Cultural Competence

Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2011, pp. 300--313

This paper is part of an ASAP special collection on Social Psychology and Contemporary Immigration Policy

Economic Dynamics and Changes in Attitudes Toward Undocumented Mexican Immigrants in Arizona

Priscila Diaz,∗ Delia S. Saenz, and Virginia S.Y. Kwan Arizona State University

Mexican immigration to the United States comprises an important social issue in contemporary public policy debate, particularly given the recent passage of Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070 (SB 1070). The current study investigated how indi- viduals’ sentiments toward undocumented Mexican immigrants shifted between 2006 and 2009 in Arizona, and also examined economic concomitants to these shifts. Participants included 3,195 culturally diverse students attending a state university in Arizona. They reported their attitudes toward undocumented Mex- ican immigrants regarding housing, employment, values, social welfare, citizen- ship, health care, and education issues. Results show less-positive attitudes as each year progressed among European and Latino Americans, as well as other ethnic minorities. Further, anti-undocumented immigrant sentiment increased as unemployment increased and gross domestic product real growth rate decreased. Ethnic differences emerged in the relative negativity toward undocumented immi- grants such that European Americans were less positive towards undocumented Mexican immigrants than Latinos over 4 years. These findings suggest that eco- nomic dynamics may beget anti-immigrant sentiment, leading to contentious leg- islation, such as Arizona’s recent immigration law.

“America has constantly drawn strength and spirit from wave after wave of immigrants. . .They have proved to be the most restless, the most adventurous, the most innovative, the most industrious of people.” – Bill Clinton, 42nd U.S. President

Nearly all U.S. citizens have roots in other countries from which they, their parents, or one of their ancestors from 300 years ago departed with the intent

∗Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Priscila Diaz, Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287–1104 [e-mail: [email protected]].

We would like to thank the following for their feedback and contributions in preparing the manuscript: Anna Berlin, Andrea Fessler, Benjamin Lozada, Jose Alba, and Megan Leonhardt.

300

DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-2415.2011.01255.x C© 2011 The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues

Economic Dynamics and Changes in Attitudes 301

to make the United States their new home. Although immigration to the United States is historically integral to the development of the nation, as former president Bill Clinton highlighted, large-scale U.S. immigration has long been an unsettling issue for many, particularly when economic conditions have not favored increases in population (Glick, 2005). Today, it is possible that controversial political restric- tions have brewed in order to deflect dissatisfaction from the economic instability of American society.

Mexican immigration to the United States has been a pervasive social topic in public policy with the passing of Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070 (SB 1070; 2010). A shift has transpired across the nation, with a push for similar legislation from a number of immigration restrictionists who argue that states need to take care of what the federal government has failed to handle. By contrast, many social activists have protested the bill and related measures, warning that this is a first step toward apartheid (Archibold, 2010). Because of the potential to influence policy and legislative momentum, it is the focus of the present work to consider the social psychological roots that have led to the passage of this controversial immigration law.

Mexicans constitute 60% of the estimated 11.6 million undocumented im- migrants in the United States and represent the largest single immigrant group in Arizona (Hoefer, Rytina, & Baker, 2009). As this large group has become the focal point of discussion during the recent economic downturn, attitudes toward undocumented Mexican immigrants may increase in negativity and instigate new policies, such as Arizona’s recent immigration law.

In this article, we begin by briefly reviewing the U.S. history of opposition to immigrant groups and the current politics of immigration. Then, we discuss the literature on attitudes toward immigrants within the social psychological frame- work of intergroup relations. In an illustrative study, we examine how individuals in Arizona felt toward undocumented Mexican immigrants over the course of 4 years leading up to the passage of SB 1070 and how these attitudes are related to key economic factors. We conclude by discussing future research directions of our work, both in the context of the current contentious political climate and in terms of scholarly implications.

History of Opposition to Immigrant Groups in the United States

The debate on SB 1070 is not an issue isolated in time, but reflects one example of the complex reactions toward immigration in the United States. The pattern suggests that history repeats itself. Over the course of four centuries, tens of millions of immigrants from many countries comprise what the United States is today. The influx of numerous immigrants from various cultural back- grounds has, at times, presented challenges to the nation’s residents. A long history of oppression exists for some large immigrant groups partly because of

302 Diaz, Saenz, and Kwan

xenophobic reactions or desires to protect American cultural values. Moreover, newcomers are easy scapegoats during financial crisis.

