Need for closure effect on collective action intentions and behavior toward immigrants in Italy: The mediation of binding foundations and political conservatism

Why are people (de)motivated to mobilize in favor of immigrants? Addressing this question, we investigated the role of individuals' epistemic motivation (i.e., need for closure) in influencing the process of becoming motivated to participate in collective action in favor of immigrants in Italy. Specifically, the mediational role of binding moral foundations and political conservatism in explaining the relationship between need for closure and collective action in favor of immigrants was examined in three studies. It was hypothesized that a heightened need for closure would be indirectly and negatively associated with collective action in favor of immigrants, sequentially mediated first through binding moral foundations and then political conservatism. We found support for this prediction when either dispositional measure (Study 1 and Study 2) or an experimental induction (Study 3) of need for closure were used, and when both collective action intentions (Study 1 and Study 3) and behavior (Study 2) were assessed. The results suggest that need for closure constitutes a powerful motivational force that leads individuals to engage in uncertainty‐reducing evaluations and actions. We discuss these results regarding how they are related with previous work and their implications for research and practice.     

Moral Foundations Theory and the Psychology of Charitable Giving

Moral foundations theory proposes that intuitions about what is morally right or wrong rest upon a set of universal foundations. Although this theory has generated a recent surge of research, few studies have investigated the real-world moral consequences of the postulated moral intuitions. We show that they are predictably associated with an important type of moral behaviour. Stronger individualizing intuitions (fairness and harm prevention) and weaker binding intuitions (loyalty, authority, and sanctity) were associated with the willingness to comply with a request to volunteer for charity and with the amount of self-reported donations to charity organizations. Among participants who complied with the request, individualizing intuitions predicted the allocation of donations to causes that benefit out-groups, whereas binding intuitions predicted the allocation of donations to causes that benefit the in-group. The associations between moral foundations and self-report measures of allocations in a hypothetical dilemma and concern with helping in-group and out-group victims were similar. Moral foundations predicted charitable giving over and above effects of political ideology, religiosity, and demographics, although variables within these categories also exhibited unique effects on charitable giving and accounted for a portion of the relationship between moral foundations and charitable giving. © 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology     

Attitudes Toward Immigration: The Role of Personal Predispositions

This article examines if deep‐seated psychological differences add to the explanation of attitudes toward immigration. We explore whether the Big Five personality traits matter for immigration attitudes beyond the traditional situational factors of economic and cultural threat and analyze how individuals with different personalities react when confronted with the same situational triggers. Using a Danish survey experiment, we show that different personality traits have different effects on opposition toward immigration. We find that Openness has an unconditional effect on attitudes toward immigration: scoring higher on this trait implies a greater willingness to admit immigrants. Moreover, individuals react differently to economic threat depending on their score on the traits Agreeableness and Conscientiousness. Specifically, individuals scoring low on Agreeableness and individuals scoring high on Conscientiousness are more sensitive to the skill level of immigrants. The results imply that personality is important for attitudes toward immigration, and in the conclusion, we further discuss how the observed conditional and unconditional effects of personality make sense theoretically.     

Empathy and humanitarianism predict preferential moral responsiveness to in-groups and out-groups

ABSTRACT

The current research tests whether empathy—sharing others’ emotions—and humanitarianism—recognizing the moral worth of all people—each predict moral responsiveness toward others but in ways that favor in-groups and out-groups, respectively. In Studies 1 and 2, empathy and humanitarianism differentially predicted preferential moral concern for in-groups and out-groups. In Study 3, humanitarianism predicted lower in-group-targeted prosociality and greater out-group prosociality. In Study 4, empathy and humanitarianism predicted perceived moral obligation to in-groups and out-groups respectively. In Study 5, out-group obligation mediated between humanitarianism and allocations to out-group charities, and in-group obligation mediated between empathy and one of two in-group charities. In sum, empathy and humanitarianism are associated with preferential morality via group-based obligation, suggesting that morality could be extended by altering empathy, humanitarianism, or group processes.     

Crossing the Border: Latino Attitudes Toward Immigration Policy

In the midst of the ongoing and highly polarized immigration debate, it seems that little attention has been paid to how Latinos view efforts to address the issues of undocumented immigrants residing in the United States and enhanced enforcement efforts along the U.S.–Mexico border. Consequently, questions arise as to the degree of support for or rejection of such measures within the Latino community and among the various segments of that community. Do U.S.-born Latinos, foreign-born naturalized citizens, and undocumented immigrants from various parts of Latin America have similar or divergent views on these issues? It is generally assumed that ethnicity is an important factor in influencing attitudes toward immigrants and immigration policies. Some studies have found that foreign-born Latinos have more positive attitudes toward immigration than native-born Latinos due in part to their shared immigration experience. There are, however, other studies demonstrating that Latino immigrants have often expressed support for more restrictive immigration policies. It may hold true, in fact, that many Latinos have ambiguous and conflicting attitudes about these issues. This article will try to shed some light on Latinos’ attitudes regarding specific policy measures by analyzing data from the Pew Hispanic Center National Survey of Latinos, which allows for considerable differentiation among various sectors of the Latino population.     

