Political affiliation, collective self-esteem and perceived employability of immigrants: Inducing national identity polarizes host-nation employers

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attachedcopy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial researchand education use, including for instruction at the authors institution

and sharing with colleagues.

Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling orlicensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party

websites are prohibited.

In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of thearticle (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website orinstitutional repository. Authors requiring further information

regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies areencouraged to visit:

http://www.elsevier.com/authorsrights

Author's personal copy

International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Intercultural Relations

j ourna l h omepa ge: www.elsev ier .com/ locate / i j in t re l

Political affiliation, collective self-esteem and perceivedemployability of immigrants: Inducing national identitypolarizes host-nation employers

Todd Lucasa,∗, Evone Barkhoa, Cort Rudolphb, Ludmila Zhdanovac,Monty Fakhouria, Lyke Thompsona

a Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USAb Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO, USAc Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 29 November 2012Received in revised form 28 October 2013Accepted 7 November 2013

Keywords:Social identityPolitical affiliationEmployabilityImmigrantNational identityNationalismCollective self-esteem

a b s t r a c t

Host-nation employers’ political affiliation and national identity both may be relevant toseeing immigrant job-seekers as employable. However, whether national identity altersdifferences in links between political affiliation and evaluations of immigrants is not wellarticulated, and this includes a potential for national identity to either bolster or lessenharshness toward immigrant job-seekers. Moreover, research has yet to identify psy-chological mechanisms that could transmit a conjoint effect of political affiliation andnational identity. In this study, we examined the capacity of national identity to accen-tuate links between political affiliation and perceived employability of immigrants. Liberaland conservative employment experts (human resource professionals and managers) wereexperimentally primed to elicit either a personal or national (U.S.) identity, and measuresof attitudes toward immigrant job-seekers were collected. Results suggested a polarizingeffect of national identity: conservative employers viewed immigrants as less employablewhen primed with national identity, while liberal employers rated immigrants as moreemployable. Among conservatives, priming national identity also resulted in greater col-lective self-esteem – feelings of self-worth derived from group membership. Moreover,increases in collective self-esteem mediated the link between primed national identityand less perceived employability among conservatives. Overall, this research contributesto emerging literature by suggesting that the capacity of national identity to either bolsteror lessen harshness toward immigrants may depend on political affiliation. In addition, wesuggest that transient changes in collective self-esteem can result from priming nationalidentity, and that such changes may transmit links between national identity and evalua-tions of immigrants among conservatives.

© 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Immigrants encounter numerous hardships as they resettle into new nations. One important and especially difficultchallenge for immigrants involves obtaining employment (Alarcón, 1999; De Vries & Pettigrew, 1998; Evers, Te Nijenhuis, &

∗ Corresponding author at: Department of Family Medicine and Public Health Sciences, Wayne State University, 3939 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, MI48201, USA. Tel.: +1 313 577 2124.

E-mail address: [email protected] (T. Lucas).

0147-1767/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2013.11.001

Author's personal copy

T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151 137

van der Flier, 2005; Harcourt, Lam, Harcourt, & Flynn, 2008). Immigrants’ capacity to gain employment in a host-nation maybe affected by numerous factors that include their a priori skill sets, training, and other experiences that occur upon settlingin a new nation (e.g., Kanas, van Tubergen, & van der Lippe, 2009). Although pre and post migration training and policyfactors are important to successful integration, psychological perspectives emphasize that immigrant employment can alsobe affected by host-nation employers’ willingness to hire immigrant workers (e.g., Grant, 2007; Grant & Nadin, 2007). In turn,securing employment in a host-nation may depend on the capacity of prospective employers to view immigrant job-seekersas competent, productive, and deserving.

Of particular relevance to employment, support for immigrants may be linked to the social and psychological charac-teristics of host-nation citizens, and political conservatism in particular may bolster exclusionary treatment of immigrants(e.g., Hitlan, Carillo, Zárate, & Aikman, 2007; Sniderman, Hagendoorn, & Prior, 2004). In parallel, psychological theory andresearch emphasize that discriminatory treatment of immigrants may be accentuated by a strong national identity (e.g., Esses,Dovidio, Jackson, & Armstrong, 2001; Huntington, 2004; Jackson, Brown, Brown, & Marks, 2001; Joppke, 2004; Verkuyten,2009). Although political affiliation and national identity are both important in guiding evaluations of immigrants, rela-tively little attention has been given to their effect on employment-related outcomes, including evaluations of immigrantjob-seekers. In parallel, there have been few attempts to jointly examine these perspectives, and to consider whether groupdifferences in links between political affiliation and evaluations of immigrants are accentuated by national identity (e.g.,Ferguson & Hassin, 2007). Further still, little is known about psychological mechanisms that could transmit a combined effectof political affiliation and national identity on evaluations of immigrants. In the present research, we sought to determineif a momentary activation of national identity would polarize links between host-nation employers’ political affiliation andtheir perceived employability of immigrants. Specifically, we consider whether national identity accentuates tendenciesto treat immigrants favorably or sternly that exist among liberals and conservatives. In addition, we aimed to determine ifnational identity would alter links between political affiliation and collective self-esteem, and whether collective self-esteemencompasses a psychological mechanism linking an interactive effect of political affiliation and national identity to harsherevaluations of immigrant job-seekers.

1.1. Political affiliation and attitudes toward immigrants

A sizable literature supports the notion that social and psychological tendencies of host-nation citizens’ play a fundamen-tal role in determining treatment accorded to immigrants. Increasingly, research has emphasized links to political ideologythat especially include conservatism (for review, Jost, Federico, & Napier, 2009). According to contemporary theories, politicalconservatism embodies a motivated social cognition that includes both resistance to change and support for inequality (e.g.,Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003). In parallel, research overwhelmingly suggests that individuals possess enduringtendencies toward either conservatism or liberalism, and that political affiliation provides a valuable means for connectingthe psychological basis of political ideology to intergroup relations (Jost et al., 2009).

Of current interest, political attitudes have been well connected to both inclusive and exclusionary intergroup attitudes.For example, while liberalism may be associated with a desire for social harmony and tolerance of others (e.g., Braithwaite,1998; Skitka & Tetlock, 1993), a conservative political affiliation is often linked to greater hostility toward a wide variety ofstigmatized outgroups (e.g., Duckitt, Wagner, Plessiss, & Birum, 2002; Federico & Sidanius, 2002; Napier & Jost, 2008). In turn,research highlights that a conservative political ideology may be especially associated with harshness toward immigrants(e.g., Hitlan et al., 2007; Sniderman et al., 2004). Links to exclusionary treatment of immigrants coincide with research thatsuggests tendencies closely related to conservatism such as authoritarianism (Oyamot, Borgida, & Fisher, 2006; Quinton,Cowan, & Watson, 1996), social dominance orientation (e.g., Costello & Hodson, 2010; Esses, Jackson, & Armstrong, 1998;Thomsen, Green, & Sidanius, 2008), and belief in a just world (Bierbrauer & Klinger, 2002; Montada & Schneider, 1989)also predict diminished support for immigrants. Although evidence linking liberal and conservative group affiliations to thetreatment of immigrants is compelling, research thus far has not well attended to whether political affiliation also influenceswillingness to hire immigrant workers. Of current interest, the extent to which conservatism among host-nation employersmight sustain hostility toward immigrant job-seekers remains unclear.

1.2. National identity and attitudes toward immigrants

According to social identity theory, individuals possess a personal identity – which includes beliefs about one’s own skills,abilities, or attributes – and also social identities that define the self in terms of membership in various social groups (e.g.,Tajfel, 1982; Tajfel & Turner, 1986; Turner, 1982). Social identities can provide individuals with valuable information abouthow to feel, think, and act toward others. Although sometimes prescribing benevolence (e.g., Tarrant, Dazeley, & Cottom,2009), theory and research have largely emphasized the potential for social identity to produce ingroup favoritism, andto promote callousness toward outgroup members (for review, Hornsey, 2008). Attempts to link group-level identity toharsh treatment of others have increasingly attended to exclusionary treatment of immigrants. Of current interest, theoryand research support that national identity – the extent to which host-nation citizens’ embrace their status as a memberof their nation – can bolster harshness toward immigrants (e.g., Esses et al., 2001; Huntington, 2004; Jackson et al., 2001;Joppke, 2004; Sniderman & Hagendoorn, 2007; Verkuyten, 2009). Links between national identity and diminished supportfor immigrants have been observed in many nations, suggesting that the discriminatory effects of national identity are not

Author's personal copy

138 T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151

tied to specific nations, but rather occur broadly (e.g., Licata & Klein, 2002; Lynn & Lea, 2003; Tilega, 2006; Triandafyllidou,2000).