The Irish Catholics were the first wave of immigrants that alarmed many Protestant, native-born Americans. In 1843, this antipathy initiated an influen- tial political group, the Know Nothings, who strongly opposed Irish immigration (Billington, 1963). This reaction was among the earliest examples of nativism, or the strong preference for favoring indigenous U.S. residents over incoming immi- grants. As nativism continued throughout generations, immigrants were often a chosen scapegoat for hard times (Glick, 2005). Blame was also put on Italian and Chinese immigrants during economic downturns. The industrial development of the United States sparked the need for cheap labor by means of recruiting foreign immigrants (Billington, 1963). A large number of contracted Italian laborers filled the spots of the U.S. workers on strike and, in turn, U.S. workers felt very nega- tively towards these Italian immigrants. During the gold rush period in California, many U.S. citizens complained in response to the small wave of Chinese immi- grants in the West brought in to fill the construction and railroad labor gap (Buck et al., 2003). Chinese immigrants created competition with those residing in the West and looking for gold. This competition soon turned Chinese immigrants into the targets of negative sentiment and instigated the only legislation that restricted immigration policy to a particular group, the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 (Buck et al., 2003). This restriction continued into the early 1920s. The United States only complicated immigration policy by setting quotas based on national origins (Zinn, 2003). This policy, the National Origins Act of 1921, essentially gave pref- erence to individuals from Northern and Western European nations. Before the turn of the century, the largely Irish and German immigrant population was slowly dominated by immigrants from Eastern and Southern European descent, including many Jews. The previous wave of Irish immigrants competed against the Jewish immigrants, which fragmented the working class (Zinn, 2003).

There is a pattern in U.S. history in which presence of economic competition is associated with greater negativity toward certain groups, even when immigration is not relevant. Between 1882 and 1930, for example, the number of lynchings in the Deep South increased as the price of cotton decreased, demonstrating that southern Whites singled out Blacks for the blame when they experienced a decline in financial well-being (Beck & Tolnay, 1990). Similarly, anti-immigration sentiment and extreme immigration policy may arise from the desire to blame outsiders for poor economic conditions. As demonstrated with immigrant and minority groups, attitudes as well as policy regulations are tied to economic competition.

Now in the early 21st century, the United States once again finds itself locked in a debate over the role of immigrants in America. To some, new immigrants seem too committed to maintaining their transnational connections, have not assimilated into American society, and are too removed from core American values. As in past eras, some critics of contemporary immigrants believe that the newcomers take

Economic Dynamics and Changes in Attitudes 303

jobs away from Americans and put undue burdens on the educational, welfare, and health care systems. Many participants in the debate consider a large number of illegal immigrants to pose a threat to the society’s basic structure and safety. However, there are advocates who point out that the initial concern and skepticism about every prior large influx of immigrants was not warranted (Williams, 2003). Immigrants did not lead to the demise of this country. Quite the contrary, supporters of immigration argue that immigrants have built the richness and diversity of the United States, which has contributed to the nation as a whole from colonial times to the present day.

Currently, public opinion polls show mixed attitudes over immigrants and immigration policy, particularly because of the inability for citizens to distinguish between documented and undocumented immigrants (Segovia & Defever, 2010). However, roughly half of Americans are greatly concerned about illegal immi- gration, and their concern has escalated since 2001 (Segovia & Defever, 2010). A majority of Americans believe that immigrants are hard workers, that they contribute to the United States, and that immigration is beneficial for the coun- try (Segovia & Defever, 2010). However, Americans do worry about the impact of costs due to use of public resources by immigrants, such as educational and medical services, as well as how immigrants drive wages down for many citizens (Segovia & Defever, 2010). The nation’s division and ambivalence in immigration opinion polls may reflect the difficulty of determining legal status of an immigrant. Because of this difficulty, proposals for everyone to carry national identification cards have been initiated since 1942, and nearly 66% of Americans approved of requiring some form of identification in 2001 (Segovia & Defever, 2010).

