Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Picking on immigrants: a cross-national analysis of individual-level relative deprivation and authoritarianism as predictors of anti-foreign prejudice

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Acta Politica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In many European countries, anti-immigrant sentiments seem to have spread following recent economic challenges. By drawing on relative deprivation (RD) theory, we establish a theoretical connection between economic downturns and anti-immigrant prejudice. We argue that the experience of individual-level relative deprivation (IRD) is comparable to that of social threat and social exclusion. We draw on a large body of research that suggests the experience of social threat and uncertainty leads to the perception of the world in ethnocentric terms and rejecting pluralistic belief systems. Unlike much of the literature, we focus on individual-level perceptions and distinguish between an objective and subjective relative deprivation. Given our focus on individual-level predictors, we also test for the effects of authoritarian preferences on the likelihood of anti-immigrant bias. Our study demonstrates that unlike objective deprivation, both subjective deprivation and authoritarianism have a significant impact on anti-immigrant sentiments. Furthermore, we find evidence that one component of authoritarian preferences, namely authoritarian submission, moderates the effect of relative deprivation on economic (not cultural) forms of anti-immigrant prejudice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Despite extensive criticism (Feldman and Stenner 1997; Saucier 2000; Sibley and Duckitt 2008; Verkuyten and Hagendoorn 1998), the extant literature shows authoritarianism to correlate highly with particular values and motivations, such as security, conformity, and conservatism (Duckitt and Sibley 2010)

  2. Throughout the existing literature, these (or similar) items are sometimes used to operationalise the more conventional notions of anti-immigrant attitudes (Hjerm 2009; Rustenbach 2010) and ethnic threat (Schneider 2008). Here, we argue against this, as the former conceptualisation is too general and the latter too specific. We would argue that “ethnic threat” almost entirely aligns with anti-immigrant prejudice for cultural reasons, but not necessarily with anti-immigrant prejudice for economic reasons.

  3. In this section, we only report the coefficients of the independent variables that are relevant for our hypotheses. For full models, we refer to Appendix Tables 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12.

  4. We ran a fourth set of regressions for each model by standardising the coefficients of the most inclusive regressions (c). While we are not necessarily referring to effect sizes throughout this study (only to direction and significance), we wanted to make sure that our significant effects were not overly weak or completely trivial. We eventually found this changes very little or not at all relevant to our results. The additional regressions are available from the authors upon request

  5. We come to the same conclusion when we explore the same regression, but with standardised coefficients.

  6. For both full models (models 1c and 2c), we refer to Appendix Tables 5 and 6. Their marginal effects plots are available from the authors upon request.

  7. For the full models with individual item interaction terms, we refer to Appendix Tables 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12.

References

  • Abrams, D., and P.R. Grant. 2012. Testing the social identity relative deprivation (SIRD) model of social change: the political rise of Scottish nationalism. British Journal of Social Psychology 51 (4): 674–689.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adler, N.E., E.S. Epel, G. Castellazzo, and J.R. Ickovics. 2000. Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: preliminary data in healthy white women. Health Psychology 19 (6): 586–592.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agnew, C.R., V.D. Thompson, V.A. Smith, R.H. Gramzow, and D.P. Currey. 1993. Proximal and distal predictors of homophobia: framing the multivariate roots of outgroup rejection. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 23 (24): 2013–2042.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allison, P.D. 2005. Fixed Effects Regression Methods for Longitudinal Data Using SAS. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altemeyer, B. 1996. The Authoritarian Specter. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agroskin, D., and E. Jonas. 2010. Out of control: how and why does perceived lack of control lead to ethnocentrism? Review of Psychology 17 (2): 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akkerman, T., S. de Lange, and M. Rooduijn. 2016. Radical Right-wing Populist Parties in Western Europe. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashmore, R.D. 1970. Prejudice: causes and cures. In Social Psychology: Social Influence, Attitude Change, Group Processes, and Prejudice, ed. Barry E. Collins, 245–339. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aydin, N., J.I. Krueger, D. Frey, A. Kastenmüller, and P. Fischer. 2014. Social exclusion and xenophobia: intolerant attitudes toward ethnic and religious minorities. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations 17 (3): 371–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bermeo, N.G. 2003. Ordinary People in Extraordinary Times: The Citizenry and the Breakdown of Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bermeo, N.G., and L.M. Bartels. 2014. Mass Politics in Tough Times: Opinions, Votes and Protest in the Great Recession. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biernat, M., T.K. Vescio, and S.A. Theno. 1996. Violating American values: A “value-congruence” approach to understanding outgroup attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 32 (4): 387–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, J.R., and P.M. Blau. 1982. The cost of inequality: metropolitan structure and violent crime. American Sociological Review 47 (1): 114–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callan, M.J., J.H. Ellard, N. Shead, and D.C. Hodgins. 2008. Gambling as a search for justice: examining the role of personal relative deprivation in gambling urges and gambling behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34 (11): 1514–1529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaplin, D. 2003. Hierarchical linear models: strengths and weaknesses. paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, 9 December, Washington, DC.