To date, national identity has been implicated in harsh treatment of immigrants via links to a handful of outcomes,especially including diminished support for minority rights and multiculturalism (e.g., Sniderman & Hagendoorn, 2007).However, and like political affiliation, whether national identity would affect the employment prospects of immigrants hasnot been well demonstrated in psychological research (though see Grant, 2007). Thus, little is yet known about the potentialfor national identity to diminish a prospective employer’s capacity to see an immigrant job candidate as employable. Thisdearth is troublesome not only because employment is fundamental to the well-being of immigrants (Harcourt et al., 2008),but also because national identity has shown a specific potential to obstruct support for immigrants. Moreover, researchoverwhelmingly suggests that national identity can be temporarily activated in individuals, much like any other socialidentity (e.g., Li & Brewer, 2004). Thus, the ways in which evaluations of immigrant job-seekers can be altered by temporaryactivations of national identity also remain unknown, despite the potential for transient activations to dramatically affectthe employment prospects of immigrants.

1.3. Political affiliation and national identity polarization

Although existing literature largely emphasizes links to harsher treatment of immigrants, recent conceptualizationshave proposed a more nuanced perspective of national identity (cf. Reicher & Hopkins, 2001; Smeekes, Verkuyten, & Poppe,2012). Specifically, and with an eye toward tenets of self-categorization theory that suggest individuals infer both toler-ant and exclusionary beliefs from the characteristics of their social groups (cf. Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell,1987), treatment of immigrants may ultimately depend on the particular meaning that ingroups ascribe to national identity(Pehrson, Vignoles, & Brown, 2009). In turn, national identity may be defined in such a way as to promote exclusion ofimmigrants in some groups, while promoting favorable treatment of immigrants in others. In support, Smeekes et al. (2012)showed that citizens of the Netherlands were more rather than less supportive of immigrant rights when national identitywas defined in terms of a historical tolerance of others. Similarly, prior research suggests that benevolent treatment of bothimmigrants and ethnic minorities results from group norms that define national identity in terms of civic or communityengagement rather than ancestry (e.g., Pehrson, Brown, & Zagefka, 2009; Wakefield et al., 2011; Yogeeswaran, Dasgupta,& Gomez, 2012). Emerging perspectives on national identification underscore its potential to carry different meanings tomultiple groups within a host nation (e.g., Citrin, Wong, & Duff, 2001; Schildkraut, 2011). For example, an American iden-tity may encompass support for free speech, active citizenship, and Protestantism, though these endorsements may differsubstantially according to race or ethnicity among U.S. citizens (Schildkraut, 2011).

Of present concern, one possibility is that political affiliation could encompass a naturally occurring group difference thatserves to ascribe unique meaning to national identity. In turn, activating national identity could exert a moderating influenceon the links between political affiliation and evaluations of immigrant job-seekers. One specific moderator possibility is thatnational identity could act as a catalyst that enables conservative individuals to be more exclusionary of immigrants, whilealso making liberals more tolerant. In other words, and with an eye toward prototypes of national identity that seem likely toexist among liberals and conservatives, activating national identity might further polarize existing and naturally occurringingroup tendencies (cf. Krochik & Jost, 2011). Among conservatives, support for an exclusionary effect of national identitymight arise from links between national identity and nationalism, a dominance-based ideology that encompasses pride andloyalty to one’s nation, as well as a belief in international superiority, and that tends to promote both exclusiveness andethnocentrism (e.g., Li & Brewer, 2004). In parallel, theory and research suggest that national identity also may be associatedwith egalitarianism, especially within the United States, where humanitarianism and equality have been embraced as corenational values (Butz, Plant, & Doerr, 2007; Devos & Banaji, 2005; Katz & Hass, 1988). Accordingly, it could be that egalitarianframings of national identity are more characteristic of liberal groups and social contexts. Thus, and in tandem to its potentialto further accentuate conservatives’ harshness toward immigrants, national identity also might enhance liberals’ proclivitiestoward greater tolerance of immigrants.

Although a potential polarizing effect of national identity might be important, combined studies of political affiliation andnational identity have been largely absent from research on immigrants, including studies of willingness to hire immigrantjob-seekers (though see Sniderman et al., 2004; Yogeeswaran & Dasgupta, 2010). This dearth seems surprising given thatsocial perception research has long emphasized a potential for interactions between social dispositions and situationalinfluences (e.g., Lucas, Alexander, Firestone, & Baltes, 2006), including during evaluations of immigrants (e.g., Snidermanet al., 2004). Moreover, social identity research has shown that group identification may accentuate the behavioral effectsof political ideology, especially on economic issues (Bobo, 1999; Kluegel & Smith, 1986; Lipset, 1960; Napier & Jost, 2008).Better understanding the potential of national identity to polarize links to political affiliation could also suggest the useof psychological tools to both identify and combat circumstances that are likely to be especially onerous for immigrantjob-seekers.

1.4. Collective self-esteem

In addition to considering the potential of national identity to moderate links between political affiliation and evalua-tions of immigrant job-seekers, research has yet to identify accompanying cognitive and emotional mechanisms that could

Author's personal copy

T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151 139

help explain underlying psychological processes. In other words, how specifically does priming national identity alter linksbetween political affiliation and host-nation employers’ views of immigrant job-seekers? One possible mechanism that ispotentially relevant to both national identity and perceptions of immigrants is collective self-esteem. Collective self-esteemrefers to perceptions that individuals have of themselves as members of social groups, and also the value and emotional sig-nificance of group membership (Crocker & Luhtanen, 1990). Like personal self-esteem, collective self-esteem encompassesa positive self evaluation. However, collective self-esteem is derived from a positive evaluation of one’s social groups asopposed to one’s personal self. A considerable body of research has demonstrated the capacity of collective self-esteem tomoderate evaluations of ingroups and outgroups, especially in response to threat. In turn, numerous studies have shownthat evaluations of ingroup members are more favorable, while outgroup members are judged more harshly, when collec-tive self-esteem is high (e.g., Crocker & Luhtanen, 1990). Such studies are consistent with original conceptualizations thatsuggest collective self-esteem encompasses a stable individual difference in the extent to which people possess a positivesocial identity (cf. Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992a,b).

In addition to its potential to function as an individual difference moderator, collective self-esteem may act as a psy-chological linking mechanism (e.g., Bettencourt & Dorr, 1997; Blaine & Crocker, 1995; Liang & Fassinger, 2008). Researchexamining the mechanistic capacities of collective self-esteem has emphasized its potential to mediate links between socialidentification and measures of individual well-being (e.g., Liang & Fassinger, 2008). However, available research has notwell considered the potential for identity saliency to temporarily alter collective self-esteem, including whether activatingnational identity might affect transient levels of collective self-esteem. A lack of attention to momentary changes in collectiveself-esteem further encompasses research on political affiliation, including whether changes in collective self-esteem couldlink the currently hypothesized polarizing effect of national identity to evaluations of immigrants. With an eye toward priorresearch that has suggested constructs conceptually related to collective self-esteem may promote harshness toward out-groups such as immigrants (e.g., de Zavala & Cichocka, 2011; Lyons, Kenworthy, & Popan, 2010), we would expect increases incollective self-esteem to foster greater exclusionary treatment of immigrant job-seekers. In turn, we would expect collectiveself-esteem to transmit a combined effect of political affiliation and national identity on evaluations of immigrant-seekers.

1.5. The present study

In the present study, we examined whether an experimentally induced national identity would moderate links betweenhost-nation employers’ political affiliation and their subsequent view of immigrant job-seekers as employable. In addition,we assessed changes in collective self-esteem that resulted from priming national identity, and we considered the capacityof transient changes in collective self-esteem to link an interactive effect of political affiliation and primed national identityto evaluations of immigrant job-seekers. We recruited conservative and liberal human resource professionals and managersfrom the United States, and we experimentally primed them to elicit either a national (U.S.) or personal identity. We measuredperceived employability of Middle Eastern immigrants as our primary outcome. We focused on a single immigrant groupin this study in order to control for possible heterogeneity in attitudes toward specific immigrant groups, and we electedto focus on Middle Eastern immigrants because host-nation employment may be especially challenging for them (Ibish &Stewart, 2003; Kulwiki, Khalifa, & Moore, 2008).

With an eye toward recent research (e.g., Wakefield et al., 2011), we expected that priming national identity would accen-tuate the latent tendencies of liberal and conservative employers toward immigrants. Specifically, we expected that inducingnational identity would bolster favorable views of immigrant job-seekers among liberal employers, while simultaneouslypromoting greater exclusionary views of immigrant job-seekers among conservative employers. In addition, we expectedthat priming national identity would increase collective self-esteem especially among conservatives, and that changes incollective self-esteem would link the combined effect of political affiliation and national identity to evaluations of immigrantjob-seekers.