In April 2010, Arizona passed a new law requiring police to make an attempt during a “lawful stop, detention or arrest,” to determine a person’s immigration status if there is reasonable suspicion that he or she is illegal. The individual in question is not released without confirmation of his or her legal immigration status (SB 1070, 2010). A week after SB 1070 was announced, Arizona House Bill 2162 (2010) clarified that officials “may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution.” Both the U.S. and Arizona supreme courts have held in court cases that race alone is not a sufficient basis to stop or arrest. Nevertheless, race has been considered in courtroom decisions con- cerning immigration law, for example, “Mexican appearance is a relevant factor” (United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 1975) and “enforcement of immigration laws of- ten involves a relevant consideration of ethnic factors” (State v. Graciano, 1982). A number of individuals seeing that racial profiling may essentially be imple- mented began protests of the immigration law and boycotts of Arizona businesses (Thousands in Phoenix protest, 2010). As history repeats itself, it is imperative to understand how, over the years, attitudes towards certain immigrant groups have evolved.

304 Diaz, Saenz, and Kwan

Literature on Attitudes and Immigration

Attitudes toward immigrants and immigration policy have psychological un- derpinnings driven by social and environmental motives (Allport, 1954; Citrin, Green, Muste & Wong, 1997; Esses, Jackson & Armstrong, 1998). More specifi- cally, one facet of social, environmental motives in attitudes toward immigration is the role of intergroup competition and hostility. According to Allport (1954), categorizing people into groups is an adaptive function that simplifies our complex social world. We assign individuals in groups on the basis of shared characteristics and in doing so, gain information of the individual based on their group member- ships. Although a necessary strategy, this categorization leads to biases for our own group, or ingroup, and those not in our group, or outgroup (Tajfel, 1982). Generally, individuals in our ingroup generate positive feelings and outgroups may be viewed as inferior, leading to negative consequences such as ethnocentrism, prejudice, and discrimination (Allport, 1954).

This phenomenon, termed ingroup–outgroup bias (Brewer, 1979), is a prime determinant in the formation of most individuals’ attitudes toward immigrants. Along with this bias that favors one’s own group, the realistic threat theory posits that actual intergroup competition over scarce resources provokes conflict be- tween groups (Blalock, 1967). This conflict makes salient potential threats from the outgroup and, consequently, amplifies group protection mechanisms such as the formation of exclusionary, anti-outgroup attitudes. This pattern is determined by cognitively appraising events to have consequences for the ingroup (and the self), which in turn elicits explicit preferences for denying “individuals or groups of people equality of treatment which they may wish” (Allport, 1954, p. 51). Previous empirical research clearly supports the assumption that perceived real- istic threat increases anti-outgroup attitudes and increases unfavorable attitudes toward immigrant groups (Riek, Mania, & Gaertner, 2006; Stephan, Renfro, Esses, Stephan, & Martin, 2005).

Other researchers have considered broader contextual and environmental factors that foment negative outgroup attitudes. For instance, the size of the immigrant group is associated with greater perceived threat and more negative attitudes towards immigrants (Schlueter & Scheepers, 2010). Hostile stances to- ward immigrants are also influenced by the state of the economy (Citrin et al., 1997; Esses et al., 1998). The declining economy signals perceived competi- tion for resources. Perceived zero-sum competition between groups, or the be- lief that the outgroup gains at the expense of one’s ingroup, strongly influences negative attitudes toward immigrants (Esses et al., 1998). The media presen- tations of the success of immigrants in a difficult economic market can in- duce perceptions of competition with immigrants and, thus, lead to unfavorable immigration attitudes (Esses, Dovidio, Jackson, & Armstrong, 2001). This lit- erature also finds that personal financial circumstances are weaker predictors

Economic Dynamics and Changes in Attitudes 305

of opposition to immigration than broader concerns related to the state and national economic trends, and tax anxiety (Citrin et al., 1997). Surges in anti-immigrant sentiment in Europe have also coincided with economic decline (O’Connell, 2005) and high unemployment rates (Meuleman, Davidov, & Billiet, 2009).

Threats also vary depending on certain characteristics and elicited emotions of the outgroup (Cottrell & Neuberg, 2005). When comparing oneself with the outgroup, individuals who highlight similarities in work-related traits perceive greater realistic economic conflict and feel more negative toward Mexican im- migrants (Zarate, Garcia, Garza, & Hitlan, 2004). In other words, equivalent job skills produce greater prejudice. From a threat-based perspective, anger reactions toward Mexican immigrants relate to stricter immigration policy attitudes, above and beyond general prejudice (Cottrell, Richards & Nichols, 2010).