  • Clarke, P., Crawford, C., Steele, F., and Vignoles, A. 2010. The Choice Between Fixed and Random Effects Models: Some Considerations for Educational Research. Bonn, Germany: Institute for the Study of Labor. IZA Discussion Paper Series 5287.

  • Cohrs, C.J., and F. Ashbrock. 2009. Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and prejudice against threatening and competitive ethnic groups. European Journal of Social Psychology 39 (2): 270–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohrs, J.C., and S. Ibler. 2009. Authoritarianism, threat, and prejudice: An analysis of mediation and moderation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 31 (1): 81–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., P. Cohen, S. West, and L. Aiken. 2003. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 3rd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, J.T., M.J. Brandt, Y. Inbar, and S.R. Mallinas. 2016. Right-wing authoritarianism predicts prejudice equally toward “gay men and lesbians” and “homosexuals”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 111 (2): 31-45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creighton, M.J., A. Jamal, and N.C. Malancu. 2015. Has opposition to immigration increased in the United States after the economic crisis? An experimental approach. International Migration Review 49 (3): 727–756.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, F. 1976. A model of egotistical relative deprivation. Psychological Review 83 (2): 85–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, F. 1984. Relative deprivation in organizational settings. Research in Organizational Behavior 6 (1): 51–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, J.C. 1962. Toward a theory of revolution. American Sociological Review 27 (1): 5–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Tocqucville, A. 1955. The Old Regime and the French Revolution. New York, NY: Garden City.