2. Method

2.1. Participants

Eighty two employment professionals were included in the present study. One participant was excluded due to incompletedata, resulting in a final sample size of 81 employment professionals (40 male). Participants were recruited from twointernet-based sources. Fifty seven employers (29 male) were recruited in collaboration with studyresponse.com – a wellknown survey sample recruitment service (Stanton & Weiss, 2002). An additional 24 employers (11 male) were recruitedusing the Mechnical Turk website (Amazon, 2013; see also Buhrmester, Kwang, & Gosling, 2011). All participants were U.Scitizens who were born and currently residing in the United States. To enhance the ecological validity of our research (i.e.,because this study was concerned with perceived employability), participants were exclusively recruited from managerialand human resources positions. Thus, all participants were prescreened to ensure that they were professionals whose currentemployment required them to make hiring decisions on a regular basis. Seventy employers (84.3%) were Caucasian, and noother ethnic group was significantly represented. Participant ages ranged from 24 to 65 (M = 39.01, SD = 9.68). All participantswere a priori identified as liberal or conservative. Political orientation was initially measured with a single item: “Which ofthe following best describes your political orientation?” Participants responded using a 10-point Likert-type scale ranging

Author's personal copy

140 T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151

from 1 (extremely conservative) to 10 (extremely liberal). As a measure of political affiliation, thirty-two participants selfidentified as conservative (5 or less) while 49 participants self identified as liberal (6 or more).1 There was no significantdifference between Studyresponse employers (sample 1 M = 6.42, SD = 2.19) and employers recruited via Mechanical Turk(sample 2 M = 5.58, SD = 3.04) for political orientation, t (79) = 1.40, p = .166, 95%CI [−0.356, 2.031], d = 0.321. All participantsreceived a small monetary compensation for their participation.

2.2. Design and manipulation procedure

This study was conducted as an experimental online survey, in which a 2(political affiliation: conservative versus lib-eral) × 2 (identity prime: national versus personal) between-participants design was specified. Political affiliation was apre-existing subject variable, while identity was experimentally induced. Participants in both identity prime conditionsread the following introductory passage:

“Immigrants endure many hardships as they resettle into new nations. One especially difficult challenge for immi-grants involves gaining employment in a new nation. Immigrants who find work are better able to support themselvesand may contribute to the productivity of their host nation. However, immigrant employment also poses many chal-lenges, and policy makers often must balance the needs of immigrants with the needs of others. In recent years,people from Middle Eastern countries have arrived in great numbers in many nations. Iraqi citizens in particular haveresettled in large numbers as immigrants and refugees. Experts forecast that Iraqi immigration trends are likely tocontinue for the foreseeable future.”

National identity was subsequently manipulated with a procedure originally used by Kramer and Brewer (1984) and sub-sequently modified by Kerr (1992) and De Cremer and Van Vugt (1999). In the national identity prime condition participantswere told that their survey responses would be compared to the responses of participants from other nations:

“This study is being conducted in many nations around the world. A primary purpose of this research is to comparehow groups of respondents from the United States perceive immigrants compared to groups of respondents fromother nations around the world. Like you, some people taking this survey are U.S. citizens.”

This group identity prime has been shown to effectively create a sense of collective identification (Turner et al., 1987).In the personal identity prime condition, participants were not provided with cross-nation comparison and were insteadencouraged to evaluate immigrants as an individual:

“A primary purpose of this research is to learn, in general, how individual people perceive immigrants.”

In the personal identity prime condition, an emphasis on differentiation among group members was meant to reinforcea more personalized identity (Turner, 1982; Turner et al., 1987).

2.3. Measures

This study included measures of U.S. identity, and collective self-esteem, as well as two unique measures of perceivedimmigrant employability. Table 1 presents scale means and standard deviations, as well as bivariate correlations and internalconsistency coefficients for all outcome measures.

2.3.1. U.S. identityTo assess the effect of attempting to prime national identity on U.S identification, all participants completed a U.S. identity

outcome measure. Sample 1 participants completed four-item U.S. identity items that included “How much do you identifyyourself with other U.S. citizens,” “Do you think that you have more in common with U.S. citizens than citizens of othernations,” “Do you feel connected to other Americans,” and “Do you like to be seen as an American.” Sample 2 participantscompleted a twelve-item measure of social identity (Cameron, 2009). This measure was framed to operationalize three facetsof U.S. identity that included centrality (e.g., “Being an American is an important reflection of who I am”), ingroup affect (e.g.,“In general, I’m glad to be an American”), and ingroup ties (e.g., “I have a lot in common with other Americans”). In bothsamples, U.S. identification items were answered on a seven-point Likert-type scale. In sample 1 this scale ranged from 1(not at all) to 7 (very much), while in sample 2 the response scale ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Totaland subscale scores were created for both measures by averaging appropriate items.

1 In addition to group-level political affiliation, another common approach is to consider individual differences in continuously measured politicalorientation (e.g., Jost et al., 2009). We elected to focus on political affiliation since overarching group membership may be fundamental and psychologicallyimportant when attempting to prime national identity. Although categorical analysis of a continuous measure is not statistically advisable, it is theoreticallydefensible where there is clear support for two distinct subtypes, and when subtypes are not identified through a median split (MacCallum, Zhang, Preacher,& Rucker, 2002). We believe identifying two well-known political affiliation subtypes through a ten point Likert-type measure, in which participants mustendorse either a conservative or liberal ideology, constitutes such a case, and that this treatment is consistent with political affiliation literature (e.g., Abel& Hornsey, 2010).

Author's personal copy

T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151 141

Table 1Means, standard deviations, internal consistency coefficients, and bivariate associations (n = 81).

Mean SD 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

1. U.S. identity (study response) 5.53 1.19 .812. U.S. identity (MTurk) 5.23 1.24 n/a .933. General perceived employability 2.84 0.95 −.14 −.38* .874. Employability target ratings 4.67 1.29 .18 −.63*** .52*** .905. CSE-membership 4.99 1.07 .47*** .40* −.39*** −.14 .726. CSE-private 5.02 0.95 .45*** .38* −.38*** −.15 .71*** .817. CSE-public 5.00 1.01 .44*** .34 −.35*** −.15 .77*** .82*** .718. CSE-importance 5.07 1.01 .50*** .47* −.44*** −.24* .84*** .81*** .81*** .679. CSE-total 5.03 0.93 .51*** .44* −.42*** −.19 .91*** .91*** .92*** .94*** .88

Notes. CSE = Collective self-esteem. n/a = not applicable. Cronbach’s alpha reported on a diagonal in bold.* p < .05.

*** p < .001.

2.3.2. General perceived employabilityOur first employability outcome assessed participants’ general perceived employability of immigrants. General percep-

tions of immigrant job-seekers were collected using a modified version of the 5-item employability scale developed byBerntson and Marklund (2007). In its original form, this measure assesses perceived self-employability. For the currentstudy, items were modified to address Middle-Eastern (i.e., Iraqi) immigrants. Scale items included ‘Iraqi immigrants’ com-petence is sought after in the labor market,’ ‘Iraqi immigrants have a contact network that they can use to get a job,’ ‘Iraqiimmigrants know of organizations or companies where they can get work,’ ‘Iraqi immigrants’ personal qualities make iteasy for them to get a job,’ and ‘Iraqi immigrants’ experience is in demand in the labor market.’ All items were answeredusing a 5-point Likert-type response scale that ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

2.3.3. Target ratings of immigrant employabilityA second employability outcome assessed ratings of specific immigrant job-seekers. To capture specific employabil-

ity target ratings, all participants completed a scenario measure containing descriptions of six different hypotheticalMiddle-Eastern immigrant job-seekers (Appendix). Descriptions contained information about the particular kind of jobeach immigrant was seeking. To allow for variability in the perceived suitability of immigrants for specific kinds of employ-ment, scenarios were intentionally specified to capture a broad range of occupations (welder, teacher, physician, etc.). Incontrast, and because gender differences were outside the scope of the present research, male immigrant job-seekers weredescribed in all scenarios. Descriptions also provided information about each immigrant target’s age, amount and type ofwork experience back home and in the U.S., time living in the U.S., mastery of the English language, and also field-specific cre-dentials. For each scenario, participants responded to three questions; “I would feel comfortable hiring this individual,” “Thisindividual is well qualified for the position described,” and “I would recommend this individual for the position described.”All questions were answered using a 7-point Likert-type scale that ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Sixseparate employability scores were calculated by summing items for each of the six immigrant targets, with higher scoresindicating greater perceived employability.

2.3.4. Collective self-esteemLuhtanen and Crocker (1992a,b) collective self-esteem scale was administered to assess changes in positive feelings about

one’s social groups derived from activating national identity. This measure includes four subscales, each measured usingfour items. All items are answered using a Likert-type response scale that ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (stronglyagree). The membership esteem subscale assesses an individual’s judgments of how worthy they are as members of theirsocial groups (e.g., “I am a worthy member of the social groups I belong to”). Private collective self-esteem measures personaljudgments of how good one’s social groups are (e.g., “In general, I’m glad to be a member of the social groups I belong to”).Public collective self-esteem that assesses whether one believes others positively evaluate one’s social group (e.g., “Overall,my social groups are considered good by others”). Finally, the importance to identity subscale assesses the significance ofone’s social group memberships to one’s self-concept (e.g., “The social groups I belong to are an important reflection of whoI am”). A score for each of the four collective self-esteem subscales was created by averaging subscale items, with higherscores indicating a greater activation of collective self-esteem. In addition, a total collective self-esteem score was calculatedas the average of subscale scores.

