Doctoral Dissertation Research in Political Science: American Public Opinion and the Politics of Immigration

这个项目调查了对拉丁裔移民的态度如何影响美国人对移民政策的支持。公众对外国人的疑虑不止一次地通过支持排斥性移民政策来表达（例如，希格姆1955; King 2000）。政治学家一致认为，美国人通常倾向于反对移民，但目前尚不清楚是否有一个或所有移民群体激活了这一立场（例如，Harwood 1986; Simon and亚历山大1993; Citrin et al. 1997）。尽管历史记录了无数次对爱尔兰、中国、德国和意大利新移民的反对（例如，Shankman 1982; Takaki 1989; Ignatiev 1995; King 2005），我们缺乏对一个移民群体的态度塑造公众反对移民的程度的系统性理解。使用两个原始的调查实验，其中包括一个内隐联想测试（IAT），该项目致力于展示美国人的移民政策的评价是如何微妙的，但不可磨灭的影响，反拉丁裔的态度。 越来越多的关于移民的民意调查数据揭示了两件事：相当多的人反对移民，以及坚决支持采取更有力的措施来遏制移民（盖洛普，2000年; Lapinski et al.，1997年）。然而，这些民意调查并没有揭示--事实上，也不能完全揭示--对移民政策的支持在多大程度上受到对特定移民的担忧的影响。这是因为调查通常会询问受访者有关这些政策的情况，而不会按种族识别移民。而且，当提出针对特定群体的问题时，回应的有效性受到强烈的社会规范的威胁，这些社会规范反对对民族和种族群体表达负面态度（Mendelberg 2001; Banaji et al.1995）。 为了克服这些挑战，本项目采用了两个调查实验，其中包括内隐联想测试（IAT），旨在捕捉对拉丁美洲移民的负面内隐态度。在这些实验中，所有受试者完成标准的自我报告的态度，对各种移民群体，以及评估的政策建议，解决非法和法律的移民。在这些评估过程中，受试者被问及这些政策建议，无论是拉丁美洲移民或非拉丁美洲移民。这个设计旨在证明两件事。首先，美国人应该对移民和移民政策做出明显公正的评估，而不是采取含蓄的态度措施。例如，预计受试者将支持采取更强有力的措施来遏制移民，而不论外国人的族裔和法律的地位如何。然而，当引入隐性态度措施时，预计反拉丁美洲人的态度将被印在对这些政策建议的评估上，即使它们没有提到拉丁美洲人。 这项研究的结果对整个社会，特别是社会科学界都有影响。通过记录内隐的反拉丁裔态度如何塑造个人对移民政策的偏好，本研究系统地挑战了反对移民与移民种族无关的观点。相反，这项调查的证据将表明，仅仅通过提出移民问题就可以激活隐性的反拉丁裔态度，正如民意调查所显示的那样。通过这种方式，这些调查结果将提出关于移民标准调查项目有效性的问题，通过诊断这些问题在多大程度上捕捉到了除了政策偏好之外的隐性反拉丁裔态度。同样重要的是，证据将建议修订标准模型的调查反应，以占一个重要的遗漏变量，即内隐态度的影响调查项目。

This project investigates how attitudes toward Latino immigrants color American support for immigration policies. More than once, public misgivings about foreigners have been expressed through support for exclusionary immigration policies (e.g., Higham 1955; King 2000). Political scientists concur that Americans are generally predisposed against immigration, yet it remains unclear whether one or all immigrant groups activate this stance (e.g., Harwood 1986; Simon and Alexander 1993; Citrin et al. 1997). Though history records numerous outbursts of opposition to Irish, Chinese, German, and Italian newcomers (e.g., Shankman 1982; Takaki 1989; Ignatiev 1995; King 2005), we lack a systematic understanding of the degree to which attitudes toward one immigrant group shape public opposition to immigration. Using two original survey-experiments which incorporate an Implicit Association Test (IAT), this project endeavors to demonstrate how Americans'' evaluations of immigration policies are subtly-but indelibly-influenced by anti-Latino attitudes. A growing volume of polling data on immigration reveals two things: sizeable opposition to immigration and solid support for stronger measures to curb it (Gallup 2000; Lapinski et al. 1997). Yet what these polls do not reveal-and in fact, cannot fully reveal-is the extent to which support for immigration policies is influenced by misgivings about particular immigrants. That is because surveys generally query respondents about these policies without identifying immigrants by ethnicity. And, when group-specific questions are asked, the validity of responses is threatened by strong social norms against the expression of negative attitudes toward ethnic and racial groups (Mendelberg 2001; Banaji et al.1995). To overcome these challenges, this project employs two survey-experiments which incorporate an Implicit Association Test (IAT) designed to capture negative implicit attitudes toward Latino immigrants. In these experiments, all subjects complete standard self-reports of attitudes toward various immigrant groups, as well as evaluations of policy proposals addressing illegal and legal immigration. During these evaluations, subjects are asked about these policy proposals with reference to either Latino immigrants or non-Latino immigrants. This design aims to demonstrate two things. First, in lieu of implicit attitude measures, Americans should display a markedly even-handed evaluation of immigrants and immigration policies. For instance, it is expected that subjects will support stronger measures to curb immigration regardless of the ethnicity and legal status of foreigners. Yet when implicit attitude measures are introduced, it is anticipated that anti-Latino attitudes will be stamped onto evaluations of these policy proposals, even when they make no reference to Latinos. The findings from this research have implications both for society in general and the social science community in particular. By documenting how implicit anti-Latino attitudes mold individuals'' preferences for immigration policy, this study systematically challenges the view that opposition to immigration has nothing to do with the ethnicity of immigrants. To the contrary, the evidence from this investigation will suggest that implicit anti-Latino attitudes are activated by merely broaching the issue of immigration, as occurs through public opinion polls. In this way, these findings will raise questions about the validity of standard survey items on immigration by diagnosing how far these questions capture implicit anti-Latino attitudes in addition to policy preferences. Equally important, the evidence will suggest revisions to standard models of survey response to account for an important omitted variable, namely, the influence of implicit attitudes on survey items.