However, the Common Ingroup Identity Model (see Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000) predicts otherwise, particularly in cases where ethnic minorities share a “common identity” based on their immigrant background status, their minority status in the United States, or lack of being perceived as the American prototype (Dovidio, Gluszek, John, Ditlmann, & Lagunes, 2010). The American prototype prominently is known to be “White” and ethnic minorities are less likely to be associated with being American (Devos & Banaji, 2005). This pattern, in turn, may differentiate immigrants and ethnic group attitudes (rooted in shared social categories or interdependence between minorities) from the European American majority. Although the perceived realistic threat model would predict less favor- able attitudes toward immigrants, based on the common identity model, Latino Americans and other ethnic minorities may rather have more favorable attitudes toward immigrants due to a shared background.

Overall, the research cited above has strong implications for how these social and environmental conditions exacerbate anti-immigrant attitudes. Immigrants, who are socially perceived as outsiders, generally elicit hostile reactions from U.S. citizens as seen throughout history, opinion polls, and the empirical literature. Although these reactions have several determinants, one considerable factor is the idea that immigrants pose an economic threat, which creates intense emotions of fear and anxiety followed by strong negative sentiment. By and large, the empirical literature addresses how economic dynamics account for perceived realistic threat and some studies have addressed the specificity of perceptions of immigrant outgroups. Nevertheless, the literature has not addressed the dynamic influences of economic conditions on attitudes towards undocumented Mexican immigrants over time. Presented here is one illustrative study that will be the first to report data on attitudes toward this group by Arizona residents over the 4 years leading up to SB1070, a time characterized by an economic recession and high U.S. unemployment rates.

306 Diaz, Saenz, and Kwan

An Illustrative Study: Attitudes Toward Undocumented Mexican Immigrants

This study utilizes a unique design to investigate how individuals in Arizona felt toward undocumented Mexican immigrants over the past 4 years. Specifi- cally, we aim to address three questions. First, did attitudes toward undocumented Mexican immigrants change over time? Second, did different ethnic groups evince differential attitude patterns? Third, were there economic markers that were related to attitude change? To address these questions, we surveyed state university stu- dents in Arizona attending one fall semester of 2006, 2007, 2008, or 2009. Partic- ipants reported their feelings toward undocumented Mexicans regarding housing laws, employment, values, social welfare, citizenship, health care, and education. We predicted that attitudes toward undocumented Mexican immigrants would be- come less positive as national and statewide unemployment rates increased over the years. We also expected to see differential patterns among the different ethnic groups such that those most likely to share some attributes with undocumented immigrants (i.e., Latinos) would show less bias. Finally, we hypothesized that as yearly Gross Domestic Product (GDP) real growth rate decreased in the United States, positive attitudes would likewise decrease.

Method

Participants

Participants were 3,195 students (female = 1,632) attending a large state university in Arizona in the fall semester of 2006 (N = 743; women = 384), 2007 (N = 1,047; women = 529), 2008 (N = 740; women = 364), and 2009 (N = 665; women = 355). All students were recruited from introductory psychology classes in a mass testing questionnaire at the beginning of each fall semester. The sample consisted of 2,131 European Americans, 288 Latinos, and 776 other ethnic minorities (e.g., African American, Asian, Native American, Middle Eastern). Other ethnic minorities did not differ from each other in the key variables of interest and thus were combined into one group in the analyses to be reported. The age of participants ranged from 18 to 49 years old (M = 18.83).

Measures

Attitudes Toward Undocumented Mexican Immigrants. Originally developed by the first two authors, the 11-item scale assesses how participants feel toward cer- tain issues dealing with immigration, such as housing laws, employment, values, social welfare, citizenship, health care, and education [5-pt scales: 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree.]. Sample items were “All undocumented Mexican

Economic Dynamics and Changes in Attitudes 307

immigrants living in the United States should adopt the language and traditions of Americans” and a reverse coded item “Undocumented Mexican immigrants provide the United States with a valuable labor resource.” The alpha was .86, and the scale scores ranged from 11 to 51, with a mean of 27.36 (SD = 8.6); the higher the scores, the less positive the attitudes were. The distribution of the scale is slightly skewed towards the lower end of the scale, indicating that few participants reported strong negative attitudes toward this group. This relatively positive bias in attitudes may be attributable to the use of explicit measures in a large university classroom, where some individuals are reluctant to admit their negative attitudes toward a particular group. Sex differences may also contribute to the positivity of the attitudes. To address this possibility, we tested whether there are significant sex differences in the mean attitude scores. Our analyses showed that women reported more-positive attitudes than men (men = 28.09 vs. women = 26.67), F (1, 3175) = 21.57, p < .05. Importantly, the pattern of results for each of the following analyses remained the same when controlling for sex differences.