Opening closed minds: the combined effects of intergroup contact and need for closure on prejudice

Five studies tested whether need for closure (NFC) moderates the relation between intergroup contact and prejudice toward immigrants. The results consistently showed that intergroup contact was more strongly associated with reduced levels of prejudice among people high in NFC compared to people low in NFC. Studies 1 (N = 138 students) and 2 (N = 294 adults) demonstrated this moderator effect on subtle, modern, and blatant racism. Study 2 also replicated the moderator effect for extended contact. An experimental field study (Study 3; N = 60 students) provided evidence of the causal direction of the moderator effect. Finally, Studies 4 (N = 125 students) and 5 (N = 135 adults) identified intergroup anxiety as the mediator through which the moderator effect influences modern and blatant racism as well as hostile tendencies toward immigrants. The role of motivated cognition in the relation between intergroup contact and prejudice is discussed.     

Talent for Citizenship and the American Dream: the USA as Outlier in the Global Race for Talent

The failed 2007 US Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (CIRA) included a “points-based system,” a proposal to shift toward supply-driven, merit-based selection. In an intensely polemic environment, this largely Republican initiative was opposed strongly by Democrats who argued that skill-based selection would weaken the traditional moral foundation of the USA, enshrined in its policy of family reunification. Through critical discourse analysis of policy documents and political rhetoric on the floor of the Senate during the CIRA debate, I explore the complexity of the relationship between neoliberalism, race, and immigration policy in the USA. I argue that the points-based system, which would severely disadvantage immigrants from the global south, became a foil for talk about Latino migration. The CIRA debate demonstrates the conflict in the USA between a need for (unskilled) labor and a nation-building project that excludes Latino migrants.     

NGOs and the future of the migration debate

Over the past quarter of a century, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) working with refugees and immigrants in the United States have emerged as a formidable force. The government funds them to help newcomers adjust, policy-makers listen to them, the media quotes them, and immigrants and refugees rely on them for assistance and advocacy. This development has caused tensions with other stakeholders in the US immigration debate and raised concerns that it will lead to polarization over progress in the policy arena. The author argues that although NGOs and other key actors have had a difficult time responding to the pace, scope, and diversity of immigration into the US, a combination of factors make it possible, even likely, that in the coming decade NGOs, federal and local governments, researchers, refugee and immigrant communities, and intergovernmental organizations will forge new understandings and modernized policy structures that will manage migration intelligently rather than repress it ineffectively.     

Proposition 187 reexamined: Attitudes toward immigration among California voters

The purposes of this study were to examine socio-demographic predictors of attitudes toward immigration in a community-based sample (N = 494) from the Los Angeles area; and to explore the relationship between attitudes toward immigration and the providing of educational and health services to the children of undocumented immigrants. Not providing services to the children of undocumented immigrants was a key element of California's Proposition 187. Attitudes toward immigration were measured with the Attitudes Toward Immigration Scale (ATIS). The providing of services was measured through the participants' evaluations of a school scenario and a health care scenario. Results indicated that participants who were middle-aged or older, less educated, identified as Republican, and were third generation or greater were more likely to hold negative attitudes toward immigration. Furthermore, participants holding negative attitudes toward immigration were less likely to provide education and health care services to the children of undocumented immigrants.     

Proposition 187 reexamined: Attitudes toward immigration among California voters

The purposes of this study were to examine socio-demographic predictors of attitudes toward immigration in a community-based sample (N = 494) from the Los Angeles area; and to explore the relationship between attitudes toward immigration and the providing of educational and health services to the children of undocumented immigrants. Not providing services to the children of undocumented immigrants was a key element of California's Proposition 187. Attitudes toward immigration were measured with the Attitudes Toward Immigration Scale (ATIS). The providing of services was measured through the participants' evaluations of a school scenario and a health care scenario. Results indicated that participants who were middle-aged or older, less educated, identified as Republican, and were third generation or greater were more likely to hold negative attitudes toward immigration. Furthermore, participants holding negative attitudes toward immigration were less likely to provide education and health care services to the children of undocumented immigrants.     

