Social factors influencing the immigration policy preferences of European Americans

Polemic debates among political scientists as to what drives Whites to favor certain policies and oppose others have suggested commitment to obedience principles and aversive racism theories. Commitment to obedience theory posits that Whites are bothered by all illegal immigrants, regardless of nationality, because they broke the law to enter the U.S. Aversive racism theory however, posits that use of issues of legality to explain anti-immigrant attitudes is a strategic technique to avoid being labeled racist. To test these two theories, Study 1 uses an experimental design to manipulate the nationality (Mexican vs. Polish) and the legal status of the immigrant group. European American undergraduates (N=145) participated in this study. Hierarchical linear regression and simple-slope analyses showed that (1) high-commitment-to-the-law people are more anti-immigrant than low-commitment-to-the-law people ( beta = -.14, p < .04); (2) people were more anti-immigrant after seeing the picture of Mexicans (beta = .20, p < .001); and (3) that the commitment-to-law theory is not supported, because those expected to respond negatively to illegal immigrants regardless of nationality (high-commitment-to-the-law people) are actually responding positively to illegal Polish immigrants (beta = .39, p < .02).;In a second study, the possible effects of implicit racism on explicit racism as they relate to immigration policy preferences are explored. The study made use of a previously validated priming procedure for examining the automatic activation of attitudes on memory to assess implicit racism. European American undergraduates (N = 81) participated in this study. Simple slope analysis revealed that the immigration attitudes of those high in implicit racism regarding male targets only were more negative if they were also high in explicit racism (beta = -.33, p < .03), whereas the immigration attitudes of those low in implicit racism did not significantly differ depending on whether they were high or low in explicit prejudice (beta = -.28, p = .055). The two studies show that hidden themes can underlie people's feelings and willingness to support or participate in policies that might otherwise not seem to be related to diversity.