This paper considers a messaging strategy to shift immigration preferences, arguing that if citizen attitudes in this issue-area build from several dimensions, then a positive message related to each dimension should move attitudes in a more favorable direction. It tests the first part using original survey data with directly comparable questions about whether immigration hurts/helps American culture/the economy/national security, providing evidence that all three dimensions currently support the preferences of voting-age citizens. It tests the second part by randomly presenting another sample with different messages about how labor immigration strengthens national security, creates new jobs, or enhances culture, finding that all three reduce anti-immigration attitudes with significant effects even within groups that are more opposed to immigration (namely, white Americans, those with less education, and partisan Republicans).
AdidaC. L.LoA.PlatasM. R., (2018). Perspective taking can promote short-term inclusionary behavior toward Syrian refugees. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(38), 9521-9526. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1765(03)00032-6.
BearceD. H.HartA. F. (2019). Labor migration numbers and rights: do they trade off or advance together?International Interactions, 45(1), 28–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050629.2019.1525137.
4.
BearceD. H.RooseveltM. (2019). A sometimes hidden economic dimension to individual immigration preferences: Cross-national evidence in support of the labor competition hypothesis. Political Research Quarterly, 72(4), 894–909. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912918819863.
5.
BonillaT.MoC. H. (2018). Bridging the partisan divide on immigration policy attitudes through a bipartisan issue area: The case of human trafficking. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 5(2), 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1017/xps.2018.3.
6.
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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00353.x.
FacchiniG.MargalitY.NakataH. (2016). Countering public opposition to immigration: The impact of information campaigns. IZA Discussion Papers. No. 10420.
9.
FacchiniG.MaydaA. (2009). The political economy of immigration policy. United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Reports. Research Paper 2009/3.
10.
FloresR. D. (2018). Can elites shape public attitudes toward immigrants? Evidence from the 2016 US presidential election. Social Forces, 96(4), 1649–1690. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soy001.
11.
FordhamB. O.KleinbergK. B. (2012). How can economic interests influence support for free trade?International Organization, 66(2), 311–328. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0020818312000057.
12.
GerberA. S.HuberG. A.BiggersD. R.HendryD. J. (2017). Self-interest, beliefs, and policy opinions: Understanding how economic beliefs affect immigration policy preferences. Political Research Quarterly, 70(1), 155–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912916684032.
GrigorieffA.RothC.UbfalD. (2016). Does information change attitudes towards immigrants? Representative evidence from survey experiments. IZA Discussion Papers. No. 10419.
HansonG. H.ScheveK.SlaughterM. J. (2007). Public finance and individual preferences over globalization strategies. Economics and Politics, 19(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0343.2007.00300.x.
17.
HixS.KaufmannE.LeeperT. J. (2021). Pricing immigration. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 8(1), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1017/xps.2020.6.
18.
HollifieldJ. (1992). Immigrants, markets, and states: The political economy of postwar Europe. Harvard University Press.
19.
HopkinsD. J.SidesJ.CitrinJ. (2019). The muted consequences of correct information about immigration. Journal of Politics, 81(1), 315–320. https://doi.org/10.1086/699914.
KuklinskiJ. H.QuirkP. J.JeritJ.SchwiederD.RichR. F. (2000). Misinformation and the currency of democratic citizenship. Journal of Politics, 62(3), 790–816. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-3816.00033.
22.
KustovA.LaakerD.RellerC. (2021). The stability of immigration attitudes: Evidence and implications. Journal of Politics. Forthcoming. https://doi.org/10.1086/715061.
23.
LahavG.CourtemancheM. (2012). The ideological effects of framing threat on immigration and civil liberties. Political Behavior, 34(3), 477–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-011-9171-z.
MalhotraN.MargalitY.MoC. H. (2013). Economic explanations for opposition to immigration: Distinguishing between prevalence and conditional impact. American Journal of Political Science, 57(2), 391–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12012.
26.
MeleadyR.SegerC. R.VermueM. (2017). Examining the role of positive and negative intergroup contact and anti‐immigrant prejudice in Brexit. British Journal of Social Psychology, 56(4), 799–808. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12203.
27.
MellonJ. (2014). Internet search data and issue salience: The properties of Google trends as a measure of issue salience. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 24(1), 45–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2013.846346.
28.
NewmanB. J.HartmanT. K.LownP. L.FeldmanS. (2015). Easing the heavy hand: Humanitarian concern, empathy, and opinion on immigration. British Journal of Political Science, 45(3), 583–607. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123413000410.
29.
NewmanB. J.MalhotraN. (2019). Economic reasoning with a racial hue: Is the immigration consensus purely race neutral?Journal of Politics, 81(1), 153–166. https://doi.org/10.1086/700109.
30.
RosenblumM.CorneliusW. (2012). Dimensions of immigration policy. In RosenblumM.TichenorD. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the politics of international migration (pp. 245–273). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195337228.013.0011.
31.
RudolphC. (2003). Security and the political economy of international migration. American Political Science Review, 97(4), 603–620. https://doi.org/10.1017/s000305540300090x.
32.
SchildkrautD. (2020). Ambivalence in American public opinion about immigration. In BerinskyA. (Ed.), New Directions in Public Opinion (3rd ed., pp. 315–337). Routledge.
33.
SnidermanP. M.HagendoornL.PriorM. (2004). Predisposing factors and situational triggers: Exclusionary reactions to immigrant minorities. American Political Science Review, 98(1), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/s000305540400098x.
WilliamsonS.AdidaC. L.LoA.PlatasM. R.PratherL.WerfelS. H. (2021). Family matters: How immigrant histories can promote inclusion. American Political Science Review, 115(2), 686–693. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055420001057.
38.
WongC. J. (2007). “Little” and “big” pictures in our heads: Race, local context, and innumeracy about racial groups in the United States. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71(3), 392-412. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfm023.
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.