    Google Scholar 

  • Decker, O., K. Rothe, M. Weißmann, J. Kiess, and E. Brähler. 2013. Economic prosperity as "narcissistic filling": A missing link between political attitudes and right-wing authoritarianism. International Journal of Conflict and Violence 7 (1): 136–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duckitt, J. 2001. A dual process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 33, ed. M. Zanna, 41–113. San Diego, CA: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duckitt, J., and K. Fisher. 2003. The impact of social threat on worldview and ideological attitudes. Political Psychology 24 (1): 199–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duckitt, J., and C.G. Sibley. 2010. Personality, ideology, prejudice, and politics: a dual-process motivational model. Journal of Personality 78 (6): 1861–1894.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duckitt, J., C. Wagner, I. du Plessis, and I. Birum. 2002. The psychological bases of ideology and prejudice: testing a dual process model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83 (1): 75–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eibner, C., R. Sturn, and C.R. Gresenz. 2004. Does relative deprivation predict the need for mental health services? The Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics 7 (4): 167–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esses, V.M., and G. Hodson. 2006. The role of lay perceptions of ethnic prejudice in the maintenance and perpetuation of ethnic bias. Journal of Social Issues 62 (3): 453–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falter, J.W. 1994. Die Massenbasis des Rechtsextremismus in Europa in vergleichender perspektive. Jahrbuch Extremismus und Demokratie 6 (1): 35–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, A., and K. Stenner. 1997. Perceived threat and authoritarianism. Political Psychology 18 (4): 741–770.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friesen, J.P., A.C. Kay, R.P. Eibach, and A.D. Galinsky. 2014. Seeking structure in social organization: compensatory control and the psychological advantages of hierarchy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 106 (4): 590–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritsche, I., E. Jonas, and T. Fankhänel. 2008. The role of control motivation in mortality salience effects on group support and defence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 95 (3): 524–541.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritsche, I., E. Jonas, and T. Kessler. 2011. Collective reactions to threat: implications for intergroup conflict and for solving societal crises. Social Issues and Policy Review 5 (1): 101–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., and S.T. Fiske. 1996. The ambivalent sexism inventory: differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70 (3): 491–512.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, P.R. 2008. The protest intentions of skilled immigrants with credentialing problems: A test of a model integrating relative deprivation theory with social identity theory. British Journal of Social Psychology 47 (4): 687–705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, P.R., D. Abrams, D.W. Robertson, and J. Garay. 2015. Predicting protests by disadvantaged skilled immigrants: a test of an integrated social identity, relative deprivation, collective efficacy (SIRDE) model. Social Justice Research 28 (1): 76–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grieve, P.G., and M.A. Hogg. 1999. Subjective uncertainty and intergroup discrimination in the minimal group situation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 25 (8): 926–940.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guimond, S., and M. Dambrun. 2002. When prosperity breeds intergroup hostility: the effects of relative deprivation and relative gratification on prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28 (8): 900–912.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurney, J.N., and K.J. Tierney. 1982. Relative deprivation and social movements: a critical look at twenty years of research. The Sociological Quarterly 23 (1): 33–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurr, T.R. 1970. Why Men Rebel. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healey, J.F., and A. Stepnick. 2016. Diversity and Society: Race, Ethnicity, and Gender, 5th ed. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herek, G.M. 2010. Sexual orientation differences as deficits: Science and stigma in the history of American psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science 5 (6): 693–699.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hjerm, M. 2009. Anti-immigrant attitudes and cross-municipal variation in the proportion of immigrants. Acta Sociologica 52 (1): 47–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, G. 2009. The puzzling person-situation schism in prejudice research. Journal of Research in Personality 43 (2): 247–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, G., and K. Dhont. 2015. The person-based nature of prejudice: Individual difference predictors of intergroup negativity. European Review of Social Psychology 26 (1): 1–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, G., K. Costello, and C.C. MacInnis. 2013. Is intergroup contact beneficial among intolerant people? Exploring individual differences in the benefits of contact on attitudes. In Advances in Intergroup Contact, ed. G. Hodson, and M. Hewstone, 49–80. London: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M.A. 2012. Uncertainty-identity theory. In Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology, vol. 2, ed. P.A.M. Van Lange, A.W. Kruglanski, and E.T. Higgins, 62–80. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M.A. 2014. From uncertainty to extremism: social categorization and identity processes. Current Directions in Psychological Science 23 (5): 338–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hox, J.J. 1998. Multilevel modelling: when and why. In Classification, Data Analysis, and Data Highways, ed. I. Balderjahn, R. Mathar, and M. Schader, 147–154. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hox, J.J. 2010. Multilevel Analysis. Techniques and Applications, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jetten, J., N.R. Branscombe, S.A. Haslam, C. Haslam, T. Cruwys, J.M. Jones, L. Cui, G. Dingle, J. Liu, S. Murphy, A. Thai, Z. Walter, and A. Zhanget. 2015. Having a lot of a good thing: multiple important group memberships as a source of self-esteem. PLoS ONE 10 (6): e0131035. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0124609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A.M., and J. Wildman. 2008. Health, income and relative deprivation: Evidence from the BHPS. Journal of Health Economics 27 (2): 308–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kawachi, I., B. Kennedy, and R.G. Wilkinson. 1999. Crime: social disorganization and relative deprivation. Social Science and Medicine 48 (6): 719–731.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kawakami, K., and K.L. Dion. 1993. The impact of salient self-identities on relative deprivation and action intentions. European Journal of Social Psychology 23 (5): 525–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kay, A., J.A. Whitson, D. Gaucher, and A.D. Galinsky. 2009. Compensatory control: achieving order through the mind, our institutions, and the heavens. Current Directions in Psychological Science 18 (5): 264–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, P.E. 2003. A Guide to Econometrics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lancee, B., and S. Pardos-Prado. 2013. Group conflict theory in a longitudinal perspective: Analyzing the dynamic side of ethnic competition. International Migration Review 47 (1): 106–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landau, M.J., A.C. Kay, and J.A. Whitson. 2015. Compensatory control and the appeal of a structured world. Psychological Bulletin 141 (3): 694–722.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavine, H., M. Lodge, and K. Freitas. 2005. Threat, authoritarianism, and selective exposure to information. Political Psychology 26 (2): 219–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, S.M. 1981. Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mark, M. M., and Folger, R. 1984. Responses to relative deprivation: a conceptual framework. In: P. Shaver (ed.) Review of Personality and Social Psychology, Volume 5. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 198–202.