Interpersonal Judgments: Moral Responsibility and Blame

A deterministic perspective, believing choices are a function of hereditary and environmental factors, could theoretically impact perceived moral responsibility and lead to decreased blame in judging others. However, little consistent support has been found relating individual differences in deterministic attitudes to blame/tolerance for others. Perhaps, though, providing information regarding past background hardships affecting an individual's current lifestyle could potentially mediate harsh moralistic judgments of that individual. In the two studies reported here, we further explored the relation of free will/determinism scales to attitudes toward others as well as the effect of manipulating background information on the assignment of blame. As in previous research, little support was found for the relation of deterministic attitudes to tolerance toward others. However, judgments following manipulated information about hypothetical target persons supported the conclusion that target individuals are blamed less and given more sympathy if more information related to previous hardships is provided. In addition, in the second study perceived similarity to a target individual was associated with decreased blame/greater sympathy for a target with alcohol abuse problems.     

Group-centrism in the absence of group norms: The role of need for closure in social projection

The need for closure (NFC) promotes group-centrism, referring to the pursuit of a shared reality in a group, commonly achieved through conformity to and introjection of group norms. The present study expands this perspective by examining how NFC motivates projection of one’s own norms on groups, as an alternative means to achieve epistemic security in the absence of clear group norms. In Study 1 (N?=?261), individual differences in NFC predicted social projection onto an incidental crowd, providing evidence for the generic effect of NFC on social projection. In line with the assertion that the epistemic value of a collectivity is a function of the degree to which the collectivity matters for the individual, Study 2 (N?=?239) and Study 3 (N?=?223) revealed that NFC effects on social projection were strengthened for in-groups and disappeared for out-groups. Furthermore, mediation analyses demonstrated that essentialist entitativity beliefs mediate the relationship between NFC and in-group projection.     

‘It's not really us discriminating against immigrants,it's more telling people how to fit in’: Constructing the nation in immigration talk in New Zealand

Previous research has demonstrated that talk about immigration can function to produce, reproduce and stabilize racism (Capdevila & Callaghan, 2008 ). In New Zealand (NZ), changes in immigration policy have seen a rapid increase in diverse groups of migrants with varied cultural backgrounds entering the country in the past two decades. Given its unique colonial history and ‘settler nationality in a bicultural nation’ (Bell, 2009 ), we explored how young NZ adults talk about and produce meanings and understandings of immigration, immigrants and cultural diversity. Appealing to notions of NZ as ‘one society’, as English speaking, and as English looking participants constructed NZ, NZ national identity and the NZ economy in particular ways. This constituted a nationalist rhetoric that was taken up in common‐sense ways by participants to legitimize racist talk whilst simultaneously acting to locate participants themselves as reasonable and moral individuals. It is concluded that nationalist discourses function to reinforce patterns of social dominance and perpetuate the notion of New Zealanders as largely white, European‐looking and English‐speaking. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Religion and Anti-Immigration Sentiments in Context: Field Studies in Jerusalem

ABSTRACT

Political and social changes in the past decade have rendered questions about religion and immigration more salient than ever. However, we know very little about the potential impact of religion as it operates in the real world on attitudes toward immigrants. In this investigation, we tested whether and how contextual religious cues in the public sphere might affect tolerance toward immigrants. In two studies, we compared the effects of a religious and a secular context (Study 1: religious location; Study 2: religious attire) on attitudes toward Jewish immigrants (i.e., a religious ingroup) and non-Jewish immigrants (i.e., a religious outgroup). Across studies, contextual religious cues predicted ingroup favoritism, as expressed by less social rejection toward religious ingroups and less support for anti-immigration policies affecting religious ingroups. However, contextual religious cues were unrelated to anti-immigration attitudes toward religious outgroups. In Study 2, these patterns were moderated by participants’ religiosity, such that they were found among more (but not fewer) religious participants. These findings extend prior laboratory findings and shed light on how religion influences attitudes toward immigration in rich and complex real environments.     

Individual differences in need for cognition and decision making in the Iowa Gambling Task

Differences in decision making between individuals differing in Need for Cognition (NFC) are examined using the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). Previous work using normative one time decisions suggests that individual low in NFC process gains and losses differently than those high in NFC and are more susceptible to decision biases. The IGT is a popular laboratory task that involves making risky decisions from experience involving both gains and losses. In the first experiment, low NFC participants performed significantly worse than the high NFC participants. A second experiment designed to examine the nature of these differences provides evidence that low NFC participants place more importance on gains as opposed to losses when performing the IGT. Results are discussed in light of previous work suggesting that low NFC participants place more importance on losses in mixed outcome decisions.     

