Previous work has shown public opinion toward immigrants is malleable based on how immigrants are described in media and elite rhetoric. In a survey experiment on a nationally representative sample of American adults, we extend this research to test for possible priming effects that occur based on how salient documentation status is when respondents proffer opinions on Latino immigrants. Our findings show that when subjects are first asked about “undocumented Latino immigrants,” their attitudes toward “Latino immigrants,” appear more negative, relative to when they are first asked about “Latino immigrants” without invoking the legal modifier. Respondents channel their negative associations with “illegal” or “undocumented” immigration into their opinions of Latino immigrants writ large. The results have implications for political communication, media reporting on immigration, and policy debates, which frequently discuss both “legal” and “undocumented” immigration in the same context.
AbrajanoM.HajnalZ. L. (2015). White backlash: Immigration, race, and American politics. Princeton University Press.
2.
BodenhausenG. V.WyerR. S. (1985). Effects of stereotypes on decision making and information-processing strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(2), 267–282. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.48.2.267
3.
BraderT.ValentinoN. A.SuhayE. (2008). What triggers public opposition to immigration? Anxiety, group cues, and immigration threat. American Journal of Political Science, 52(4), 959–978.
4.
BurnsP.GimpelJ. G. (2000). Economic insecurity, prejudicial stereotypes, and public opinion on immigration policy. Political Science Quarterly, 155(2), 201–225.
5.
ChavezL. R. (2001). Covering immigration: Popular images and the politics of the nation. University of California Press.
6.
ChavezL. R. (2008 [2013]). The Latino threat: Constructing immigrants, citizens, and the nation. Stanford University Press.
7.
ChavezM.HoeweJ. (2012). National perspectives on state turmoil: Characteristics of elite U.S. Newspaper coverage of Arizona sb 1070. In AnaO. S.BustamanteC. G. d. (Eds.), Arizona firestorm: Global immigration realities, national media, and provincial politics (pp. 189–202). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
8.
DunawayJ.BrantonR. P.AbrajanoM. A. (2010). Agenda setting, public opinion, and the issue of immigration reform. Social Science Quarterly, 91(2), 359–378.
9.
GamsonW. A.ModiglianiA. (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95(1), 1–37.
10.
HurwitzJ.PeffleyM. (1997). Public perceptions of race and crime: The role of racial stereotypes. American Journal of Political Science, 41(2), 375–401. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111769
11.
IyengarS.KinderD. R. (1987). News that matter. University of Chicago Press.
12.
IyengarS.SimonA. (1993). News coverage of the gulf crisis and public opinion: A study of agenda-setting, priming, and framing. Communication Research, 20(3), 365–383.
13.
KatzI.HassR. G. (1988). Racial ambivalence and American value conflict: Correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(6), 893–905. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.55.6.893
14.
KinderD. R.SandersL. (1996). Divided by color: Racial politics and democratic ideals. University of Chicago Press.
15.
KnollB. R.RedlawskD. P.SanbornH. (2010). Framing labels and immigration policy attitudes in the Iowa caucuses: ‘Trying to out-Tancredo Tancredo’. Political Behavior, 33(3), 433–454.
16.
KrosnickJ. A.KinderD. R. (1990). Altering the foundations of support for the president through priming. American Political Science Review, 84(2), 497–512.
LauR.SearsD.JessorT. (1990). Fact or artifact revisited: Survey instrument effects and pocketbook politics. Political Behavior, 12(3), 217–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992334
19.
MccombsM. (2004). Setting the agenda: The mass media and public opinion. Blackwell Publishing Inc.
20.
McconnaughyC. M.WhiteI. K.LealD. L.CasellasJ. P. (2010). A Latino on the ballot: Explaining co-ethnic voting among Latinos and the response of white americans. Journal of Politics, 72(4), 1199–1211.
21.
MendelbergT. (2001). The race card: Campaign strategy, implicit messages, and the norm of equality. Princeton University Press.
22.
MendelbergT. (2008a). Racial priming revived. Perspectives on Politics, 6(1), 109–123.
23.
MendelbergT. (2008b). Racial priming: Issues in research and interpretation. Perspectives on Politics, 6(1), 135–140.
24.
MerollaJ. L.RamakrishnanK.HaynesC. (2013). “Illegal,” “undocumented,” or “unauthorized”: Equivalency frames, issue frames, and public opinion on immigration. Perspectives on Politics, 11(3), 789–807.
25.
RamakrishnanK.EsterlingK.NebloM. (2010). Illegality, national origin cues, and public opinion on immigration. Paper presented at the Midwest Political Science Association. http://polisci.osu.edu/faculty/mneblo/papers.htm
26.
RenyT. T.CollingwoodL.ValenzuelaA. A. (2019). Vote switching in the 2016 election: How racial and immigration attitudes, not economics, explain shifts in white voting. Public Opinion Quarterly, 83(1), 91–113.
27.
Santa AnaO. (2002). Brown tide rising: Metaphors of Latinos in contemporary American public discourse. University of Texas Press.
ScheufeleB. (2000). Agenda-setting, priming, and framing revisited: Another look at cognitive effects of political communication. Mass Communication and Society, 3, 297–316.
30.
SchildkrautD. J. (2011). Americanism in the twenty-first century: Public opinion in the age of immigration. Cambridge University Press.
31.
SchumanH. (1981). Questions and answers in attitude surveys: Experiments on question form, wording, and context. Academic Press.
32.
SearsD. O.LauR. R. (1983). Inducing apparently self-interested political preferences. American Journal of Political Science, 27(2), 223–252. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111016
33.
SigelmanL. (1981). Question-order effects on presidential popularity. Public Opinion Quarterly, 45(2), 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1086/268650.
34.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In AustinW. G.WorchelS. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–98). Brooks/Cole.
35.
TeslerM. (2015). Priming predispositions and changing policy positions: An account of when mass opinion is primed or changed. American Journal of Political Science, 59(4), 806–824.
36.
TourangeauR. (1984). Cognitive sciences and survey methods. In JabineT. B.StrafM. L.TanurJ. M.TourangeauR. (Eds.), Cognitive aspects of survey methodology: Building a bridge between disciplines. National Academy Press.
37.
ValentinoN. A.HutchingsV. L.WhiteI. K. (2002). Cues that matter: How political ads prime racial attitudes during campaigns. American Political Science Review, 96(1), 75–90.
38.
ValentinoN. A.BraderT.JardinaA. (2013). Immigration opposition among U.S. Whites: General ethnocentrism or media priming of attitudes about Latinos?Political Psychology, 34(2), 149–166.
39.
WhiteI. K. (2007). When race matters and when it doesn’t: Racial group differences in response to racial cues. American Political Science Review, 101(2), 339–354.
40.
WrightM.LevyM.CitrinJ. (2016). Public attitudes toward immigration policy across the legal/illegal divide: The role of categorical and attribute-based decision-making. Political Behavior, 38(1), 229–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-015-9311-y
41.
ZallerJ. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge University Press.
42.
ZallerJ.FeldmanS. (1992). A simple theory of the survey response: Answering questions versus revealing preferences. American Journal of Political Science, 36(3), 579–618.
43.
Zepeda-MillánC. (2017). Latino mass mobilization: Immigration, racialization, and activism. Cambridge University Press.
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.