  • Marx, K. 1935. Wage, Labour and Capital. New York, NY: International Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann, S.J.H. 2009. Political conservatism, authoritarianism, and societal threat: voting for republican representatives in U.S. congressional elections from 1946 to 1992. The Journal of Psychology 143 (4): 341–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFarland, S. 2010. Authoritarianism, social dominance, and other roots of generalized prejudice. Political Psychology 31 (3): 453–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, D.E. 1971. Some notes toward theory on relative deprivation, social movements, and social change. American Behavioral Scientist 14 (5): 675–690.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mudde, C., and C.R. Kaltwasser. 2012. Populism in Europe and the Americas: Threat or Corrective for Democracy?. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullin, B.A., and M.A. Hogg. 1998. Dimensions of subjective uncertainty in social identification and minimal intergroup discrimination. British Journal of Social Psychology 37 (3): 345–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Navarro, V. 1999. Health and equity in the world in the era of “globalization”. International Journal of Health Services 29 (2): 215–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, S., and D. Novakowski. 2016. Personal Relative deprivation and risk: an examination of individual differences in personality, attitudes, and behavioral outcomes. Personality and Individual Differences 90 (1): 22–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murnane, R., and J. Willet. 2011. Methods Matter. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, D., and C.G. Sibley. 2013. Through rose-colored glasses: system-justifying beliefs dampen the effects of relative deprivation on well-being and political mobilization. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 39 (8): 991–1004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, D., Y.J. Huo, and H.J. Smith. 2014. Organizational respect dampens the impact of group-based relative deprivation on willingness to protest pay cuts. British Journal of Social Psychology 54 (1): 159–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Passini, S. 2015a. Different ways of being authoritarian: the distinct effects of authoritarian dimensions on values and prejudice. Political Psychology. doi:10.1111/pops.12309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Passini, S. 2015b. Social relations, the financial crisis and human development. In Social Relations in Human and Societal Development, ed. C. Psaltis, A. Gillespie, and A. Perret-Clermont, 194–214. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, T.F. 2015. Samuel Stouffer and relative deprivation. Social Psychology Quarterly 78 (1): 7–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, T.F. 2016. In pursuit of three theories: authoritarianism, relative deprivation, and intergroup contact. Annual Review of Psychology 67 (1): 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, T.F., O. Christ, U. Wagner, R.W. Meertens, R. van Dick, and A. Zick. 2008. Relative deprivation and intergroup prejudice. Journal of Social Issues 64 (2): 385–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, T.F., and R.W. Meertens. 1995. Subtle and blatant prejudice in western europe. European Journal of Social Psychology 25 (1): 57–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rippl, S., and C. Seipel. 2012. Threat appraisal and authoritarianism in context: reactions to the European Union enlargement in border regions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 42 (11): 2758–2775.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runciman, W.G. 1966. Relative Deprivation and Social Justice: A Study of Attitudes to Social Inequality in Twentieth-Century England. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rustenbach, E. 2010. Sources of negative attitudes toward immigrants in Europe: A multi- level analysis. International Migration Review 44 (1): 53–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saucier, G. 2000. Isms and the structure of social attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 78 (2): 366–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M., J. Maes, and K.F. Widaman. 2010. Longitudinal Effects of egoistic and fraternal relative deprivation on well-being and protest. International Journal of Psychology 45 (2): 122–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, S.L. 2008. Anti-immigrant attitudes in Europe: outgroup size and perceived ethnic threat. European Sociological Review 24 (1): 53–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. 1998. Changing attitudes to sexual morality: A cross-national comparison. Sociology 32 (4): 815–845.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sibley, C.G., and J. Duckitt. 2008. Personality and prejudice: a meta-analysis and theoretical review. Personality and Social Psychology Review 12 (3): 248–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidanius, J., and F. Pratto. 1999. Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H.J., T. Cronin, and T. Kessler. 2008. Anger, fear, or sadness: faculty members’ emotional reactions to collective pay disadvantage. Political Psychology 29 (2): 221–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H.J., and D.J. Ortiz. 2002. Is it just me?: The different consequences of personal and group relative deprivation. In Relative Deprivation: Specification, Development and Integration, ed. I. Walker, and H.J. Smith, 91–118. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H.J., T.F. Pettigrew, G.M. Pippin, and S. Bialosiewicz. 2012. Relative deprivation: a theoretical and meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review 16 (3): 203–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark, O., and J.E. Taylor. 1989. Relative deprivation and international migration. Demography 26 (1): 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark, O., and S. Yitzhaki. 1988. Labour migration as a response to relative deprivation. Journal of Population Economics 1 (1): 57–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steenbergen, M.R., and B.S. Jones. 2002. Modeling multilevel data structures. American Journal of Political Science 46 (1): 218–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegmueller, D. 2013. How many countries for multilevel modeling? A comparison of Bayesian and frequentist approaches. American Journal of Political Science 57 (3): 748–761.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stenner, K. 2005. The Authoritarian Dynamic. London: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stouffer, S.A., E.A. Schuman, L.C. DeVinney, S.A. Star, and R.B. Williams. 1949. The American Soldier: Adjustment during Army Life, vol. 1. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H. 1974. Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information 13 (2): 65–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, M.C. 2002. Fraternal deprivation, collective threat, and racial resentment: perspectives on white racism. In Relative Deprivation: Specification, Development, and Integration, ed. I. Walker, and H.J. Smith, 13–43. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomsen, L., E. Green, and J. Sidanius. 2008. We will hunt them down: how social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism fuel ethnic persecution of immigrants in fundamentally different ways. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 44 (6): 1455–1464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Kessel, S. 2015. Populist Parties in Europe: Agents of Discontent?. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verkuyten, M., and L. Hagendoorn. 1998. Prejudice and self-categorization: The variable role of authoritarianism and in-group stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 24 (1): 99–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, I., and L. Mann. 1987. Unemployment, relative deprivation, and social protest. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 13 (2): 275–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, I., and T.F. Pettigrew. 1984. Relative deprivation theory: an overview and conceptual critique. British Journal of Social Psychology 23 (4): 301–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, B.E., and S. Ægisdóttir. 2000. The gender belief system, authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and heterosexuals’ attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Sex Roles 42 (11): 947–967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, B.E., and S.E. Lee. 2000. The relationship of authoritarianism and related constructs to attitudes toward homosexuality. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 30 (1): 144–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitson, J.A., A.D. Galinsky, and A.C. Kay. 2015. The emotional roots of conspiratorial perceptions, system justification, and belief in the paranormal. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 56 (1): 89–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamora-Kapoor, A., and M. Verea. 2014. ‘Public attitudes toward immigration in turbulent times. Migration Studies 2 (2): 131–134.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Politics, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK

