Search

The relationship between ethnic diversity and social solidarity has become increasingly tenuous with the advance of globalization. Immigrant access to the welfare state has been a salient issue throughout the West recently, most especially in Europe after the enlargement of the European Union eastwards in 2004 and the migration crisis of 2015 (Reeskens and van der Meer 2018). Migration and diversity have been attributed with stimulating welfare chauvinism, which has led to a burgeoning body of research into this line of political inquiry (Kitschelt 1997). Previous research has largely focused on the national identity of the majority population by measuring the nature of their identification with the nation. However, this focus is inadequate because it leaves out how the majority population perceives the relationship of immigrants to the nation. If immigrants are perceived by the majority as being less committed to the national community, they are likely to suffer from “membership penalties” (Banting et al. 2022; Harell et al. 2021). When immigrants are perceived as less deserving, then their claims-making can be seen as less legitimate than native-born citizens. Although immigrants are less likely today to be formally excluded from the nation as pathways to citizenship are available, they continue to be subject to a form of hierarchical inclusion between an ethno-national core and penalized outsider minority (Antonsich and Petrillo 2019), at least in some cases and by some native-born citizens. Membership penalties imposed by the majority are likely to surface over support for redistribution. This is because welfare state support relies on a sense of community membership, which typically has been tied to notions of nationhood (Marshall 1950). Recent research shows that people are more willing to redistribute benefits when they perceive others in society as equally committed to the national community (Harell et al. 2021). Despite a large experimental literature that shows that immigrants and racialized minorities are less likely to be seen as deserving of welfare (Ford and Koostra 2017; Harell, Soroka and Iyengar, 2016) little work looks at how cues of membership influence attitudes toward redistribution. The aim of this project is to better understand how individual behavior by immigrants can influence perceptions of commitment to the national community, to test the extent they matter for support for redistribution compared to common indicators in the literature, such as economic situation and racial prejudice. To do so, we draw on a unique cross-national survey, with an embedded social media experiment that manipulates cues about commitment to the host society, the immigrant's racial background, and their employment status. This preregistration plan only focuses on the social media experiment embedded within the larger study.

A simple dictionary that captures mentions of anger, anxiety, optimism and sadness in news content.

Our project seeks to understand the power of “Critical Race Theory” (CRT) in current popular debate and primary election campaigns to mobilize and divide public opinion. The strength of “CRT” derives, we believe, not simply from a lack of knowledge about what CRT actually is. We suspect its political strength lies in the fact that CRT as a term is ambiguously related to racism. “CRT” as a phrase allows for the expression of what might for some people be otherwise unpalatable attitudes. Our logic is motivated in part by the suspicion that the phrase “critical race theory” is especially powerful in activating not only racial biases, but also partisan identity, independent of racial biases. Our interest is accordingly not so much on the direct impact of issue framing, but rather on the ways in which partisanship and racism are activated using “CRT” versus other alternative frames.

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-psx-10.1177_00323217221105170 for Revisiting Elite Perceptions as Mediator of Elite Responsiveness to Public Opinion by Stefaan Walgrave, Stuart Soroka, Peter Loewen, Tamir Sheafer and Karolin Soontjens in Political Studies

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-hij-10.1177_19401612211008430 for Migrants, Caravans, and the Impact of News Photos on Immigration Attitudes by Guadalupe Madrigal and Stuart Soroka in The International Journal of Press/Politics

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-hij-10.1177_19401612211008430 for Migrants, Caravans, and the Impact of News Photos on Immigration Attitudes by Guadalupe Madrigal and Stuart Soroka in The International Journal of Press/Politics

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-psx-10.1177_00323217221105170 for Revisiting Elite Perceptions as Mediator of Elite Responsiveness to Public Opinion by Stefaan Walgrave, Stuart Soroka, Peter Loewen, Tamir Sheafer and Karolin Soontjens in Political Studies

Supplemental material, SC900290_Supplemental_Figs_01-02_CLN for Politicization and Polarization in Climate Change News Content, 1985-2017 by Sedona Chinn, P. Sol Hart and Stuart Soroka in Science Communication

Supplemental material, Online_Appendices_CPS for Asymmetric Accountability: An Experimental Investigation of Biases in Evaluations of Governments’ Election Pledges by Elin Naurin, Stuart Soroka and Niels Markwat in Comparative Political Studies

Supplemental material, Supplemental_Material_Updated for Mass Media as a Source of Public Responsiveness by Fabian G. Neuner, Stuart N. Soroka and Christopher Wlezien in The International Journal of Press/Politics

This article assesses the apparent effect of political multiculturalism on tolerance of Muslim accommodation among native-born majority members. Our principle goal is in understanding how public opinion on religious accommodation varies as a function of both federal multicultural policy, on one hand, and more deeply rooted notions of political culture, on the other. We do so by examining responses to a pair of survey experiments embedded in surveys conducted in Canada and the United States. The experiments allow us to convincingly demonstrate “Muslim exceptionalism.” Contextual comparisons across multicultural policy regimes (Canada and the United States) and within them but across distinct political cultures (Quebec vs. English Canada) lend credence to a fairly subdued role for policy and a much larger one for political culture. These effects are, we argue and show, strongly moderated by support for multiculturalism at the individual-level.