Economic Dynamics. National and state unemployment as well as GDP for each year (2006–2009) was used to assess the fiscal state. These indices were taken from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analyses (BEA) Factbook (2010) and from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Factbook (2010).

Results

A 4 × 3 time (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009) by ethnicity (European American, Latino, Other) between-subjects ANOVA was conducted to test the hypotheses. In line with predictions, there was a main effect of time, F (3, 3,183) = 300.31, p < .001 and a main effect of ethnicity, F (2, 3,183) = 126.58, p < .001, with no significant interaction, F (6, 3,183) = .76, p > .05 (see Figure 1). A Games–Howell post hoc analysis with an alpha level of .05 for each analysis was conducted for both time and ethnicity.

Six pair wise comparisons over time showed no significant mean difference between 2006 (M = 23.32) and 2007 (M = 23.53, p > .05), between 2006 and 2008 (M = 23.7, p > .05) or between 2007 and 2008. However, there was a significant mean difference between 2006 and 2009 (M = 32.57, p < .001) with less-positive attitudes in the year 2009. Further, the remaining two pair wise comparisons between 2007 and 2009, as well as between 2008 and 2009, were significantly different from each other (p < .001). Together, these findings suggest that attitude shifts towards undocumented Mexican immigrants became less positive and were particularly pronounced from fall 2008 to fall 2009.

Did ethnic groups show different attitudes toward undocumented Mexican immigrants? Pair wise comparisons across the different ethnic groups showed that less-positive attitudes towards undocumented Mexican immigrants were

308 Diaz, Saenz, and Kwan

Fig. 1. Attitudes Toward Undocumented Mexican Immigrants by Ethnic Group and Year.

significantly greater overall for European American participants (M = 28.69, p < .001) than for Other (M = 25.85, p < .001) or Latino (M = 22.56, p < .001) participants. Participants from Other ethnic minority groups, further, showed less positivity toward undocumented Mexican immigrants than Latino participants (p < .001). Notably, all ethnic groups showed a similar pattern of decrease in positive attitudes as years progressed (Figure 1).

To address the relationships between economic conditions and attitudes to- ward undocumented Mexican immigrants, we examined bivariate correlations among relevant variables (GDP, national and state unemployment, attitudes to- ward undocumented Mexican immigrants). As predicted, as GDP real growth rate decreased, participants had less positive attitudes towards undocumented Mexican immigrants (r = –.41, p < .001). Also as predicted, negative bias was positively correlated with national unemployment rates (r = .48, p < .001) and statewide unemployment rates (r = .44, p < .001), indicating that as unemployment in- creased, participants had less-positive attitudes towards undocumented Mexican immigrants. These correlations were consistent across ethnic groups, whether considered independently or in combination.

To examine the relative contribution of resource threat to nonresource threat in the changing attitudes toward undocumented immigrants, we compared the

Economic Dynamics and Changes in Attitudes 309

Table 1. Mean Correlations Between Attitudes Toward Undocumented Mexican Immigrants and Economic Factors

GDP real National State Measures growth rate unemployment unemployment

All 11 items of the attitudes toward Mexican immigrants scale

−.41∗∗ .48∗∗ .44∗∗

Five resource-related items from the attitudes toward Mexican immigrants scale

−.44∗∗ .50∗∗ .47∗∗

Six nonresource-related items from the attitudes toward Mexican immigrants scale

−.33∗∗ .41∗∗ .37∗∗

∗∗ Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level.

mean correlations of the five attitude items relating specifically with resources (labor, welfare, health care, education) and the mean correlations of the six items relating to cultural assimilation or equal rights. As can be seen in Table 1, the mean correlations for items dealing with resource threat are significantly higher with the three indicators of economic conditions than those for items that do not involve resource threat (p’s < .05) (as calculated by Preacher, 2002). This indicates attitudes specifically regarding the resources taken and given by undocumented Mexican immigrants strongly relate to the fluctuations in the economy. These findings suggest that current economic conditions may be one of possibly multiple factors that lead to the less-positive sentiments against undocumented immigrants.