    Barbara Yoxon

  2. University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany & Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas (CIDE), Ciudad de Mexico, Mexico

    Steven M. Van Hauwaert

  3. University of Siegen, Siegen, Germany

    Johanness Kiess

Authors
  1. Barbara Yoxon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steven M. Van Hauwaert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Johanness Kiess
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barbara Yoxon.

Appendix 1: Descriptive statistics and question wording

Appendix 1: Descriptive statistics and question wording

Dependent variables

Economic prejudice: Would you say it is generally bad or good for the COUNTRY’s economy that people come to live here from other countries? Please state your answer on this scale where 0 means ‘Bad’ and 10 means ‘Good’.

Cultural prejudice: Would you say that the COUNTRY’s cultural life is generally undermined or enriched by people coming to live here from other countries? Please state your answer on this scale where 0 means ‘Undermined’ and 10 means ‘Enriched’.

Independent variables

Social class: People often say that they belong to the working class, the middle class, upper class and so forth. Which of the following classes do you feel that you belong to? < 1 > Upper class < 2 > Upper middle class < 3 > Middle class < 4 > Lower middle class < 5 > Working class < 6 > Lower class.

Income: What is your household’s MONTHLY income, after tax and compulsory deductions, from all sources? If you don’t know the exact figure, please give your best estimate. Answer categories: 10 income brackets (in line with ESS categories).

The subjective deprivation variable is a combination of the following five items:

  • On a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means ‘Much worse’ and 10 means ‘Much better’, would you say that your own current standard of living is better or worse compared to your parents when they were your age?

  • On a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means ‘Much worse’ and 10 means ‘Much better’, would you say that the economic situation of your household now is better or worse to how it was 5 years ago?

  • On a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means ‘Much worse’ and 10 means ‘Much better’, would you say that the economic situation of your household now is better or worse than it was 12 months ago?

  • On a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means ‘Much worse’ and 10 means ‘Much better’, would you say that over the past year the state of the economy in COUNTRY has become…?

