Explaining contemporary anti -immigration attitudes in Germany and the Netherlands.

Using multistage national probability samples from Germany and the Netherlands, this study investigated three approaches used to explain prejudice and racism in the United States as predictors of immigration policy preferences: (a) biological distance (that emphasized biological inferiority of non-whites); (b) covert prejudice (that emphasized the denial that immigrants face discrimination or that immigrants need government assistance) and (c) intergroup threat (that emphasized the perception of threat and insecurity over competition for resources with immigrants). The study had three aims: (1) test whether prejudice/racism factors (i.e., perceived biological distance, covert prejudice, and intergroup threat) independently and additively predicted immigration policy preferences; (2) test whether biological forms of racism (i.e. perceived biological distance) had waned in the European context or if they were useful predictors of immigration policy preferences; (3) test if the direct relationship between biological distance and immigration policy preferences was fully mediated by covert prejudice and intergroup threat. Contrary to the predictions, in Germany, biological distance independently explained a considerable proportion of variance of immigration policy preferences when controlling for the effects of covert prejudice and intergroup threat. In addition, covert prejudice and intergroup threat did not mediate the relationship between biological distance and immigration policy preferences. By contrast, in support of the hypotheses the results for the Netherlands found that the effect of biological distance on immigration policy preferences was suppressed when controlling for the effects of covert prejudice and intergroup threat. In addition, the direct relationship found between biological distance and immigration policy preferences was fully mediated by intergroup threat. Finally, post-hoc analyses found that intergroup threat fully mediated the direct relationship between covert prejudice and anti-immigration policy preferences. From the results, it was argued that strong kinship-ethnic ties, dominant-minority group position and exclusionary immigration policies are all factors that might contribute to weak social norms against the overt expression of prejudice towards immigrants in Germany. On the other hand, the Netherlands emphasis on immigration policies of inclusion and multiculturalism seem to contribute to norms of tolerance towards immigrants. The findings highlight the importance of how history and macro-social factors influence immigration attitudes in specific societies. Implications for future research on immigrant psychology are discussed.Ph.D.Ethnic studiesPsychologySocial SciencesSocial psychologySocial structureUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studieshttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/123531/2/3096042.pd