2.4. Overview of statistical analyses

A series of univariate and repeated measures analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were conducted to assess the effect ofpriming national identity on levels of U.S. identification among liberals and conservatives, and to evaluate the independentand conjoint effects of political affiliation and the national identity prime on both perceived employability and collective

Author's personal copy

142 T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151

self-esteem.2 We focused on the combined sample for all analyses with the exception of the U.S. identity outcome, which wasanalyzed separately due to use of a non-common identity measure across samples. For all analyses, a 2(political affiliation:liberal vs. conservative) × 2 (identity prime: personal vs. national) between-participants ANOVA was utilized. UnivariateANOVAs were conducted for both general perceived employability and the sample 1 U.S. identity measure, while mixedANOVAS were used to probe target employability ratings, collective self-esteem and sample 2 U.S. identity due to therepeated measures structure of these measures. Significant effects for both univariate and mixed ANOVAs were probedusing LSD comparison. A two-tailed significance test was utilized for all other pairwise comparisons (e.g., t-tests). Related,a preliminary data analysis revealed significant mean differences between the two sample sources for total collective self-esteem, t(79) = −2.36, p = .021, 95% CI [−0.958, −0.081], d = 0.571, general perceived employability, t(79) = 2.46, p = .016, 95%CI [0.107, 1.01], d = 0.637, and for one employability rating target (Gabil); t(79) = 3.07, p = .003, 95%CI [0.420, 1.976], d = 0.708.To account for potential interference stemming from these response differences, scores on all three measures were group-mean centered prior to examining the effect of political affiliation and the identity manipulation (Fischer, 2004).3 Scalescores below zero were thus interpreted to indicate that a cell mean was below the overall average for a given measure,while scores above zero were interpreted to indicate a cell mean above the overall average.

3. Results

3.1. U.S. identity

The brief U.S. identity outcome measures administered to sample 1 was analyzed using a 2 (political affiliation) × 2 (iden-tity prime) between-participants ANOVAs, while the expanded sample 2 measure was analyzed as a 2 (political affiliation) × 2(identity prime) × 3 (identity subscale) mixed ANOVA. There was a significant main effect of the identity prime in sample 1,F(1, 53) = 3.95, p = .052, partial �2 = .069. Participants in the national identity condition had a stronger U.S. identity (M = 5.83,SD = 0.84) than participants in the personal identity condition (M = 5.54, SD = 0.82). The main effect of political affiliationwas not significant in sample 1, F(1, 53) = 1.51, p = .175, partial �2 = .035, as conservatives (M = 5.88, SD = 0.83) did not overallposses a stronger U.S. identity than liberals (M = 5.60, SD = 0.85). However, the identity prime × political affiliation interactionapproached significance, F(1, 53) = 3.37, p = .072, partial �2 = .060. Although conservatives in the national identity condi-tion had a much stronger U.S. identity (M = 6.38, SD = 0.57) than conservatives in the personal identity condition (M = 5.48,SD = 0.80), liberals in the national identity condition had only a slightly higher U.S. identity (M = 5.63, SD = 0.85) than liberalsin the personal identity condition (M = 5.58, SD = 0.85). For sample 2, Mauchly’s test of sphericity was significant (p < .001),indicating that the assumption of equality of variance across conditions was violated. Thus, interpretations were basedon the Greenhouse–Geisser statistic, which corrected significance tests for differences in variance across the U.S. identitysubscales. The repeated measures main effect was significant, indicating differences between centrality (M = 5.65, SD = 1.09),affect (M = 4.13, SD = 1.84), and ingroup ties (M = 5.92, SD = 1.23) identity subscales. Of greater interest, sample 2 corroboratedand extended the marginal identity prime x political affiliation interaction observed in sample 1, F(1, 20) = 4.98, p = .037, par-tial �2 = .199. Although conservatives primed with national identity had a stronger U.S. identity (M = 5.98, SD = 0.88) thanconservatives in the personal identity condition (M = 5.38, SD = 1.00), liberals in the national identity condition had a weakerU.S. identity (M = 3.92, SD = 1.21) than liberals in the personal identity condition (M = 5.28, SD = 1.23). The main effect of theidentity prime was not significant in sample 2, F(1, 20) = 0.77, p = .391, partial �2 = .037. However, the main effect of polit-ical affiliation was significant, F(1, 20) = 6.02, p = .023, partial �2 = .231. In sample 2, national identity was stronger amongconservatives (M = 5.68, SD = 0.96) than among liberals (M = 4.60, SD = 1.36).

3.2. General perceived employability

Table 2 presents cell means and standard deviations for general perceived employability on the combined employersample. These scores were examined using a 2 (political affiliation) × 2 (identity prime) between-participants ANOVA. Themain effect of political affiliation was significant, F(1, 77) = 6.30, p = .014, partial �2 = .076. Consistent with prior research,general perceived employability of immigrants was lower among conservatives (M = −0.31, SD = 0.95) than among liberals(M = 0.19, SD = 0.86). There was no main effect of the identity prime, F(1, 77) = 0.11, p = .741, partial �2 = .001. However, thepredicted political affiliation × identity prime interaction was significant, F(1, 77) = 4.71, p = .033, partial �2 = .058. As seen inFig. 1, general perceived employability was lower for conservatives in the national identity condition than conservatives inthe personal identity condition (d = −.54). Conversely, general perceived employability was higher for liberals in the national

2 To ensure that attending to categorical-level political affiliation did not result in statistically spurious findings, analyses for general perceived employ-ability, target employability ratings, and collective self-esteem were also conducted using a moderated multiple regression framework (Aiken & West,1991), in which political orientation was analyzed as a continuous individual difference. For these analyses, univariate scale totals were used for both targetratings and collective self-esteem. Controlling for sample source, a significant political orientation x identity prime interaction term for each of generalperceived employability (B = .16, SE = .08, p = .048), target employability ratings (B = .36, SE = .11, p = .002), and collective self-esteem (B = .30, SE = .16, p = .059)corroborated results obtained through analyses of group-level political affiliation.

3 We also analyzed uncentered means. In addition, we conducted analyses that included ethnicity, gender, education, and income as covariates. Both ofthese modifications produced results that were highly similar to those currently reported.

Author's personal copy

T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151 143

Table 2Collective self-esteem and job-seeker employability ratings as a function of political affiliation and identity prime (n = 81).

Liberal Conservative

National Personal National Personal

CSE total −0.15(0.92)a −0.28(0.96)a 0.74(0.57)b −0.05(0.71)a

General perceived employability 0.36(0.70)a −0.01(1.00)a −0.58(1.03)b −0.07(0.84)a

Jamail 0.47(1.09)a −0.30(1.33)bd −0.86(1.92)bc 0.45(1.29)ad

Al Ali 0.17(1.50)a 0.12(1.72)a −0.30(1.82)a −0.16(1.69)a

Zaid 0.32(1.36)a −0.06(1.65)a −0.53(1.36)b 0.06(1.73)a

Malik 0.59(1.44)a −0.45(1.58)b −0.71(1.77)bc 0.55(1.62)a

Gabil 0.68(1.39)a −0.41(1.45)b −084(1.68)b 0.25(1.61)ac

Muhammad 0.40(0.98)a −0.29(1.65)ab −0.59(1.66)b 0.30(1.68)ab

Combined 0.43(1.02)a −0.24(1.37)bc −0.65(1.45)b 0.23(1.19)ac

Notes. CSE = collective self-esteem total scale average. Significant pairwise differences do not contain a common superscript. Pairwise differences assessedusing LSD comparison at p < .05.

identity condition than liberals in the personal identity condition, though this pairwise difference was slightly less robust(d = .43). Thus, conservatives had lower general perceived employability of immigrants when primed with national identity,while this pattern was inverted for liberals.

3.3. Target ratings of immigrant employability

Table 2 also presents cell means and standard deviations for perceived employability of specific immigrant rating tar-gets. These ratings were examined for the combined sample using a 2 (political affiliation) × 2 (identity prime) × 6 (targetratings) mixed ANOVA, with target ratings serving as the repeated measures factor and political affiliation and the identityprime both serving as between-participants factors. Mauchly’s test of sphericity was again significant (p < .001). Thus, inter-pretations were based on the Greenhouse–Geisser statistic, which corrected significance tests for differences in varianceacross the rating targets. The two-way political affiliation × identity prime interaction was significant, F(1, 77) = 7.57, p = .007,partial �2 = .090. This interaction replicated the effect obtained for general perceived employability; conservatives primedwith national identity gave lower overall employability ratings to targets than conservatives primed with a personal iden-tity (M = −0.65, SD = 1.45 vs. M = 0.23, SD = 1.19; p = .050, d = −.66), while liberals primed with national identity gave higheroverall ratings than liberals primed with a personal identity (M = 0.43, SD = 1.02 vs. M = −0.23, SD = 1.35; p = .060, d = .55). Theimmigrant target × political affiliation interaction was not significant, F(3.99, 367.98) = 0.24, p = .936, partial �2 = .003, norwas the immigrant target × identity prime interaction, F(4.02, 390.37) = 0.17, p = .954, partial �2 = .002. In addition, there wasno significant main effect for target ratings, F(4.02, 390.37) = 1.56, p = .170, partial �2 = .020).