  • The living conditions among European countries differ quite a lot today, and we would like to get your personal evaluation. Please use the scale below, where 0 means ‘Very bad living conditions’ and 10 means ‘Very good living conditions’. Where on the scale do you place your country?

The authoritarian attitudes index is comprised of the following five statements (all coded on a 0–10 scale, with higher values indicating more authoritarian preferences):

  1. 1.

    A woman has to have children in order to be fulfilled | A woman can be fulfilled through her professional career. (reverse coded)

  2. 2.

    A woman who does not want to have a child should be allowed to have a free and safe abortion | Abortion should not be allowed in any case.

  3. 3.

    Children should be taught to obey authority | Children should be encouraged to have an independent judgment. (reverse coded)

  4. 4.

    People who break the law should get tougher sentence | Tougher sentences do not contribute to reduce criminality. (reverse coded)

  5. 5.

    Homosexual couples should be able to adopt children| Homosexual couples should not be allowed to adopt children under any circumstances.

Control variables (selection)

The economic left–right index is comprised of the following five statements (all coded on a 0–10 scale, with higher values indicating more economically liberal preferences):

  1. 1.

    Incomes should be made more equal | We need larger income differences as incentives.

  2. 2.

    People should take more responsibility to provide for themselves | The government should take more responsibility to ensure that everyone is provided for. (reverse coded)

  3. 3.

    People who are unemployed should have to take any job available or lose their unemployment benefits | People who are unemployed should have the right to refuse a job they do not want. (reverse coded)

  4. 4.

    Competition is good. It stimulates people to work hard and develop new ideas | Competition is harmful. It brings out the worst in people. (reverse coded)

  5. 5.

    Government should decrease taxes a lot and spend much less on social benefits and services | Government should increase taxes a lot and spend much more on social benefits and services. (reverse coded)

The internal political efficacy variable combines the following three items:

  • I consider myself well-qualified to participate in politics [1 = strongly disagree; 5 agree strongly]

  • I feel that I have a pretty good understanding of the important political issues facing the [COUNTRY] [1 = strongly disagree; 5 agree strongly]

  • I think that I am at least as well-informed about politics and government as most people [1 = strongly disagree; 5 agree strongly]

The external political efficacy variable combines the following three items:

  • Public officials don’t care much what people like me think [1 = strongly disagree; 5 agree strongly]

  • People like me don’t have any say about what government does [1 = strongly disagree; 5 agree strongly]

  • Sometimes politics and government seem so complicated that a person like me can’t really understand what’s going on [1 = strongly disagree; 5 agree strongly]

The political trust index is a combination of the trust in (1) national parliament, (2) politicians, (3) political parties, (4) the European Union, (5) trade unions, (6) the judicial system, (7) the police/the army, (8) the media, (9) national government, and (10) banks. All answer categories range from 0 (no trust) to 10 (complete trust).

Martial status: Which one of the following best describes your legal marital status now? < 1 > Never married or in legally registered civil union < 2 > Civil partnership/In a legally registered civil union < 3 > Legally separated < 4 > Legally divorced/civil union dissolved < 5 > Widowed/civil partner died < 6 > Legally married.

Subjective domicile: Which of the following best describes the area in which you live? < 1 > A big city < 2 > Suburbs or outskirts of big city < 3 > Town or small city < 4 > Country village < 5 > Farm or home in the country-side.

See Tables 4–12

Table 4 Descriptive statistics
Full size table
Table 5 Full model for economic anti-immigrant prejudice
Full size table
Table 6 Full model for cultural anti-immigrant prejudice
Full size table
Table 7 Full model for economic anti-immigrant prejudice, with interaction term
Full size table
Table 8 Full model for cultural anti-immigrant prejudice, with interaction term
Full size table
Table 9 Full model for economic anti-immigrant prejudice, with interaction term (authoritarian submission)
Full size table
Table 10 Full model for cultural anti-immigrant prejudice, with interaction term (authoritarian submission)
Full size table
Table 11 Full model for economic anti-immigrant prejudice, with interaction term (social conservatism)
Full size table
Table 12 Full model for economic anti-immigrant prejudice, with interaction term (social conservatism)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yoxon, B., Van Hauwaert, S.M. & Kiess, J. Picking on immigrants: a cross-national analysis of individual-level relative deprivation and authoritarianism as predictors of anti-foreign prejudice. Acta Polit 54, 479–520 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41269-017-0067-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41269-017-0067-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation