The influence of societal values on attitudes towards immigration
| Author | Gizem Arikan,Pazit Ben-Nun Bloom |
| Published date | 01 March 2013 |
| Date | 01 March 2013 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0192512111411210 |
Article
International Political Science Review
34(2) 210–226
© The Author(s) 2012
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0192512111411210
ips.sagepub.com
Corresponding author:
Gizem Arikan, Department of International Relations, Yasar University, Izmir, Turkey.
Email: gizem.arikan@yasar.edu.tr
The influence of societal values on
attitudes towards immigration
Gizem Arikan
Pazit Ben-Nun Bloom
Abstract
This paper examines the influence of societal values on individual attitudes towards immigration and
immigrants. We argue that conflict between individual and societal values leads individuals to be exposed
to frames and opinions that are contrary to their values, evokes competing considerations and creates
attitudinal ambivalence and volatility. To evade ambivalence, individuals whose values are in conflict with
those of their society rely less on their core values to construct their attitudes. Using data from the
first wave of European Social Surveys and relying on Heteroskedastic Maximum Likelihood Regression,
we test our argument simultaneously for 18 European countries and show that deviations from society’s
conservation and self-transcendence values lead to greater ambivalence in attitudes towards immigration
and immigrants. Our results provide evidence of the importance of the social context and society’s shared
values in influencing personal political attitudes and judgments.
Keywords
ambivalence, attitudes towards immigration, Heteroskedastic Maximum Likelihood Regression, societal
values, values
Introduction
Scholars of the Columbia School have consistently stressed the crucial role of social context and
‘cross pressures’ on political attitudes and behavior (e.g. Berelson et al., 1954; Lazarsfeld et al.,
1944). Diverse social environments provide various countervailing positions, expose people to
both sides of the argument, and thus make them less confident and more ambivalent in their atti-
tudes (e.g. Ben-Nun Bloom and Levitan, 2011; Berelson et al., 1954; Huckfeldt, Johnson et al., 2004;
Huckfeldt, Mendez et al., 2004; Lazarsfeld et al., 1944; Levitan and Visser, 2009; Mutz, 2006;
Visser and Mirabile, 2004). Regardless of persuasive empirical demonstrations of the effects of
Arikan and Ben-Nun Bloom 211
social context on public opinion, most attempts to explain political attitudes focus on personal
motivations without considering their interaction with societal pressures and cues.
This is no different for the study of values and attitudes towards immigration and immigrants.
Plenty of examples demonstrate the influence of values on the European immigration debate and
the role of public opinion in influencing immigration policies (Lahav, 2004a, 2004b). These
include Switzerland’s 2009 minaret ban referendum, in which campaigns connected the construc-
tion of mosques with the oppression of Muslim females; European immigration authorities
actively enforcing migrants’ rights; and France’s cabinet examining a draft bill that imposes
prison sentences on men who force their wives to wear a burka. Indeed, research has established
the crucial role played by the core values of conservation and self-transcendence on attitudes
towards immigration (Davidov et al., 2008; Sagiv and Schwartz, 1995; Schwartz, 2007). On the
other hand, most works largely ignore the effect of societal pressures on individual preferences in
immigration policies.
In this paper we intend to fill this gap. We argue that societal values influence issue frames,
political discourses, and public debate, which are generally known to individuals through social
interactions and the consumption of mass media. When personal values and social influences that
reflect a society’s values are compatible, core values function as important guides for the construc-
tion of political attitudes. However, when there is tension between individual values and the values
of a broader social environment, individuals are exposed to frames, ideas, and opinions that offer
competing considerations. This leads them to experience greater ambivalence, which, in turn,
results in more volatile attitudes. Since people are also inclined to seek consistency and stability in
their belief structure (Eagly and Chaiken, 1993), they prefer to avoid being guided by values that
induce ambivalence and uncertainty. Accordingly, increasing conflict between private and societal
values leads to less reliance on values during the process of attitude formation when compared with
a state of congruency between personal and societal values.
To test our hypotheses, we rely on Heteroskedastic Maximum Likelihood (ML) estimation,
which models the error variance of three regression models that predict attitudes towards immigra-
tion. Using data from European Social Surveys, we test our argument simultaneously for eighteen
European countries and demonstrate that as individuals increasingly deviate from society’s conser-
vation and self-transcendence values, they experience more ambivalence in their attitudes towards
immigrants and support for immigration, as indicated by the increased error variance in the
Heteroskedastic ML model. Second, we show that the well-established effect of conservation and
self-transcendence values on immigration attitudes is contingent on the congruence of personal and
societal values; as tension between privately held and societal values increases, the effect of core
values on immigration attitudes decreases.
This paper’s findings stress the dynamic interactions that exist between individual level attitude
formation and the broader societal environment. Our attitudes are shaped not only by our own
values and our societal climate, but also by the congruency between the two. By studying the role
of social context in political attitude formation, this paper offers a fuller and more multilayered
picture of comparative public opinion.
Value-driven ambivalence
In contrast to past conceptualizations of political attitudes, which regarded attitudes as objects
saved in memory, current literature in political psychology claims that attitudes are constructed on
the spot at the moment of appraisal. This makes attitudes vulnerable to the environment in which
opinion is created (e.g. Barsalou, 1987; Zaller, 1992; Zaller and Feldman, 1992). According to this
To continue reading
Request your trial