Research Article
Why do citizens want to keep refugees out? Threats, fairness and hostile norms in the treatment of asylum seekers†
Winnifred R. Louis,
Julie M. Duck, Deborah J. Terry, Regina A. Schuller, Richard N. Lalonde,
Corresponding Author
Winnifred R. Louis
University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
School of Psychology, University of Queensland, McElwain Building St. Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia.Search for more papers by this authorWinnifred R. Louis,
Julie M. Duck, Deborah J. Terry, Regina A. Schuller, Richard N. Lalonde,
Corresponding Author
Winnifred R. Louis
University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
School of Psychology, University of Queensland, McElwain Building St. Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia.Search for more papers by this author†
The results for this study were presented in a paper at the annual meeting of the Australian Psychological Society, Gold Coast, QLD, September 2002.
Abstract
A social identity framework was employed to understand why people support the exclusionary treatment of refugee claimants (‘asylum seekers’) in Australia. Over and above individual difference effects of social dominance orientation and individuals' instrumental threat perceptions, insecure intergroup relations between citizens and asylum seekers were proposed to motivate exclusionary attitudes and behaviour. In addition, perceived procedural and distributive fairness were proposed to mediate the effects of social identity predictors on intergroup competitiveness, serving to legitimise citizens' exclusionary behaviours. Support for these propositions was obtained in a longitudinal study of Australians' social attitudes and behaviour. Small and inconsistent individual-level effects were noted. In contrast, after controlling for these variables, hostile Australian norms, perceived legitimacy of citizen status, and threatening socio-structural relations were strongly and consistently linked to intentions to support the harsh treatment of asylum seekers, and exclusionary attitudes and action at Time 2. Moreover, perceived procedural and distributive justice significantly mediated these relationships. The roles of fairness and intergroup socio-structural perceptions in social attitudes and actions are discussed. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
REFERENCES
- Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.
- Amiot, C. E., & Bourhis, R. Y. (2005). Ideological beliefs as determinants of discrimination in positive and negative outcome distributions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 581–598.
- Barkham, P. (2001, September 10). Asylum in Australia. The Guardian. Retrieved November 22, 2005, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/immigration/story/0,15729,1421579,00.html
- Bettencourt, B. A., Dorr, N., Charlton, K., & Hume, D. L. (2001). Status differences and in-group bias: A meta-analytic examination of the effects of status stability, status legitimacy, and group permeability. Psychological Bulletin, 127(4), 520–542.
- Bradford, G. (February 11, 2002). Asylum seekers to dominate Parliament opening. In Lateline, Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved November 22, 2005, from http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/stories/s479105.htm.
- Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multi-trait multi-method matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105.
- Chen, E. S., & Tyler, T. R. (2001). Cloaking power: Legitimizing myths and the psychology of the advantaged. In A. Y. Lee-Chai, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The use and abuse of power: Multiple perspectives on the causes of corruption (pp. 241–261). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
- Commonwealth of Australia, Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2001). Introduction of legislation—November 2001. Retrieved November 22, from http://www.immi.gov.au/legislation/refugee/index.htm
- Commonwealth of Australia, Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2005). Refugee and humanitarian issues—Australia's response. Retrieved November 22, 2005, from http://www.immi.gov.au/refugee/publications/refhumiss-full.pdf.
- Esses, V. M., Dovidio, J. F., & Hodson, G. (2001a). Public attitudes toward immigration in the United States and Canada in response to the September 11, 2001 ‘Attack on America’. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 2, 69–85.
10.1111/j.1530-2415.2002.00028.x Google Scholar
- Esses, V. M., Dovidio, J. F., & Dion, K. L. (2001b). Immigrants and immigration [Special issue]. Journal of Social Issues, 57(3).
- Esses, V. M., Dovidio, J. F., Jackson, J. 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.
- Esses, V. M., Jackson, L. M., Dovidio, J. F., & Hodson, G. (2005). Instrumental relations among groups: Group competition, conflict, and prejudice. In J. F. Dovidio, P. Glick, L. A. Rudman, & A. Laurie (Eds.), On the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after Allport (pp. 227–243). Malden, MA, US: Blackwell Publishing.
