Why is immigration important to you? A revisit to public issue salience and elite cues

Soyeon Jin
{"title":"Why is immigration important to you? A revisit to public issue salience and elite cues","authors":"Soyeon Jin","doi":"10.1111/1475-6765.12708","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Extensive media coverage of immigration, that is, media salience, has been thought to heighten anti‐immigrant attitudes among native‐born citizens by creating an information environment that portrays immigration as society's greatest problem. However, past empirical findings on the relationship between media salience and anti‐immigrant attitudes have been mixed. Some studies have observed that media salience increases hostility towards immigrants, while others have found it has no significant influence. This study investigates the underlying reasons for these inconsistent findings and demonstrates the need to revisit the meaning of issue importance. It employs the concept of public issue salience, the perception that immigration is the most important problem or concern about immigration, to find evidence. It argues that when the immigrant issue is a pivotal point of political competition, the immigration issue signals conflicts, connoting negativity so public issue salience and anti‐immigrant attitudes are closely related. On the other hand, in an environment where political elites reach a consensus, the immigration issue remains neutral so that they can be disentangled. The scope of media salience changes accordingly as well. This study chooses the United Kingdom and Germany for comparative research due to their similarities in immigration histories and the success of far‐right parties as well as differences in their major political parties' reactions to the issue. I match individual‐level longitudinal survey data to media article data and find clear country differences. In the United Kingdom, where political parties are polarized over the issue, public issue salience and anti‐immigrant attitudes are closely related so that media salience heightens them. In Germany, where political elites across different ideologies hold welcoming stances, their relationship is moderate. Media salience merely increases the perceived importance and does not increase anti‐immigrant attitudes. Contributions and implications are discussed with respect to political elites' role.","PeriodicalId":507837,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Political Research","volume":"53 36","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Political Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12708","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Extensive media coverage of immigration, that is, media salience, has been thought to heighten anti‐immigrant attitudes among native‐born citizens by creating an information environment that portrays immigration as society's greatest problem. However, past empirical findings on the relationship between media salience and anti‐immigrant attitudes have been mixed. Some studies have observed that media salience increases hostility towards immigrants, while others have found it has no significant influence. This study investigates the underlying reasons for these inconsistent findings and demonstrates the need to revisit the meaning of issue importance. It employs the concept of public issue salience, the perception that immigration is the most important problem or concern about immigration, to find evidence. It argues that when the immigrant issue is a pivotal point of political competition, the immigration issue signals conflicts, connoting negativity so public issue salience and anti‐immigrant attitudes are closely related. On the other hand, in an environment where political elites reach a consensus, the immigration issue remains neutral so that they can be disentangled. The scope of media salience changes accordingly as well. This study chooses the United Kingdom and Germany for comparative research due to their similarities in immigration histories and the success of far‐right parties as well as differences in their major political parties' reactions to the issue. I match individual‐level longitudinal survey data to media article data and find clear country differences. In the United Kingdom, where political parties are polarized over the issue, public issue salience and anti‐immigrant attitudes are closely related so that media salience heightens them. In Germany, where political elites across different ideologies hold welcoming stances, their relationship is moderate. Media salience merely increases the perceived importance and does not increase anti‐immigrant attitudes. Contributions and implications are discussed with respect to political elites' role.
为什么移民对您很重要?重新审视公共问题的突出性和精英线索
人们认为,媒体对移民的广泛报道(即媒体突出性)会营造一种将移民描绘成社会最大问题的信息环境,从而加剧本地出生公民的反移民态度。然而,过去关于媒体显著性与反移民态度之间关系的实证研究结果不一。一些研究发现,媒体的显著性会增加对移民的敌意,而另一些研究则发现媒体的显著性并没有显著影响。本研究探讨了这些不一致结论的根本原因,并表明有必要重新审视问题重要性的含义。它采用了公共问题突出性的概念,即认为移民是最重要的问题或对移民的关注,来寻找证据。研究认为,当移民问题成为政治竞争的关键点时,移民问题就会成为冲突的信号,意味着消极,因此公共问题突出性与反移民态度密切相关。另一方面,在政治精英达成共识的环境中,移民问题保持中立,从而可以将两者区分开来。媒体显著性的范围也相应发生变化。本研究选择英国和德国作为比较研究的对象,是因为这两个国家在移民历史和极右翼政党的成功方面具有相似性,同时两国主要政党对移民问题的反应也存在差异。我将个人层面的纵向调查数据与媒体文章数据相匹配,发现了明显的国家差异。在英国,各政党在这一问题上呈两极分化,公共问题的突出性与反移民态度密切相关,因此媒体的突出性加剧了两者的关系。而在德国,不同意识形态的政治精英都持欢迎态度,两者的关系则比较温和。媒体的显著性只是增加了人们感知到的重要性,并没有增加反移民态度。本文讨论了政治精英作用的贡献和影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信