, 45–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430213486208
41.
SmithE. R. (1993). Social identity and social emotions: Toward new conceptualizations of prejudice. In MackieD. M.HamiltonD. L. (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception (pp. 297–315). Academic Press.
42.
SpielbergerC. D. (Ed.). (2013). Anxiety and behavior. Academic Press.
43.
StaatsS. R.StassenM. A. (1985). Hope: An affective cognition. Social Indicators Research, 17, 235–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00319312
44.
StephanW. G.YbarraO.MorrisonK. R. (2016). Intergroup threat theory. In NelsonT. D. (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination (pp. 255–278). Psychology Press.
Van HielA.PandelaereM.DuriezB. (2004). The impact of need for closure on conservative beliefs and racism: Differential mediation by authoritarian submission and authoritarian dominance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 824–837. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204264333
47.
Velasco GonzálezK.VerkuytenM.WeesieJ.PoppeE. (2008). Prejudice towards Muslims in the Netherlands: Testing integrated threat theory. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 667–685. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466608X284443
VerkuytenM. (2007). Religious group identification and inter-religious relations: A study among Turkish-Dutch Muslims. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 10, 341–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430207078695
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.