- 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.
- Henry, P. J., Sidanius, J., Levin, S., & Pratto, F. (2005). Social dominance orientation, authoritarianism, and support for intergroup violence between the Middle East and America. Political Psychology, 26, 569–583.
- Ho, R. (1987). Immigrants and immigration: A survey of attitudes. Australian Psychologist, 22(1), 3–16.
- Hogan, R., & Emler, N. P. (1981). Retributive justice. In M. J. Lerner, & S. C. Lerner (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior (pp. 125–144). New York: Academic Press.
10.1007/978-1-4899-0429-4_7 Google Scholar
- Jackson, J. S., Brown, K. T., Brown, T. N., & Marks, B. (2001). Contemporary immigration policy orientations among dominant-group members in Western Europe. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 431–456.
- Johnson, D., Terry, D. J., & Louis, W. R. (2005). Perceptions of the intergroup structure and Anti-Asian prejudice among White Australians. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 8, 53–71.
- Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27.
- Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 29(3), 339–375.
- Kinder, D. R. (1998). Opinion and action in the realm of politics. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology ( 4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 778–867). New York: Oxford University Press.
- Lerner, M. J. (1971). Justified self-interest and the responsibility for suffering: A replication and extension. Journal of Human Relations, 19, 550–559.
- Levin, S., Federico, C. M., Sidanius, J., & Rabinowitz, J. L. (2002). Social dominance orientation and intergroup bias: The legitimation of favoritism for high status groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 144–157.
- Levine, R. A., & Campbell, D. T. (1972). Ethnocentrism: Theories of conflict, ethnic attitudes, and group behavior. New York: Wiley.
- Louis, W. R., Mavor, K. I., & Terry, D. J. (2003). Reflections on the statistical analysis of personality and norms in war, peace, and prejudice: Are deviant minorities the problem? Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 3(1), 189–198.
10.1111/j.1530-2415.2003.00025.x Google Scholar
- Louis, W. R., & Taylor, D. M. (2002). Understanding the September 11th terrorist attack on America: The role of intergroup theories of normative influence. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 2, 87–100.
10.1111/j.1530-2415.2002.00029.x Google Scholar
- Louis, W. R., & Taylor, D. M. (2005). Rights and duties as group norms: Implications of intergroup research for the study of rights and responsibilities. In N. J. Finkel, & F. M. Moghaddam (Eds.), The psychology of rights and duties: Empirical contributions and normative commentaries (pp. 105–134). Washington, DC: APA Press.
- Louis, W. R., Taylor, D. M., & Douglas, R. L. (2005). Normative influence and rational conflict decisions: Group norms and cost-benefit analyses for intergroup behaviour. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 8(4), 355–374.
- Louis, W. R., Taylor, D. M., & Neil, T. (2004). Cost-benefit analyses for your group and your self: The rationality of decision-making in conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 15(2), 110–143.
10.1108/eb022909 Google Scholar
- Major, B. (1994). From social inequality to personal entitlement: The role of social comparisons, legitimacy appraisals, and group membership. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental psychology (Vol. 26, pp. 293–355). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
- Maley, W. (2002a). Australian refugee policy: Myths and realities. Social Alternatives, 21(4), 6–10.
- Maley, W. (2002b). Receiving Afghanistan's asylum seekers: Australia, the Tampa ‘Crisis’ and refugee protection. Forced Migration Review, 13, 19–21.
- Nickerson, A., & Louis, W. R. (2006). Human and national identities and Australians' attitudes to asylum seekers. Unpublished manuscript.
- Olson, M. (1968). The logic of collective action. New York: Schocken Books.
- Platow, M. J., Wenzel, M., & Nolan, M. (2003). The importance of social identity and self-categorization processes for creating and responding to fairness. In S. Haslam, D. van Knippenberg, M. J. Platow, & N. Ellemers (Eds.), Social identity at work: Developing theory for organizational practice (pp. 261–276). New York: Psychology Press.
- Pratto, F., & Lemieux, A. F. (2001). The psychological ambiguity of immigration and its implications for promoting immigration policy. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 413–430.
