Search

Introduction: The discourse on immigration and immigrants is central to contemporary political and public discussions. Analyzing online conversations about immigrants provides valuable insights into public opinion, complemented by data from questionnaires on how attitudes are formed. Methods: The research includes two studies examining the expressive and informational use of social media. Study 1 conducted a computational text analysis of comments on Singaporean Facebook pages and forums, focusing on how social media is used to discuss immigrants. Study 2 utilized survey data to examine the use of social media at the individual level, testing the relationships between cognitive ability, perceptions of threat, negative emotions towards immigrants, and social media usage within the Integrated Threat Theory framework. Results: Study 1 found that discussions about immigrants on social media often involved negative emotions and concerns about economic impact, such as competition for jobs and crime. Complementing these findings about perceived economic threats, Study 2 showed that individuals with higher social media usage and greater perceptions of threat were more likely to have negative emotions towards immigrants. These relationships were mediated by perceptions of threat and were stronger in individuals with lower cognitive abilities. Discussion: The findings from both studies demonstrate the role of social media in shaping public attitudes towards immigrants, highlighting how perceived threats influence these attitudes. This research suggests the importance of considering how digital platforms contribute to public opinion on immigration, with implications for understanding the dynamics of attitude formation in the digital age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents two studies which address an underdeveloped area within acculturation research: majority members' perceptions of cultural change. Specifically, drawing on the theory of cultural inertia, we explored how majority members react to perceptions of recent majority culture and minority cultures change. A path model was hypothesised whereby British and English majority members' perceptions that their British (Study 1, N = 266) and English (Study 2, N = 292) cultures are changing due to the presence of minority cultures was positively associated with symbolic threat, and through this with greater prejudice towards minorities living in the UK/England. However, participants' perceptions that minority cultures are changing due to influence from the majority culture were negatively associated with symbolic threat, and through this with less prejudice towards minorities. These findings were supported across different operationalizations of prejudice (i.e., social distance and positive/negative affect) and even when controlling for another recently introduced concept of meta-perceptions – that is, majority members' perceptions of whether minority members prefer majority members to maintain their culture and/or adopt to the minority cultures. Findings call for a greater focus on studying the intergroup consequences of majority members' perceptions of cultural change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to Gordijn (2002), prejudice does not only escalate because of how the ingroup feels towards the outgroup but also because of the perception the ingroup has about how the outgroup feels towards the ingroup, that is meta-prejudice. In a sample of 604 participants, this study explores the extent to which meta-prejudice predicts perceived threat and prejudice towards immigrants in Finland. In line with previous studies, results showed that meta-prejudice significantly predicted the perception of immigrants as a threat and feelings of prejudice towards immigrants. In addition, perceived threat significantly mediated the relationship between meta-prejudice and prejudice towards immigrants. Implications and recommendations for future research are discussed as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although different types of prejudice tend to be highly correlated, target-specific and more generalized components can nevertheless be distinguished. Here, we analyze whether indicators of the intergroup context-threat, contact, and neighborhood composition-predict the target-specific and/or generalized components of prejudice. Using data from the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study ( N = 4629), we build a multilevel model that captures the relationship between social dominance orientation, general levels of neighborhood heterogeneity, symbolic and realistic threat and cross-group friendship (averaged across target groups), and generalized prejudice. Our model simultaneously estimates the relationship between target-specific levels of these intergroup context indicators and target-specific prejudice. Results indicated that social dominance orientation remained the strongest predictor of generalized prejudice when adjusting for other variables and that indicators of the intergroup context primarily explain differences between target group ratings. Aggregate levels of cross-group friendship also had a small effect on generalized prejudice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a context of inflow of immigration and economic crisis, new forms of prejudice and the activation of the perception of threat (realistic and symbolic) will determine the response to immigrant minorities (outgroups). The antecedents of threat are considered to be: the perception of the intergroup situation and the forms of affective prejudice. The outcome variables are ingroup favouritism, prosocial response, empathy and willingness to help. In a cross-sectional study based on a random survey of Basques (n = 500), structural equation modelling analyses were applied to test the differences between realistic and symbolic threat. The results indicate that when the majority group status is perceived as legitimate, the perception of realistic threat arises and this increases ingroup favouritism and decreases prosocial response to the outgroup, directly and through the expression of affective prejudice. Symbolic threat, on the other hand, plays a more limited role. Mechanisms of the perception of realistic and symbolic threat regarding attitudes of natives to immigrants are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

International students provide a variety of benefits to higher education institutions within the United States (J. J. Lee, 2007; J. J. Lee & C. Rice, 2007). Despite these benefits, many international students experience prejudice and discrimination by American students. The purpose of the present study was to examine several potential predictors of prejudice against international students: perceptions of international students as symbolic and realistic threats, right-wing authoritarianism, and social dominance orientation. A simultaneous regression analysis that the authors based on 188 students at a Southwestern university revealed that perceptions of symbolic and realistic threats and social dominance orientation were each positive and significant predictors of prejudice. Mediation analyses suggested that the effects of right-wing authoritarianism on prejudice is fully mediated through perceived symbolic threat and partially mediated by realistic threat. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]