The Effects of Media Framing on Attitudes Toward Undocumented Immigrants.

Intense debates in the United States over immigration often coincide with each wave of mass immigration. The last two decades have witnessed the largest number of immigrants admitted to the US. In addition to increases in legal immigration, there has been a dramatic increase in undocumented immigrants, which by some estimates has grown to over 11 million. The increase in "legal" and "illegal" immigration has predictably resulted in a backlash toward immigrants and current US immigration policy which many consider to be broken. In response to this backlash, in 2005 the House of Representatives passed HR 4437, which sought to create a 700 mile fence along the U.S.-Mexico border and criminalize undocumented immigrants and persons assisting them. Politicos and media elites were taken by surprise when in the spring of 2006 over a million immigrants and immigrant-rights advocates took to the streets in protest of these draconian measures. In light of these dramatic events, this study seeks to examine the factors shaping American public opinion toward undocumented immigrants and US immigration policy. Current studies on attitudes toward immigration largely consider the role of economic motives, inter-group contact, affect, and symbolic orientations (Pantoja 2006a, 2006b; Binder, Polinard, and Wrinkle 1997; Hood and Morris 1997; Citrin, Green, Muste and Wong 1997; Espenshade and Hempstead 1996; Espenshade and Calhoun 1993). Each of these studies has advanced our understanding of the factors underlying opinion formation toward immigrants and US immigration policy. However, given data limitations, most have not examined how media framing influences immigration attitudes. Furthermore, since many studies were conducted pre-9/11, we know little about how national security concerns influence attitudes toward immigration. This study overcomes these issues by proposing an experimental design to test the effects of differing frames (Druckman 2004) in shaping public opinion toward undocumented immigrants and immigration policies. Subjects are assigned to one of six conditions: a control group, a national security frame, an economic benefit frame, an economic cost frame, a social instability frame, and a historical tradition frame. We hypothesize that those who receive a positive frame (economic benefits and historical tradition) will have more favorable views towards undocumented immigrants and be more supportive of progressive immigration reform relative to those who receive a negative frame (economic cost, social instability, and national security). We treat each frame separately to see whether some frames carry a stronger effect than others in influencing the ingredients of evaluations and opinions on immigration. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]