The political affiliation × identity prime x immigrant target effect was also significant, F(3.99, 367.98) = 4.14, p = .009,partial �2 = .043. This three-way interaction suggested that the combined effect of political affiliation and national identityfurther depended on the specific immigrant target that was rated. Table 2 presents cell means and standard deviation foreach of the six immigrant rating targets, while Fig. 2 provides a visual representation. For three immigrant targets (Jamail,Malik, and Gabil) there were significant pairwise differences between national and personal identity for both liberals andconservatives. For conservatives, perceived employability of all three targets was lower in the national identity conditionthan in the personal identity condition, while for liberals the opposite effect was always observed. There were no signif-icant differences between nationally primed liberals and personally primed conservatives, or between personally primed

Fig. 1. General perceived employability and collective self-esteem as a function of political affiliation and national identity.

Author's personal copy

144 T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151

Liberals Conservatives

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

Personal primeNational prime-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

Personal primeNational prime

Jamail

Ali

Zaid

Malik

Gabil

Muhammad

Fig. 2. Target employability ratings as a function of political affiliation and national identity.

liberals and nationally primed conservatives for each of these three targets. For two immigrant targets (Muhammad, Zaid)only pairwise differences involving nationally primed conservatives were significant, with a national identity prime againpromoting lower employability ratings. Lastly, for one immigrant target (Ali), there were no significant differences for eitherliberals or conservatives.

3.4. Collective self-esteem

Table 2 presents cell means and standard deviations for collective self-esteem alongside those obtained for employabilitymeasures. To assess changes in collective self-esteem, a 2 (political affiliation) × 2 (identity prime) × 4 (collective self-esteemsubscale) mixed ANOVA was conducted. Collective self-esteem subscales served as the repeated measures factor, whilepolitical affiliation and identity prime served as between-participants factors. Mauchly’s test of sphericity was significant(p < .001). Thus, interpretations were again based on the Greenhouse–Geisser statistic. The within subjects effect of collec-tive self-esteem was significant, indicating mean differences among the collective self-esteem subscales, F(3, 77) = 77.64,p < .001, partial �2 = .502. In addition, the collective self-esteem × political affiliation interaction was significant, indicatingthat subscale differences further depended on political affiliation, F(3, 77) = 5.16, p = .002, partial �2 = .063. Of greater sub-stantive interest, the between-participants main effect of political affiliation was significant, F(1, 77) = 5.74, p = .019, partial�2 = .069. Conservatives had higher overall collective self-esteem (M = 0.32, SD = 0.75) than liberals (M = −0.21, SD = 0.93). Inaddition, the between-participants main effect of the identity prime was significant F(1, 77) = 4.36, p = .040, partial �2 = .054.Participants primed with national identity had higher overall collective self-esteem (M = 0.18, SD = 0.91) than personally-primed participants (M = −0.18, SD = 0.86). The between-participants main effects were both qualified by a notable politicalaffiliation × identity prime interaction, F(1, 77) = 3.52, p = .064, partial �2 = .044. Conservatives had higher overall collectiveself-esteem when primed with a national identity (M = 0.74, SD = 0.57) than when primed with a personal identity (M = −0.05,SD = 0.71). In contrast, collective self esteem among liberals was not substantially different between liberals primed witha national (M = −0.15, SD = 0.92) versus personal identity (M = −0.28, SD = 0.96). Thus, conservatives had higher collectiveself-esteem when primed with national identity, while liberals’ collective self-esteem was not affected by the identityprime.

A mediation analysis was conducted to test the hypothesis that collective self-esteem would transmit the conjoint effectof political affiliation and induced national identity on perceived employability of immigrants. We performed mediationanalysis using the total score for collective self-esteem. In addition, since the multivariate effect was significant for targetratings of employability, we focused mediation analysis on the general perceived employability measure. Collective self-esteem was expected to mediate an interactive effect of political affiliation and national identity, as opposed to transmittinga main effect of either variable. As such, mediation was evaluated using a mediated-moderation framework. Support formediated-moderation is obtained in two steps (Morgan-Lopez & MacKinnon, 2006). First, significant moderator relationshipswith predictor variables must be established for both the mediating and outcome variables. Second, predictor variables, theircross product (i.e., interaction term), and the hypothesized mediator must be simultaneously regressed onto an outcomevariable. Mediated-moderation is attained when the proposed mediator remains a significant predictor of the outcome whilethe interaction term does not.

For illustrative purposes, mediation regressions suggested by Baron and Kenny (1986) are presented in Fig. 3. Theseregressions used a two-way interaction term, which was calculated using effect coded vectors for each independent vari-able. Variable vectors were coded −1 and 1 for conservative versus liberal employers, and for personal versus nationalprime, respectively. The two-way interaction term and collective self-esteem were always assessed on the second stepof hierarchical multiple regressions, after accounting for variance explained by the main effects of political affiliation andnational identity on the first step. Our prior conducted ANOVAs demonstrated that the political affiliation × identity primeinteraction significantly predicted both collective self-esteem (the proposed mediator) and also perceived employability(the proposed outcome), thus fulfilling the first requirement of mediated-moderation. The second requirement was also

Author's personal copy

T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151 145

β = -.18*

Perceived

Employability

Collective Self-Esteem

β = -.35***

(β = -.32***)

Political Affiliation

x National Identity

Interaction Term β = .24**

(β =-.17)

Fig. 3. Mediated-moderation: collective self-esteem fully mediates the interaction of political affiliation and primed identity on perceived employabilityof immigrants. *p < .10, **p < .05, ***p < .001.

met in that collective self-esteem remained a significant predictor while the two-way interaction term did not when thesevariables were simultaneously regressed onto perceived employability. We assessed the significance of the indirect effectusing bootstrap procedures for obtaining confidence intervals (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). Selig and Preacher’s (2008) macrowith 5000 re-samples suggested that the indirect effect was significant, corroborating that the interactive effect of politicalaffiliation and primed national identity on perceived employability of immigrants occurred through changes in collectiveself-esteem (Bindirect effect = 0.05; 95% CI upper = 0.14; lower = 0.00).

4. Discussion

In this study, an experimentally induced national identity moderated the effect of political affiliation on perceivedemployability of immigrants. Conservative U.S. employers evaluated immigrant job-seekers more harshly when primed withnational identity than when primed with personal identity. Conversely, liberal employers evaluated immigrant job-seekersmore favorably when primed with national identity. Overall, this initial demonstration aligns with emerging research thatsuggests national identity can either bolster or lessen harshness toward immigrants (e.g., Smeekes et al., 2012; Wakefieldet al., 2011). However, this study is the first to our knowledge to demonstrate a potential polarizing effect of experimentallyprimed national identity on the links between political affiliation and treatment of immigrants. We foresee several implica-tions and future directions for continued research on social influence processes in employment and other domains relatedto immigrant well-being.

Foremost, strong support was obtained for the hypothesis that immigrant job-seekers would be evaluated most harshlyby conservative employers primed with national identity. An interactive effect of conservatism and national identity extendsthe available literature on harsh treatment of immigrants, where dispositional tendencies and group identities have beenmostly examined in isolation of one another. On one hand, the capacity of national identity to bolster lack of support forimmigrant job-seekers reveals that conservatives can be persuaded to view immigrants even more harshly by group-levelidentity. Thus, and consistent with social identity literature, the current results illustrate that national identity may furtheraccentuate conservatives’ tendencies toward harsh treatment of immigrants. However, the current results also suggest thatconservatives may exhibit relatively favorable treatment of immigrants, but only when primed with personal identity. It isnoteworthy that, on average, conservatives primed with a personal identity rated immigrant targets nearly as favorably asliberals primed with national identity.

The present research further supports the notion that national identity may affect liberal employers’ views of immigrantjob-seekers. Like conservatives, liberals seem capable of more and less exclusionary treatment of immigrant job-seekers.However, national rather than personal identity was associated with greater support for immigrant job-seekers among liber-als. Consistent with prior research that suggests heterogeneity in the implicit meaning of national identity (e.g., Yogeeswaran& Dasgupta, 2010), this finding perhaps underscores that liberal group norms prescribe tolerance and respectful treatmentof stigmatized or disadvantaged others (e.g., Braithwaite, 1998, Skitka & Tetlock, 1993). In turn, national identity may beassociated with egalitarian beliefs and prosocial treatment of others among liberals (e.g., Butz et al., 2007). However, it isalso noteworthy that we observed a potential ironic effect of attempting to prime national identity among liberals. Namely,identity-prime results for sample 2 suggested that inducing national identity may have resulted in less rather than more U.S.identity among liberals. Thus, the effect of national identity among liberals could be interpreted not only as demonstrat-ing the capacity of U.S. identity to elicit egalitarianism among liberals, but also as reactance against an explicit attempt toprime national identity. Future research will be needed to explore both implicit egalitarianism and ironic identity rejectionhypotheses.

