移民态度与信息评估的党派差异

IF 2.1 2区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Social Psychology Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-07-17 DOI:10.1177/01902725231184201
Victoria S. Asbury-Kimmel
{"title":"移民态度与信息评估的党派差异","authors":"Victoria S. Asbury-Kimmel","doi":"10.1177/01902725231184201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Attitudes about immigrants, though related, are not interchangeable with attitudes about immigration. Much research has examined the latter, yet our knowledge regarding what Americans think about immigrants is lacking. Drawing on an original national survey conducted by NORC (n = 2,132) in 2021, I address shortcomings in the literature by illuminating distinct partisan attitudes about immigrants, revealing that Republicans tend to agree with both anti- and worthy-immigrant narratives while Democrats tend to embrace worthy- and reject anti-immigrant narratives. Further, I show how differences in information evaluation are related to the observed phenomena. That is, Republicans tend to interpret prototypical anti-immigrant political rhetoric as commentary about unauthorized immigrants and prototypical pro-immigrant discourse as messaging about immigrants in general and legal immigrants in particular. Democrats, however, interpret anti-immigrant and pro-immigrant narratives to be about immigrants in general. The results complicate understandings of immigration polarization by showing how social psychological mechanisms may facilitate commonality and divergence on attitudes about immigrants.","PeriodicalId":48201,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychology Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Attitudes toward Immigrants and Partisan Differences in Information Evaluation\",\"authors\":\"Victoria S. Asbury-Kimmel\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01902725231184201\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Attitudes about immigrants, though related, are not interchangeable with attitudes about immigration. Much research has examined the latter, yet our knowledge regarding what Americans think about immigrants is lacking. Drawing on an original national survey conducted by NORC (n = 2,132) in 2021, I address shortcomings in the literature by illuminating distinct partisan attitudes about immigrants, revealing that Republicans tend to agree with both anti- and worthy-immigrant narratives while Democrats tend to embrace worthy- and reject anti-immigrant narratives. Further, I show how differences in information evaluation are related to the observed phenomena. That is, Republicans tend to interpret prototypical anti-immigrant political rhetoric as commentary about unauthorized immigrants and prototypical pro-immigrant discourse as messaging about immigrants in general and legal immigrants in particular. Democrats, however, interpret anti-immigrant and pro-immigrant narratives to be about immigrants in general. The results complicate understandings of immigration polarization by showing how social psychological mechanisms may facilitate commonality and divergence on attitudes about immigrants.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48201,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Psychology Quarterly\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Psychology Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01902725231184201\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Psychology Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01902725231184201","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对移民的态度虽然有关联,但与对移民的看法是不能互换的。许多研究对后者进行了研究,但我们对美国人对移民的看法缺乏了解。根据NORC(n = 2132)在2021年,我通过阐明对移民的不同党派态度来解决文献中的不足,揭示了共和党人倾向于同意反移民和有价值的移民叙事,而民主党人倾向于接受有价值的反移民叙事。此外,我还展示了信息评估的差异与观察到的现象之间的关系。也就是说,共和党人倾向于将典型的反移民政治言论解读为对未经授权移民的评论,将典型的亲移民言论解读为关于一般移民,特别是合法移民的信息。然而,民主党人将反移民和支持移民的叙事解读为关于移民的一般性叙事。研究结果表明,社会心理机制如何促进对移民态度的共性和分歧,从而使对移民两极分化的理解变得复杂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Attitudes toward Immigrants and Partisan Differences in Information Evaluation
Attitudes about immigrants, though related, are not interchangeable with attitudes about immigration. Much research has examined the latter, yet our knowledge regarding what Americans think about immigrants is lacking. Drawing on an original national survey conducted by NORC (n = 2,132) in 2021, I address shortcomings in the literature by illuminating distinct partisan attitudes about immigrants, revealing that Republicans tend to agree with both anti- and worthy-immigrant narratives while Democrats tend to embrace worthy- and reject anti-immigrant narratives. Further, I show how differences in information evaluation are related to the observed phenomena. That is, Republicans tend to interpret prototypical anti-immigrant political rhetoric as commentary about unauthorized immigrants and prototypical pro-immigrant discourse as messaging about immigrants in general and legal immigrants in particular. Democrats, however, interpret anti-immigrant and pro-immigrant narratives to be about immigrants in general. The results complicate understandings of immigration polarization by showing how social psychological mechanisms may facilitate commonality and divergence on attitudes about immigrants.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Psychology Quarterly
Social Psychology Quarterly PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
3.70%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: SPPS is a unique short reports journal in social and personality psychology. Its aim is to publish cutting-edge, short reports of single studies, or very succinct reports of multiple studies, and will be geared toward a speedy review and publication process to allow groundbreaking research to be quickly available to the field. Preferences will be given to articles that •have theoretical and practical significance •represent an advance to social psychological or personality science •will be of broad interest both within and outside of social and personality psychology •are written to be intelligible to a wide range of readers including science writers for the popular press
期刊最新文献
Scrutinizing Justice in Sociology: Inspiration From Social Psychology Introduction of Karen A. Hegtvedt, Winner of the 2023 Cooley-Mead Award The Job Satisfaction Paradox: Pluralistic Ignorance and the Myth of the “Unhappy Worker” When Good News Falls Flat: Complications in the Delivery and Reception of Good News in Pediatric Neurology The Magic Word? Face-Work and the Functions of Please in Everyday Requests
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1