- Pratto, F., & Cathey, C. (2002). The role of social ideologies in legitimizing political attitudes and public policy. In V. C. Ottati, R. S. Tindale, J. Edwards, F. B. Bryant, L. Heath, D. C. O'Connell, Y. Suarez-Balcazar, & E. J. Posavac (Eds.), The social psychology of politics (pp. 135–155). New York: Kluwer Academic.
10.1007/978-1-4615-0569-3_7 Google Scholar
- Schmitt, M. T., Branscombe, N. R., & Kappen, D. M. (2003). Attitudes toward group-based inequality: Social dominance or social identity? British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 161–186.
- Sherif, M. (1966). Group conflict and co-operation: Their social psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
- Sidanius, J. (1993). The psychology of group conflict and the dynamics of oppression: A social dominance perspective. In S. Iyengar, & W. J. McGuire (Eds.), Explorations in political psychology (pp. 183–219). London: Duke University Press.
10.1215/9780822396697-009 Google Scholar
- Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.
10.1017/CBO9781139175043 Google Scholar
- Smith, H. J., & Tyler, T. R. (1996). Justice and power. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 171–200.
- Steel, Z., Silove, D., Bird, K., McGorry, P., & Mohan, P. (1999). Pathways from war trauma to posttraumatic stress symptoms among Tamil asylum seekers, refugees, and immigrants. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 12, 421–435.
- Steel, Z., Silove, D., Chey, T., Bauman, A., Phan, T., & Phan, T. (2005). Mental disorders, disability and health service use amongst Vietnamese refugees and the host Australian population. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 111(4), 300–309.
- Stephan, W. G., Ybarra, O., & Bachman, G. (1999). Prejudice towards immigrants. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 2221–2237.
- Summerfield, D. (2001). Asylum-seekers, refugees and mental health services in the UK. Psychiatric Bulletin, 25, 161–163.
10.1192/pb.25.5.161 Google Scholar
- Tajfel, H. (1982). Human groups and social categories. New York: Cambridge University.
- Tajfel, H. (1984). Intergroup relations, social myths and social justice in social psychology. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), The social dimension: European developments in social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10.1017/CBO9780511759154 Google Scholar
- Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
- Taylor, D. M., & McKirnan, D. J. (1984). Theoretical contributions: A five-stage model of intergroup relations. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23(4), 291–300.
- Terry, D. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1996). Group norms and the attitude-behavior relationship. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 776–793.
- Terry, D. J., Hogg, M. A., & Blackwood, L. (2001). Prejudiced attitudes, group norms, and discriminatory behaviour. In M. Augoustinos, & K. J. Reynolds (Eds.), Understanding prejudice, racism, and social conflict (pp. 140–155). London: Sage Publications.
10.4135/9781446218877.n9 Google Scholar
- Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
- Turner, J. C., & Reynolds, K. J. (2003). Why social dominance theory has been falsified. British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 199–206.
- Tyler, T. R. (1989). The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the Group-Value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 830–838.
- Tyler, T. R. (1994). Psychological models of the justice motive: Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 850–863.
- Tyler, T. R., & Smith, H. J. (1999). Justice, social identity, and group processes. In T. R. Tyler, R. M. Kramer, & O. P. John (Eds.), The psychology of the social self (pp. 223–264). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2005). Refugees by Numbers, 2005 Edition. Retrieved November 22, 2005, from UNHCR>Publications http://www.unhcr.ch/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/directory.
- United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (1967). Convention and protocol relating to the status of refugees. Retrieved November 22, 2005, from UNHCR>Publications: http://www.unhcr.ch/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/directory.
- Veilleux, F., & Tougas, F. (1989). Male acceptance of affirmative action programs for women: The results of altruistic or egotistical motives? International Journal of Psychology, 24, 485–496.
- Verkuyten, M. (2004). Emotional reactions to and support for immigrant policies: Attributed responsibilities to categories of asylum seekers. Social Justice Research, 17, 293–314.
10.1023/B:SORE.0000041295.83611.dc Google Scholar
- Wilson, T. C. (2001). Americans' views on immigration policy: Testing the role of threatened group interests. Sociological Perspectives, 44, 485–501.