Discussion

This illustrative study is the first to document the parallels between a growing economic crisis over a recent 4-year period and attitude shifts toward a specific, controversial immigrant group in Arizona, where SB 1070 was passed. As years progressed closer to 2010, positive attitudes toward undocumented Mexican immi- grants decreased for all ethnic groups. This decreased positivity was significantly pronounced between the fall of 2008 and the fall of 2009, the latter of which was related to a marked decline in the economy, generally, and a severe housing crisis in Arizona, in particular. As local and national unemployment rates increased and GDP real growth rate decreased (particularly in 2009), attitudes also increased in relative negativity. Also noteworthy is the fact that attitudes remained relatively constant as the economy slowly declined from 2006 to 2008, but a strong shift occurred when a national recession was declared after fall of 2008. These find- ings illustrate a manner in which immigrants may become scapegoats of social discontent and thus be seen as potential usurpers of governmental and private resources.

Consistent with past empirical literature that has examined economic fac- tors and anti-immigrant sentiment, these findings theoretically substantiate that

310 Diaz, Saenz, and Kwan

perceived economic threat is associated with less-positive immigration attitudes (Citrin et al., 1997; Esses et al., 1998; Riek et al., 2006; Stephan et al., 2005). The current work extends previous findings to a specific immigrant subgroup that may be seen as posing a threat for individuals residing in Arizona. As jobs are restricted and individuals experience financial losses due to the state of the economy, indi- viduals will be less likely to want to share resources and will have less-favorable feelings toward a group that may pose a threat (Stephan et al., 2005). Thus, shifts in decreased positivity toward a large immigrant group may be the impetus for policies concerning immigration.

Although positive attitudes decreased for all ethnic groups over time, there were significant mean differences. Compared to other ethnic groups, Latinos showed more-positive attitudes toward undocumented Mexican immigrants. The recent, July 2010, CNN opinion research poll inquiring about endorsement views on the new SB 1070 bill parallels the current findings. A great majority of Latinos (71%) reported opposition to the bill. By comparison, 50% of African American and 34% of European American respondents did so. The ingroup–outgroup bias accounts for the interesting pattern of mean differences, substantiating the role of ethnicity in determining citizens’ attitudes toward a specific group of undoc- umented immigrants. The ingroup–outgroup bias explains how Latinos are more likely to see undocumented Mexican immigrants as part of their ingroup on the basis of their culture of origin, whereas other ethnic groups may not share this identification (De La Garza, 1998).

As the ingroup–outgroup bias and the common identity model would predict, European Americans show a less positive attitude than other ethnic minorities, perhaps based on a magnified sense of not identifying commonalities with the outgroup (e.g., nationality, language, racial distinctions, less contact). Research on policy indicates that Latinos are less likely to endorse immigration policy than European Americans, such as 1994 California Proposition 187, which eliminates illegal immigrants from any type of social service (e.g., education, emergency medical care, welfare) and requires teachers, enforcement officers, and welfare officials to report illegal immigrants for deportation (Lee Ottati, & Hussain, 2001; Lee & Ottati, 2002). Latinos and other ethnic minorities may have greater sym- pathy with Mexican immigrants as a result of a shared background, whereas European Americans may not evaluate this group as favorably because of lack of shared identity. Overall, the current results have implications for considering the relevant social and environmental psychological determinants in immigration policy.

Although our study focuses on the relationships between economic dynamics and attitudes toward undocumented immigrants, other concerns about social and cultural issues may also contribute to the changes in attitudes. For example, the radical rightward movement pressed on by the Tea Party after the 2008 presi- dential elections, and even health concerns, such as H1N1 (also termed Mexican

Economic Dynamics and Changes in Attitudes 311

swine flu; Sunnucks, 2009), occurred during the same period of time and may have contributed to the increase in negative sentiment against undocumented immigrant between 2008 and 2009.

