Implicit Nativist Attitudes, Social Desirability, and Immigration Policy Preferences

While previous research on immigration attitudes among the American public has focused on factors such as economic threat, social context, and racial prejudice, fewer studies have examined the psychological determinants of immigration policy preferences. This study analyzes the results of an implicit association test (IAT) procedure that measures automatic nativist preferences for a traditional American culture versus a Latino-American culture {i.e., implicit nativist attitudes). In brief, this study demonstrates that implicit nativist attitudes are fairly common, that they are an independent predictor of immigration policy attitudes, and that they affect those who are not explicitly nativist but who still hold restrictionist policy views.

Response to "Framing unauthorized immigrants: the effects of labels on evaluations," by Ommundsen, et al. (2014)

Ommundsen, Larsen, van der Veer, and Eilertsen (2014 ) presented evidence that varying how immigrants are described in surveys can lead to differences in how respondents to those surveys change their self-reported orientations toward those immigrants and immigration policy. We argue that the apparent conflict between their findings and those of Knoll, Redlawsk, and Sanborn (2011 ) should be interpreted as complementary rather than contradictory. In particular, differences in samples, timing, and dependent variables limit direct comparisons between the studies. Moreover, because Ommundsen, et al. (2014) do not have a measure of partisanship and did not test for interaction effects between ideology and frames, their broader conclusions are limited given that immigration is such a highly charged political issue that is strongly affected by political ideology and partisan cues.

Assessing the effect of social desirability on nativism attitude responses

Attempts to measure and analyze public opinion attitudes toward racial/ethnic minorities often confront the "social desirability" problem: those who have prejudiced attitudes are rarely willing to admit them to surveyors. Instead, they may be more likely to give a socially acceptable answer rather an accurate reflection of their views. Previous research has clearly established that this effect presents a challenge for accurately measuring self-reported racial and policy attitudes that primarily affect African-Americans. It is less clear, however, how it might affect self-reported responses to attitudes dealing with Latinos and immigration. This study thus seeks to analyze the extent to which social desirability may affect survey measures of perceived levels of cultural threat (nativism). Results from two separate analyses using the Crowne-Marlowe "social desirability scale" and a survey "list experiment" demonstrate that social desirability is indeed a concern for accurately measuring nativism in the American public, but that it exerts an opposite effect from what has previously been observed: nativist attitudes tend to be over-reported in opinion surveys.