Moral identity and the expanding circle of moral regard toward out-groups

This article examines moral identity and reactions to out-groups during intergroup conflict Four studies suggest that a highly self-important moral identity is associated with an expansive circle of moral regard toward out-group members (Study 1) and more favorable attitudes toward relief efforts to aid out-group members (Study 2). Study 3 examines moral identity and national identity influences on the provision of financial assistance to out-groups. Study 4 investigates the relationship between moral identity and (a) the willingness to harm innocent out-group members not involved in the conflict and (b) moral judgments of revenge and forgiveness toward out-group members directly responsible for transgressions against the in-group. Results are discussed in terms of self-regulatory mechanisms that mitigate in-group favoritism and out-group hostility.     

Assimilation and ethnic boundaries: Israeli students' altitudes toward soviet immigrants

The attitudes of Israeli students toward new immigrants from the former Soviet Union were examined against the theoretical framework of the sociology of ethnicity and sociology of education. The main research question explored was which ethnic relationship model (assimilation, pluralism, or separation) best described the attitudes and self-reported behavior of Israeli youth toward the new immigrants. Israeli students' changing attitudes toward their immigrant counterparts were also investigated, as well as actual Israeli educational practices (not only declared policies) regarding Soviet immigrants. The study was conducted in grades 4-11 at schools in northern Israel. The results indicated positive attitudes and openness of relations by the Israelis toward the new immigrant students in the first year following their immigration. However, the attitudes were less positive in the second year. Although the Israeli students manifested positive attitudes toward immigration and to the immigrants themselves, these views were largely assimilatory; Israeli cultural capital was obviously dominant, and it was expected to be accepted as such by the newcomers. The findings point to Israeli assimilatory educational practice; immigrants are expected to blend in, abandoning their past heritage and culture.     

Integrating justice and care in animal ethics

In this paper I argue that the standoff between justice and care approaches to animal ethics presents us with a false dilemma. We should take justice's focus on reasoning from principles, and care's use of sympathetic awareness, as two integrated deliberative capacities necessary for the consideration of arguments for extending moral concern to animals. Such an integrated approach rests on a plausible account of the psychology of moral deliberation. I develop my argument as follows. Section I summarizes the nature of the debate between justice and care approaches to animal ethics, focusing on Brian Luke's arguments against justice approaches. Section II provides pro-justice rebuttals to Luke's objections. These rebuttals, while largely successful against Luke's objections, do not account for the intuition that sympathy does play a central epistemological role in animal ethics. Section III explains how sympathy cognitively simulates the perspective of the other, and thus can play an epistemological role in animal ethics. I argue that the abilities to simulate the perspective of the other and to reason from moral principles can complement each other. In section IV, I argue that though it may not be desirable to use both sympathy and reasoning from principles in all moral deliberation, it is a desirable aim when offering, and considering, moral arguments for what I will term the "extensionist project" of extending over moral concern to animals. I make this idea plausible by elucidating the claim that arguments for this project are best thought of as second-order deliberations about our first-order deliberative life.     

Cultural Differences in Targets of Stigmatization Between Individual- and Group-Oriented Cultures

This research investigated cultural differences in stigmatization of out-groups representing Goffman's distinction between “tribal stigma” and “blemishes of character.” We hypothesized that “group-oriented” (vs. individual-oriented) cultures would be more likely to stigmatize nonnormative groups, including tribal out-groups (people of a different race, immigrants/foreign workers) and out-groups with blemishes of character (homosexuals, heavy drinkers, drug addicts), because of higher value of behavioral conformity and/or lower value of uniqueness. Country-level analyses with nine individual-oriented and four group-oriented countries supported our hypotheses and revealed that the cultural value of uniqueness played a more influential role than behavioral conformity. We discuss implications and directions for future research.     

Disparate roads to certainty processing strategy choices under need for closure

This paper describes a programme of research addressing an intriguing inconsistency in research findings about cognitive processes under a high need for cognitive closure (NFC). While early studies demonstrated that individuals who seek closure opt for closed-minded cognitive strategies, a growing body of research has identified a number of circumstances in which individuals who are high in NFC engage in effortful, open-minded information processing to an even greater extent than their low NFC counterparts. This has posed the challenge of delineating the circumstances under which people motivated to reduce uncertainty (i.e., attain closure) engage in effortful and open-minded cognition from those situations in which they rely on simplistic, low-effort strategies. This also calls for theoretical advancement in NFC theory. We discuss our proposed solution to this puzzle and the implications of this model for real-world social phenomena.