The current research can also be considered alongside emerging research examining incidentally primed national identity,in which brief exposure to symbols such as flags are used to activate national identity (e.g., Butz, 2009; Carter, Ferguson, &Hassin, 2011; Ferguson & Hassin, 2007). Recent research suggests that incidental exposure to national symbols can facilitateboth exclusionary judgments and behavior (e.g., Carter, Ferguson, & Hassin, 2011) and also egalitarian attitudes and actions

Author's personal copy

146 T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151

(e.g., Butz, 2009). Although future research will be needed to disentangle circumstances under which incidental exposureto national symbols facilitates or lessens harshness toward others, the current results suggest that such effects may dependon individual difference characteristics, including political affiliation. However, we encourage caution in directly linking thecurrent results to existing literature on incidental priming, as the methodology used to prime national identity in our researchdiffers from methods used to incidentally prime national identity. Specifically, we relied on a deliberate other-nation socialcomparison manipulation to induce a sense of collective identification (Kerr, 1992; De Cremer & Van Vugt, 1999), as opposedto transiently activating national identity through subliminal exposure to national symbols. Future immigrant employabilityresearch may wish to consider other methods of priming national identity, including incidental exposure to national symbols.

Another contribution of the present research comes from demonstrating that national identity increases collective self-esteem among conservatives, and that collective self-esteem may act as an important psychological linking mechanism. Priorresearch suggests that collective self-esteem can act as a mediator (Bettencourt & Dorr, 1997; Blaine & Crocker, 1995; Liang& Fassinger, 2008), in addition to functioning as an individual difference moderator. The current research is the first to ourknowledge to demonstrate that transient fluctuations in collective self-esteem may arise from inducing national identity,and that increases in collective self-esteem may be especially well observed among conservatives. In turn, increases in collec-tive self-esteem mediated links between national identity and harsher views of immigrant job seekers among conservativeemployers (i.e., mediated-moderation). A deleterious effect on treatment of immigrant job seekers is consistent with priorresearch that has emphasized the potential for group-based self-esteem to facilitate outgroup hostility (de Zavala & Cichocka,2011; Lyons, Kenworthy, & Popan, 2010). Although increases in collective self-esteem explained harsher views of immigrantjob seekers among nationally primed conservative employers, evidence was less robust concerning collective self-esteemand treatment of immigrants among liberal employers. One possibility is that collective self-esteem may be connected torelated group norms or values that differ between liberals and conservatives. For example, recent work exploring the moralfoundations of political affiliation suggests that conservatives may place greater value on ingroup loyalty than liberals (e.g.,Graham, Haidt, & Nosek, 2009; Haidt, Graham, & Joseph, 2009). It could be that group differences in loyalty or other under-lying values also connect to the currently observed differences for collective self-esteem, such that loyalty is manifested aspositive group-based esteem for conservatives, but not liberals. Future research must continue to explore emotional andcognitive pathways that link national identity to less rather than more harsh treatment of immigrants among liberals, per-haps including direct measures of constructs such as egalitarianism that could encompass liberals’ implicit prototypes ofnational identity, and that could further explicate the mechanistic functions of collective self-esteem. More generally, thecurrent results pertaining to collective self-esteem should be interpreted as preliminary, not only because future researchwill be needed to explore the psychological foundations of presently observed group differences, but also because statisti-cal evidence for mediation via collective self-esteem in the current research was relatively modest (i.e., marginal indirecteffect).

In addition to examining general attitudes toward immigrants, the present study links political affiliation and nationalidentity to ratings of specific immigrant job-seekers. In doing so, the current study revealed that polarizing effects of nationalidentity may be observed when liberals and conservatives consider some immigrant job-seekers, but not others. Althoughour research was primarily focused on a characteristic of employers, the significant three-way interaction that we achievedfor rating targets underscores that the polarizing effect of national-identity possibly also depends on the characteristics ofparticular job-seekers. For example, while differences appeared less pronounced for targets who were described as seekingseemingly less skilled work (e.g., welder and salesman), polarizing effects were consistently observed for immigrants whowere described as seeking high-level professional employment (e.g., physician and dentist). Future research will be needed toilluminate the specific and multivariate nature of the three-way interaction that we observed for employment rating targets.Along these lines, two existing theoretical paradigms may prove especially useful. First, the aversive racism platform maybe useful in attending to differences among immigrant job seekers (Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986). Namely, employers maychoose to discriminate against particular immigrant job seekers, but only when less favorable assessments can be readilyattributed to some aspect of an immigrant job seeker, such as poor language skills or other unknown job qualifications, thatallow an employer to retain a view of the self as fair and unbiased. Second, a useful paradigm for better understanding howcharacteristics of employers and job seekers combine to affect perceived employability is suggested by generalizability (G)theory. Traditionally thought of as a framework for examining the reliability of observations or test scores (Cronbach, Gleser,Nanda, & Rajaratnam, 1972), G theory and analysis also provide a useful approach for deconstructing sources of variancein interpersonal perception (for recent examples, Lucas, Lakey, Alexander, & Arnetz, 2009; Lucas, Lakey, Arnetz, & Arnetz,2010; Lucas, Weidner, & Janisse, 2012). We foresee that target employability ratings could be deconstructed using a G theoryframework to illuminate the extent to which perceived employability depends on characteristics of employers (e.g., politicalaffiliation or familial immigrant background), job-seekers (e.g., sociodemographic characteristics, pre and post migrationtraining, type of employment sought), and also relationships between them (see also, Blommaert, Coenders, & van Tubergen,2013).

Of practical value, the present study carries potential implications for an immigrant employment intervention environ-ment, especially to the extent that results can suggest specific uses of national identity that may be helpful to immigrantjob-seekers. However, the practicality of an identity-based intervention hinges on the extent to which employer politicalaffiliation can be a priori identified and national identity appropriately segmented (e.g., Albrecht & Bryant, 1996). Develop-ing methods to match group-level and pro-immigrant identities to employer characteristics is an intriguing and importantdirection for future research on immigrant employment.

Author's personal copy

T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151 147

4.1. Limitations

A few limitations suggest a cautious interpretation of results, and also directions for future research. First, this studyonly assessed evaluations of Middle-Eastern immigrants in a single host nation. This initial focus was appropriate given theacute difficulties Middle Eastern job-seekers have in procuring employment post 9/11 in the United States. Nevertheless, itis possible that the political affiliation and identity saliency effects observed presently operate differently when evaluatingother immigrant groups, or in other nations. Second, this research is somewhat limited by relying on a general sampleof employment experts. Although an important strength stems from recruiting participants whose primary work functionsinvolved hiring others, this does not ensure that participants had sufficient knowledge to consider a capacity for employmentin all of the currently assessed occupational domains. For example, while physicians may be well qualified to evaluate theemployment candidacy of an immigrant physician, they may lack knowledge of the necessary credentialing or experiencefor an immigrant to accept a position as a teacher. Future research therefore must include specific evaluations of the differentforms of employment that immigrant job-seekers may consider.

A third potential limitation encompasses the use of multiple sample sources. Although we observed a robust overalleffect of political affiliation and national identity, this does not preclude possible differences in perceived employabilityin samples collected at different times from two different sources. Related, we observed slight differences in the politicalaffiliation × identity prime interaction between samples, though this difference is conflated with the use of a more robustidentity measure in sample 2. A final potential limitation concerns that collective self-esteem was measured in generalterms in the current research. Although a general framing is consistent with prior uses of this measure, one importantfuture direction will be to explore how specific (i.e., national) forms of collective self-esteem are implicated in psychologicalprocesses that link political affiliation and national identity to treatment of immigrants.

5. Conclusion

Political affiliation and national identity both may contribute to exclusionary treatment of immigrants, though availableresearch has not well attended to their potential to jointly influence attitudes toward immigrants. The present researchadvances available literature by initially demonstrating the potential for national identity to polarize tendencies that promotetolerant versus exclusionary treatment of immigrant job-seekers among liberal and conservative employers. Moreover,current findings suggest that inducing national identity may potentially disinhibit harshness toward immigrants amongconservatives because of increases in collective self-esteem that also result from priming national identity. Ultimately, thecurrent research aligns with emerging perspectives that suggest national identity may both compel and lessen exclusionarytreatment of immigrants depending on its ascribed ingroup meaning. Moreover, the current research supports the potentialfor distinct concepts of national identity among liberals and conservatives that possibly explain its polarizing effect onevaluations of immigrants. Though much additional research is required, the present research indicates a potential to oneday assist immigrant job-seekers by crafting psychological interventions rooted in the selective use of national identityinductions among host-nation employers.

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by a Wayne State University Research Enhancement Grant, awarded to the first author. Portionsof this research were presented at the 2010 Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues Biennial Conference (NewOrleans, LA). We thank two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on presentation of this research.

Appendix. Immigrant Employability Measure.