Furthermore, the media has focused on immigration during these past few years, making salient this target outgroup and, perhaps, contributing to decreases in positivity towards immigrants. In particular, use of certain linguistic terms might have intensified the negative sentiments against this group. “Undocumented worker” (similar to the “undocumented immigrant” term used in the current study), for example, has been found to invoke less perception of threat and prejudice than the term “illegal alien” (Pearson, 2010). The latter term is associated with greater perception of realistic and symbolic threat. This issue has been highlighted in the arena of term usage in media, particularly with the presentation of SB 1070. Future studies (and political rhetoric) should take into consideration the specific terminology used and how different labels may elicit different emotions and varying levels of hostility/acceptance.

As immigration issues continue to be heightened by economic anxieties, it is critical to recognize that Americans may be adding yet another group to the database of scapegoats in this country’s immigration historical record. Economic struggles may once again instigate staunch anti-immigrant sentiment, which in turn may prompt the creation of laws that pin the evils of society on a low power outgroup—undocumented immigrants. It is imperative for researchers to continue building an understanding of the social and environmental determinants of opposition to groups and individuals whom our former president Bill Clinton regarded as the “strength and spirit” of America.

References

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Archibold, R. C. (2010, April 23). Arizona enacts stringent law on immigration. The New York

Times. Retrieved on September 28, 2010 from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/24/us/politics/ 24immig.html?_r=1.

Arizona Senate Bill 1070, S. 1070, 49th Legislature, 2nd Sess. (2010). Arizona House Bill 2162, H. 2162, 49th Legislature, 2nd Sess. (2010). Beck, E.M., & Tolnay, S.E. (1990). The killing fields of the deep South: The market for cotton and the

lynching of Blacks, 1882–1930. American Sociological Review, 55, 526–539. Billington, R. A. (1963). The Protestant Crusade, 1800–1860: A Study of the Origins of American

Nativism, Gloucester, Mass.: Peter Smith. Blalock, H. (1967). Toward a theory of minority-group relations. New York: Wiley. Brewer, M. B. (1979). Ingroup bias in the minimal intergroup situations: A cognitive motivational

analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307–324. Buck, B., Hobbs, M., Kaiser, A., Lang., S., Montero, D., Romines, K., & Scott, T., (2003). Immigration

and immigrants: Trends in American public opinion, 1964–1999. Journal of Ethnic & Cultural Diversity in Social Work, 12, 73–90.

Citrin, J., Green, D., Muste, C., & Wong, C. (1997). Public Opinion Toward Immigration Reform: The Role of Economic Motivation. The Journal of Politics, 59, 858–881.

CNN opinion research poll (2010, July). Retrieved on September 28, 2010 from http:// politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/27/cnnopinion-research-poll-july-16–21-arizona-law/.

312 Diaz, Saenz, and Kwan

Cottrell, C. A., & Neuberg, S. L. (2005). Different emotional reactions to different groups: A socio- functional threat-based approach to ‘prejudice.’ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 770–789.

Cottrell, C. A., Richards, D. A. R., & Nichols, A. L. (2010). Predicting policy attitudes from general prejudice versus specific intergroup emotions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 247–254.

De la Garza, R.O. (1998). Interests Not Passions: Mexican-American Attitudes toward Mexico, Immigration from Mexico, and Other Issues Shaping U.S.-Mexico Relations. International Migration Review, 32, 401–422.

Devos, T., & Banaji, M. (2005). American = White? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 447–466.

Dovidio, J. F., Gluszek, A., John, M., Ditlmann, R., & Lagunes, P. (2010). Understanding bias toward Latinos: Discrimination, dimensions of difference, and experiences of exclusion. Journal of Social Issues, 66, 59–78.

Esses, V. M., Jackson, L. M., & Armstrong, T. L. (1998). Intergroup competition and attitudes toward immigrants and immigration: An instrumental model of group conflict. Journal of Social Issues, 54, 699–724.

Esses, V. M., Dovidio, J. F., Jackson, L. M. & Armstrong, T. L. (2001). The immigration dilemma: The role of perceived group competition, ethnic prejudice, and national identity. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 389–412.

Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.

Glick, P. (2005). Choice of scapegoats. In J. F. Dovidio, P. Glick, & L. A. Rudman (Eds.). On the nature of prejudice: 50 years after Allport (pp. 244–261). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Hoefer, M., Rytina, N., & Baker, B. C. (2009). Estimates of the unauthorized immigrant population residing in the United States: January 2008. Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security Office of Immigration Statistics.

