Search

Largely due to immigration, European societies have grown increasingly diverse. The current study seeks to determine how citizens characterize their experiences with this diversity and whether various types of intergroup exposure can influence immigration attitudes. This analysis takes a unique approach by comparing positive, negative, and neutral intergroup exposure characterizations, along with those reporting no exposure at all. Using internationally representative data from the 2014 European Social Survey, this paper demonstrates how these different characterizations predict citizens' immigration attitudes. Results indicate that positive and negative experiences have opposing effects that are roughly symmetrical in magnitude and both are more intense when experienced in high frequency. Neutral exposure is actually much more common than negative experiences and represents a net benefit compared to those with no exposure at all. The results present important implications for future research and highlight several encouraging patterns for diversity across Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper contends that exclusionary views towards out-group populations are formed along two dimensions: exclusion from the country and exclusion from equal rights. Data obtained from the European Social Survey (for twenty-one countries) reveal that objection to the admission of foreigners to the country is more pronounced than objection to the allocation of 'equal rights'. The data further suggest that objection to admission can be directed either at all non-nationals or only at ethnic and racial minorities. 'Total exclusionists' (i.e. support exclusion of all non-nationals) are more likely to support the denial of foreigners from equal rights than 'racial exclusionists' (i.e. support only exclusion of ethnic minorities). Multi-level analyses show that support for exclusion is also influenced by socio-economic characteristics of individuals (e.g. education, political orientation) and characteristics of their countries (e.g. size of the non-European population). The findings are discussed in light of sociological theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The relationship between police and ethnic minorities has been the subject of increasing interest in many Western societies in recent years. We examine first-generation immigrants' trust in the police in Europe from a comparative and longitudinal perspective. Based on roughly 20,000 immigrants observed in 22 countries over 13 years in the European Social Survey, results show that initially high levels of trust in the police among immigrants tend to erode with the length of their stay in the host country. We show that two simultaneous processes drive this pattern: a fading reference effect (downward assimilation) and an increasing discrimination effect. Cross-national comparisons show that, on average, immigrants in countries with more police trust the police less. However, there is no effect of police size within countries, mostly because police numbers hardly change over time. We discuss implications for future research and policy development based on our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research empirically approaches symbolic boundary making in the form of individual assent to selective immigration policy. Distinguishing two such types of boundaries, restriction based on immigrant skills and race/religion, we approach the antecedents of such preferences. Do economic or rather cultural concerns about immigration drive boundary making? We furthermore assess whether social boundaries in the form of integration and multicultural policies are of importance. The results obtained from the European Social Survey show that on the individual level, both forms of boundary making are mainly driven by cultural concerns. On the country level, net of several measures of diversity, integration policies dampen skill-related boundaries, while multicultural policies weaken the strength of cultural boundary making along race and religion. These findings expose the political embeddedness of processes of symbolic boundary making into the very policies that approach the respective type of boundary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Documenting the extraordinary potency and reach of the European backlash against multiculturalism, this essay provides a new theoretical model for explaining it. Rather than focusing primarily on demographic and institutional facts about Islamic immigration – such as education, wealth, participation and mobility – the author proposes a cultural-sociological approach that focuses on meanings and emotions as core issues for civil societies. As the demographic presence of Islamic immigrants has intensified, the anti-civil construction of Islamic qualities has led European masses, leaders and intellectuals, not only from the right but from the centre and left, to demand homogenizing assimilation. Representing public practices of Islam as threatening European democracy, newly restrictive citizenship tests have emerged alongside growing xenophobic political parties and newly threatening neo-fascist violence. Initially brought to Europe for economic and political reasons, the question has now become whether the children and grandchildren of Islamic immigrants can be incorporated into European civil society. The conflict is not over whether immigrants should be incorporated but over the grounds for doing so. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While Europe is unifying, it is also becoming more diverse, making multiculturalism one of the most hotly debated political issues in Western Europe. Minority citizens occupy an important place in the landscape of this challenging issue. Using the Eurobarometer 53 survey of European citizens, I look at the gap between Europeans who claim minority heritage and those who do not in support for multiculturalism in fifteen European Union member nations, taking into account percentage of extreme right-wing vote. This contextual factor has a persistent significant effect on the difference between minority and non-minority attitudes. High levels of support for extreme right-wing parties may have a polarizing effect, heightening awareness of personal heritage and making ethnic identity more salient in attitudes towards multiculturalism. This suggests an extension of group threat theory in which conceptions of what constitutes both a group and a threat can be created at the level of discourse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]