Immigrant employment poses many challenges for managers who make hiring decisions. In particular, it is often difficultfor host-nation employers to determine whether immigrant job applicants possess skills and training that qualify them forpositions they apply for. Below are descriptions of six immigrant job applicants. Please read each scenario and decide howlikely it is that this individual would be to hired for the position described. Assume that each individual would be legallycertified or licensed to work in their respective field in their new nation. Following each immigrant’s description, there arequestions regarding the likelihood of employability for that person. Please indicate the extent to which you agree with thesequestions on the following 7-point scale:

1 = strongly disagree2 = moderately disagree3 = slightly disagree4 = neutral5 = slightly agree6 = moderately agree7 = strongly agree

Author's personal copy

148 T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151

1. Jamaila is a 45 year old Iraqi who immigrated 5 years ago. Jamail was trained and employed in Iraq as a family practice physician. Before arriving inhis new homeland, Jamail ran a successful medical practice in Iraq for over 12 years. Although it took him some time to do so, Jamail recently obtainedrequired licensure from accrediting agencies to practice medicine in his new homeland. Jamail has applied for a position with a family medicinepractice in a metropolitan area. He believes this position is comparable to the one he held back home.I would feel comfortable hiring this individual.1 2 3 4 5 6 7This individual is well qualified for the position described.1 2 3 4 5 6 7I would recommend this individual for the position described.1 2 3 4 5 6 72. Alib is a 27 year old Iraqi who immigrated only 3 months ago. Ali was employed as a welder in Iraq for almost 1 year, and he reports that he receivedbasic welding training from his previous employer. Ali has not yet mastered the native language, although his linguistic skills have vastly improved inthe short time since arrival in his new homeland. Ali is seeking employment with a local machine shop that has advertised a need for an experiencedwelder.I would feel comfortable hiring this individual.1 2 3 4 5 6 7This individual is well qualified for the position described.1 2 3 4 5 6 7I would recommend this individual for the position described.1 2 3 4 5 6 73. Zaidc is a 36 year old Iraqi who immigrated over 10 years ago. Zaid has spent his entire adult life in sales. In Iraq, Zaid primarily sold industrialcomputer systems and equipment. Since arriving in his new homeland, Zaid has held a number of different sales positions. As an immigrant, his longesttenure with a job was over 2 years, while his shortest stint lasted only 3 weeks. Zaid is seeking employment as a sales representative with a well knownelectronics company.I would feel comfortable hiring this individual.1 2 3 4 5 6 7This individual is well qualified for the position described.1 2 3 4 5 6 7I would recommend this individual for the position described.1 2 3 4 5 6 74. Malikd is a 22 year old Iraqi male who immigrated over a year ago. Malik received a teaching certification in Iraq but left before he could find work asan educator. Malik teaches secondary (high school) science and math, and he speaks fluently in his host-nation language. Although inexperienced, Malikreports that he received high marks in his prior training program. Malik has applied for a position as a basic science teacher in an urban school district.I would feel comfortable hiring this individual.1 2 3 4 5 6 7This individual is well qualified for the position described.1 2 3 4 5 6 7I would recommend this individual for the position described.1 2 3 4 5 6 75. Gabile is a 51 year old Iraqi who immigrated two years ago. Gabil was a practicing dentist for over 20 years in Iraq. Although he has desperatelywanted to do so, Gabil has not practiced dentistry since arriving in his new homeland over two years ago. Gabil has strong references from colleaguesback home, though the standards for Iraqi dental care are not well understood. Gabil seeks to join a new dental practice that will open in a suburbancommunity in the coming months.I would feel comfortable hiring this individual.1 2 3 4 5 6 7This individual is well qualified for the position described.1 2 3 4 5 6 7I would recommend this individual for the position described.1 2 3 4 5 6 76. Muhammadf is a 32 year old Iraqi computer programmer who immigrated over 3 years ago. Muhammad is well versed in the latest programminglanguages and made a comfortable living in Iraq as a programmer. As a freelance website developer, Muhammad has mostly worked alone throughouthis career. Though his linguistic skills aren’t perfect, Muhammad believes he speaks well enough to interact with non-Iraqi computer programmers inhis new homeland. Muhammad seeks employment with a company that has advertised a need for a competent programmer to help developcommercial websites.I would feel comfortable hiring this individual.1 2 3 4 5 6 7This individual is well qualified for the position described.1 2 3 4 5 6 7I would recommend this individual for the position described.1 2 3 4 5 6 7a Obtained range was 1–7 for Jamail (M = 5.30, SD = 1.46); ̨ = .93.b Obtained range was 1–7 for Ali (M = 4.27, SD = 1.67); ̨ = .93.c Obtained range was 1–7 for Zaid (M = 4.70, SD = 1.54); ̨ = .91.d Obtained range was 1–7 for Malik (M = 4.51, SD = 1.65); ̨ = .93.e Obtained range was 1–7 for Gabil (M = 4.22, SD = 1.69); ̨ = .94.f Obtained range was 1–7 for Muhammad (M = 5.02, SD = 1.50); ̨ = .94.

Author's personal copy

T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151 149

References

Abel, L., & Hornsey, M. (2010). Social identity and moral judgment: The impact of political affiliation on the evaluation of government policy. In R. E. Hicks(Ed.), Personality and individual differences: Current directions. Australia: Australian Academic Press.

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Alarcón, R. (1999). Recruitment processes among foreign-born engineers and scientists in Silico Valley. American Behavioral Scientist, 42, 1380–1399.Albrecht, T. L., & Bryant, C. (1996). Advances in segmentation modeling for health communication and social marketing campaigns. Journal of Health

Communication, 1, 65–80.Amazon (2013). Retrieved from https://requester.mturk.com/Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical

considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.Berntson, E., & Marklund, S. (2007). The relationship between perceived employability and subsequent health. Work & Stress, 2, 279–292.Bettencourt, B. A., & Dorr, N. (1997). Collective self-esteem as a mediator of the relationship between allocentrism and subjective well-being. Personality

and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 963–972.Bierbrauer, G., & Klinger, E. W. (2002). Political ideology, perceived threat, and justice towards immigrants. Social Justice Research, 15, 41–52.Blaine, B., & Crocker, J. (1995). Religiousness, race, and psychological well-being: Exploring social-psychological mediators. Personality and Social Psychology

Bulletin, 21, 1031–1041.Blommaert, L., Coenders, M., & van Tubergen, F. (2013). Ethnic discrimination in recruitment and decision makers’ features: Evidence from labora-

tory experiment and survey data using a student sample. Social Indicators Research, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0329-4 (advance onlinepublication)

Bobo, L. (1999). Prejudice as group position: Microfoundations of a sociological approach to racism and race relations. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 445–472.Braithwaite, V. (1998). The value orientations underlying liberalism-conservatism. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 575–589.Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high quality, data? Perspectives on

Psychological Science, 6, 3–5.Butz, D. A. (2009). National symbols as agents of psychological and social change. Political Psychology, 30, 779–804.Butz, D. A., Plant, E. A., & Doerr, C. E. (2007). Liberty and justice for all? Implications of exposure to the U.S. flag for intergroup relations. Personality and

Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(3), 396–408.Cameron, J. E. (2009). A three-factor model of social identity. Self and Identity, 3, 239–262.Carter, T. J., Ferguson, M. J., & Hassin, R. R. (2011). A single exposure to the American flag shifts support toward republicanism up to 8 months later.

Psychological Science, 22, 1011–1018.Cronbach, L. J., Gleser, G. C., Nanda, H., & Rajaratnam, N. (1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements: Theory of generalizability for scores and profiles.

New York: John Wiley & Sons.Citrin, J., Wong, C., & Duff, B. (2001). The meaning of American national identity: Patterns of ethnic conflict and consensus. In R. D. Ashmore, & L. Jussim

(Eds.), Social identity, integroup conflict, and conflict reduction (pp. 71–100). London: Oxford University Press.Costello, K., & Hodson, G. (2010). Exploring the roots of dehumanization: The role of animal human similarity in promoting immigrant humanization. Group

Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13, 3–22.Crocker, J., & Luhtanen, R. (1990). Collective self-esteem and ingroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 60–67.Duckitt, J., Wagner, C. U., Plessis, I., & Birum, I. (2002). The psychological bases of ideology and prejudice: Testing a dual process model. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 83, 75–93.De Cremer, D., & Van Vugt, M. (1999). Social identification effects in social dilemmas: A transformation of motives. European Journal of Social Psychology,

29, 871–893.Devos, T., & Banaji, M. R. (2005). American = White? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 447–466.De Vries, S., & Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Effects of ethnic diversity: The position of minority workers in two Dutch organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology,

28, 1503–1529.de Zavala, A. G., & Cichocka, A. (2011). Collective narcissism and anti-Semitism in Poland. Group Process and Intergroup Relations, 15, 213–229.Evers, A., Te Nijenhuis, J., & Van der Flier, H. (2005). Ethnic bias and fairness in personnel selection: Evidence and consequences. In A. Evers, N. Anderson,

& O. Smit-Voskuijl (Eds.), The Blackwell Handbook of Personnel Selection (pp. 306–328). Oxford, England: Blackwell.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.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.Federico, C. M., & Sidanius, J. (2002). Sophistication and the antecedents of whites’ racial policy attitudes: Racism, ideology, and affirmative action in

America. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66, 145–176.Ferguson, M. J., & Hassin, R. R. (2007). On the automatic association between America and aggression for news watchers. Personality and Social Psychology

Bulletin, 33, 1632–1647.Fischer, R. (2004). Standardization to account for cross-cultural response bias: A classification of score adjustment procedures and review of research in

JCCP. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 263–282.Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1986). The aversive form of racism. In J. F. Dovidio, & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination and racism: Theory and

research (pp. 61–89). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. (2009). Liberals and conservatives use different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96,

1029–1046.Grant, P. R. (2007). Sustaining a strong cultural and national identity: The acculturation of immigrants and second generation Canadians of Asian and African

descent. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 8, 89–116.Grant, P. R., & Nadin, S. (2007). The credentialing problems of foreign trained personnel from Asia and Africa intending to make their home in Canada: A

social psychological perspective. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 8, 141–162.Haidt, J., Graham, J., & Joseph, C. (2009). Above and below left-right: Ideological narratives and moral foundations. Psychological Inquiry, 20, 110–119.Harcourt, M., Lam, H., Harcourt, S., & Flynn, M. (2008). Discrimination against immigrants and Ethnic minorities in hiring: The effects of unionization.