Lee, Y. T., & Ottati, V. (2002). Attitudes toward U.S. immigration policy: The roles of in-group- out-group bias, economic concern, and obedience to law. Journal of Social Psychology, 142, 617–634.

Lee, Y. T., Ottati, V., & Hussain, I. (2001). Attitudes towards Illegal Immigration into the United States: California Proposition 187. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 23, 430–443.

Meuleman, B., Davidov, E., & Billiet, J. (2009). Changing attitudes toward immigration in Europe, 2002–2007: A dynamic group conflict theory approach. Social Science Research, 38, 352–365.

O’Connell, M. (2005). Economic forces and anti-immigrant attitudes in Western Europe: A paradox in search of an explanation. Patterns of Prejudice, 39, 60–74.

Preacher, K. J. (2002, May). Calculation for the test of the difference between two independent correlation coefficients [Computer software]. Available from http://quantpsy.org.

Pearson, M.R. (2010). How “undocumented workers” and “illegal aliens” affect prejudice toward Mexican immigrants. Social Influence, 5, 118–132.

Riek, B. M., Mania, E.W., & Gaertner, S. L. (2006). Intergroup threat and outgroup attitudes: A meta analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 336–353.

Schlueter, E. & Scheepers, P. (2010). The relationship between outgroup size and anti-outgroup attitudes: A theoretical synthesis and empirical test of group threat and intergroup contact theory, Social Science Research, 39, 285–295.

Segovia F., & Defever R. (2010). American public opinion on immigrants and immigration policy, Public Opinion Quarterly, 74, 375–394.

State v. Graciano, 653 P.2d 683, 687 n.7 (Ariz. 1982). Stephan, W., Renfro, C., Esses, V. M., Stephan, C., & Martin, T. (2005). The effects of feeling threatened

on attitudes towards immigrants. International Journal of Intercultural relations,29, 1–19. Sunnucks, M. (2009, April 24). Health officials caution about Mexican swine flu. Phoenix Business

Journal. http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/04/20/daily81.html. Tajfel, H. (1982). Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University

Press.

Economic Dynamics and Changes in Attitudes 313

Thousands in Phoenix protest against SB 1070, thousands of SB 1070 supporters rally in Tempe (2010, May 29). KVOA.com. Retrieved March 9, 2010, from http://www.kvoa.com/news/thousands- in-phoenix-protest-against-sb-1070-thousands-of-sb-1070-supporters-rally-in-tempe/.

United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 886–87 (1975). U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Factbook (2010). Retrieved September 28, 2010, from

http://www.bls.gov/lau/home.htm. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analyses (BEA) Factbook (2010). Retrieved September 28, 2010, from

http://www.bea.gov/national/index.htm#gdp. Williams, M.E. (2003). Immigration: Opposing view points. San Diego: Greenhaven Press. Zarate, M. A., Garcia, B., Garza, A. A., & Hitlan, R. T. (2004). Cultural threat and perceived realistic

group conflict as dual predictors of prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 99–105.

Zinn, H. (2003). A people’s history of the United States. New York: Harper Colophon.

PRISCILA DIAZ is a NIMH Prevention Research Training Fellow in the De- partment of Psychology at Arizona State University. She is a 2006–2007 APA Minority Fellowship recipient and a 2007–2010 NSF Graduate Research Fellow- ship recipient. Her main research interests include intergroup attitudes, and the societal and intrapersonal challenges facing minority and immigrant groups.

DELIA S. SAENZ is a professor in the Social Psychology program at Arizona State University. She received her training at Princeton University and taught at the University of Notre Dame prior to her current appointment. Her research interests include tokenism, intergroup processes, acculturation, and social identity. Her work, funded by the National Science Foundation, NIMH, and the Ford Foundation, has been published in the Journal of Personality & Social Psychology; the Journal of Experimental Psychology; Social Cognition; and Developmental Psychology. She currently serves as Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education at ASU.

VIRGINIA S. Y. KWAN, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Psychology at Arizona State University. Social perception at multiple levels—self-perception, interpersonal perception, and group perception—is central to her work. One of her research programs examines how self-perception processes and individuation help capitalize on the value of diversity on group performance. Another aim of her research is to examine the content of Asian-American stereotypes and to identify factors that help to break the persistence of these stereotypes. A key feature of her work is the integrative use of multiple methods and diverse samples.

Copyright of Analyses of Social Issues & Public Policy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may

not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written

permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.