International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19, 98–115.Hitlan, R. T., Carrillo, K., Zarate, M. A., & Aikman, S. N. (2007). Attitudes toward immigrant groups and the September 11 terrorist attacks. Peace and Conflict

Studies, 13(2), 135–152.Hornsey, M. J. (2008). Social identity theory and self-categorization theory: A historical review. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 204–222.Huntington, S. (2004). Who we are: The challenges to American national identity. New York: Simon and Schuster.Ibish, H., & Stewart, A. (2003). Report on hate crimes and discrimination against Arab Americans 2003: The post-September 11 backlash, September 11,

2001–October 11, 2001. Washington, DC: American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee.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.Joppke, C. (2004). The retreat of multiculturalism in the liberal state: Theory and policy. British Journal of Sociology, 55, 237–257.Jost, J. T., Federico, C. M., & Napier, J. L. (2009). Political ideology: Its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 307–

337.

Author's personal copy

150 T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151

Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. B. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychology Bulletin, 129, 339–375.Katz, I., & Hass, R. G. (1988). Racial ambivalence and American value conflict: Correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 893–905.Kanas, A., Van Tubergen, F., & Van der Lippe, T. (2009). Immigrant self-employment: Testing hypotheses about the role of origin-and host-country human

capital and bonding and bridging social capital. Work & Occupations, 36, 181–208.Kerr, N. L. (1992). Efficacy as a causal and moderating variable in social dilemmas. In W. B. G. Liebrand, D. M. Messick, & H. A. M. Wilke (Eds.), Social dilemmas:

Theoretical issues and research findings (pp. 59–80). Oxford: Pergamon Press.Kluegel, J. R., & Smith, E. R. (1986). Beliefs about inequality. New York: Walter de Gruyter.Kramer, R. M., & Brewer, M. B. (1984). Effects of group identity on resource use in a simulated commons dilemma. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

46, 1044–1057.Krochik, M., & Jost, J. T. (2011). Ideological conflict and polarization: A social psychological perspective. In D. Bar-Tal (Ed.), Intergroup conflicts and their

resolution: A social psychological perspective (pp. 145–174). New York: Psychology Press.Kulwiki, A., Khalifa, R., & Moore, G. (2008). The effects of September 11 on Arab American nurses in Metropolitan Detroit. Journal of Transcultural Nursing,

19, 134–139.Li, Q., & Brewer, M. B. (2004). What does it mean to an American? Patriotism, nationalism, and American Identity after 9/11. Political Psychology, 25, 727–739.Liang, C. T. H., & Fassinger, R. E. (2008). Collective self-esteem in the relationship between racism-related stress and psychological adjustment: A test of

moderator and mediator hypotheses. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 14, 19–28.Lipset, S. M. (1960). Political man. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of one’s social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 302–

318.Lucas, T., Alexander, S., Firestone, I. J., & Baltes, B. B. (2006). Self-efficacy and independence from social influence: Discovery of an efficacy-difficulty effect.

Social Influence, 1, 58–80.Lucas, T., Lakey, B., Alexander, S., & Arnetz, B. (2009). Individuals and illnesses as sources of perceived preventability. Psychology, Health and Medicine, 14,

322–330.Lucas, T., Lakey, B., Arnetz, J., & Arnetz, B. (2010). Do ratings of African American cultural competency reflect characteristics of providers or perceivers?

Initial demonstration of a generalizability theory approach. Psychology, Health and Medicine, 15, 445–453.Lucas, T., Weidner, N., & Janisse, J. (2012). Where does work stress come from? A generalizability analysis of stress in police officers. Psychology & Health,

27, 1426–1447.Licata, L., & Klein, O. (2002). Does European citizenship breed xenophobia? European identification as a predictor of intolerance towards immigrants. Journal

of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 12, 323–337.Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of one’s social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 302–318.Lyons, P. A., Kenworthy, J. B., & Popan, J. R. (2010). Ingroup identification and group-level narcissim as predictors of U.S. Citizens’ attitudes and behavior

toward Arab immigrants. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1267–1280.Lynn, N., & Lea, S. A. (2003). Phantom menace and the new apartheid: The social construction of asylum seekers in the United Kingdom. Discourse and

Society, 14, 425–452.MacCallum, R. C., Zhang, S., Preacher, K. J., & Rucker, D. D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7,

19–40.Montada, L., & Schneider, A. (1989). Justice and emotional reactions to the disadvantaged. Social Justice Research, 3, 313–344.Morgan-Lopez, A. A., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2006). Demonstration and evaluation of a method for assessing mediated moderation. Behavior Research Methods,

38, 77–87.Napier, J. L., & Jost, J. T. (2008). The “antidemocratic personality” revisited: a cross-national investigation of working class authoritarianism. Journal of Social

Issues, 64, 595–617.Oyamot, C. M., Borgida, E., & Fisher, E. L. (2006). Can values moderate the attitudes of right wing authoritarians? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,

32, 486–500.Pehrson, S., Brown, R., & Zagefka, H. (2009). When does national identification lead to the rejection of immigrants? Cross-sectional and longitudinal evidence

for the role of essentialist in-group definitions. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 61–76.Pehrson, S., Vignoles, V., & Brown, R. (2009). National identification and anti-immigrant prejudice: Individual and contextual effects of national definitions.

Social Psychology Quarterly, 72, 24–38.Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models.

Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.Quinton, W. J., Cowan, G., & Watson, B. D. (1996). Personality and attitudinal predictors of support of proposition 187—California’s anti-illegal immigrant

initiative. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 2204–2223.Reicher, S., & Hopkins, N. (2001). Self and nation. London, England: SAGE.Schildkraut, D. J. (2011). National identity in the United States. In S. J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx, & V. L. Vignoles (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and research

(pp. 809–829). New York: Springer.Selig, J. P., & Preacher, K. J. (2008). Monte Carlo method for assessing mediation: An interactive tool for creating confidence intervals for indirect effects [Computer

software]. Available from http://quantpsy.org/Skitka, L., & Tetlock, P. E. (1993). Providing public assistance: Cognitive and motivational processes underlying liberal and conservative policy preferences.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1205–1224.Smeekes, A., Verkuyten, M., & Poppe, E. (2012). How a tolerant past affects the present: Historical tolerance and acceptance of Muslim expressive rights.

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1410–1422.Sniderman, P. M., & Hagendoorn, L. (2007). When ways of life collide: Multiculturalism and its discontents in the Netherlands. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University

Press.Sniderman, P. M., Hagendoorn, L., & Prior, M. (2004). Predisposing factors and situational triggers: Exclusionary reactions to immigrant minorities. American

Political Science Review, 98, 35–49.Stanton, J. M., & Weiss, E. M. (2002). Online Panels for Social Science Research: An Introduction to The Study Response Project. (Tech. Rep. No. 13001). Syracuse,

NY: Syracuse University, School of Information Studies.Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 1–39.Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. Psychology of intergroup relations, 33, 7–24.Tarrant, M., Dazeley, S., & Cottom, T. (2009). Social categorization and empathy for outgroup members. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 427–446.Thomsen, L., Green, E. G. T., & Sidanius, J. (2008). We will hunt them down: How social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism fuel ethnic

persecution of immigrants in fundamentally different ways. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1455–1464.Tilega, C. (2006). Representing the ‘other’: A discursive analysis of prejudice and moral exclusion in talk about Romanies. Journal of Community & Applied

Social Psychology, 16, 19–41.Triandafyllidou, A. (2000). The political discourse on immigration in Southern Europe: An analysis. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 10,

373–389.Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social identity and intergroup relations (pp. 15–40). Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.

Author's personal copy

T. Lucas et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 39 (2014) 136–151 151

Verkuyten, M. (2009). Support for multiculturalism and minority rights: The role of national identification and out-group threat. Social Justice Research, 22,31–52.

Wakefield, J. R. H., Hopkins, N., Cockburn, C., Shek, K. M., Muirhead, A., Reicher, S., & van Rijswijk, W. (2011). The impact of adopting civic conceptions ofnational belonging for others’ treatment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1599–1610.

Yogeeswaran, K., & Dasgupta, N. (2010). Will the “real” American please stand up? The effect of implicit national prototypes on discriminatory behaviorand judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1332–1345.

Yogeeswaran, K., Dasgupta, N., & Gomez, C. (2012). A new American dilemma? The effect of ethnic identification and public service on the national inclusionof ethnic minorities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 691–705.