BookPDF Available

İstanbul'da Suriyeli Sığınmacılara Yönelik Algı ve Tutumlar: Partizanlık, Yabancı Karşıtlığı, Tehdit Algıları ve Sosyal Temas

Authors:

Abstract

TÜSES ve Heinrich Böll Stiftung Derneği'nin katkılarıyla yürütülen bu çalışmada İstanbul'da yaşayan Türkiye vatandaşlarının Suriyeli sığınmacılara yönelik algı ve tutumları ortaya serilmektedir. Ayrıca bu algı ve tutumları şekillendiren siyasi, sosyoekonomik ve kültürel faktörler incelenmektedir.
A preview of the PDF is not available
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
With international migration at a record high, a burgeoning literature has explored the drivers of public attitudes toward migrants. However, most studies to date have focused on developed countries, which have relatively fewer migrants and more capacity to absorb them. We address this sample bias by conducting a survey of public attitudes toward Syrians in Jordan, a developing country with one of the largest shares of refugees. Our analysis indicates that neither personal- nor community-level exposure to the economic impact of the refugee crisis is associated with antimigrant sentiments among natives. Furthermore, an embedded conjoint experiment validated with qualitative evidence demonstrates the relative importance of humanitarian and cultural concerns over economic ones. Taken together, our findings weaken the case for egocentric and sociotropic economic concerns as critical drivers of antimigrant attitudes and demonstrate how humanitarian motives can sustain support for refugees when host and migrant cultures are similar.
Article
Full-text available
Based on an innovative design, combining a multi-factorial survey experiment with a longitudinal perspective, we examine changes in the public acceptance of immigrants in Germany from the beginning of the so-called "migration crisis" to after the sexual assaults of New Year's Eve 2015/16. In contrast to previous studies investigating similar research questions, our approach allows to differentiate changes along various immigrant characteristics. Derived from discussions making up the German immigration discourse during this time, we expect reduced acceptance especially of those immigrants who were explicitly connected to the salient events, like Muslims and the offenders of NYE. Most strikingly, we find that refugees were generally highly accepted and even more so in the second wave, whereas the acceptance of immigrants from Arab or African countries further decreased. Moreover, female respondents' initial preference for male immigrants disappeared. Contrary to our expectations, we find no changes in the acceptance of Muslims. We conclude that (1) public opinion research is well advised to match the particular political and social context under investigation to a fitting outcome variable to adequately capture the dynamics of anti-immigrant sentiment and that (2) the vividly discussed upper limits for refugees seem to be contrary to public demands according to our data. 2
Article
Full-text available
Immigration is among the most vividly discussed topics in Europe’s national parliaments in recent years, often with a particular emphasis on the inflow of Muslims. This article examines the link between articulations of national political parties (political elite discourses) and natives’ attitudes toward immigrants in Europe. It provides a nuanced view of this relationship by (i) distinguishing more (inclusionary) from less (exclusionary) immigration-friendly political elites and (ii) isolating natives’ openness toward two specific groups: Muslim immigrants and ethnically similar immigrants. Combining the European Social Survey with party manifesto data and other sources, the analysis reveals that political elite discourses perform better in explaining natives’ attitudes compared to national demographic or economic aspects. Native Europeans’ attitudes toward Muslim immigrants are more hostile in countries where political elites are more exclusionary and more welcoming where political elites are more inclusionary. In contrast, Europeans’ views on ethnically similar immigrants seem largely unaffected by exclusionary political elites. These findings suggest that political elites can play an important role in fostering or impeding immigrant integration by shaping public opinion, particularly toward more marginalized immigrant groups.
Article
Full-text available
What types of refugees do Americans prefer for admission into the United States? Scholars have explored the immigrant characteristics that appeal to Americans and the characteristics that Europeans prioritize in asylum-seekers, but we currently do not know which refugee characteristics Americans prefer. We conduct a conjoint experiment on a representative sample of 1800 US adults, manipulating refugee attributes in pairs of Syrian refugee profiles, and ask respondents to rate each refugee’s appeal. Our focus on Syrian refugees in a 2016 survey experiment allows us to speak to the concurrent refugee crisis on the eve of a polarizing election, while also identifying religious discrimination, holding constant the refugee’s national origin. We find that Americans prefer Syrian refugees who are female, high-skilled, English-speaking, and Christian, suggesting they prioritize refugee integration into the U.S. labor and cultural markets. We find that the preference for female refugees is not driven by the desire to exclude Muslim male refugees, casting doubt that American preferences at the time were motivated by security concerns. Finally, we find that anti-Muslim bias in refugee preferences varies in magnitude across key subgroups, though it prevails across all sample demographics.
Article
Full-text available
This article demonstrates that public opinion on migration "at home" is systematically driven by terrorism in other countries. Although there is little substantive evidence linking refugees or migrants to most recent terror attacks in Europe, news about terrorist attacks can trigger more negative views of immigrants. However, the spatial dynamics of this process are neglected in existing research. We argue that feelings of imminent danger and a more salient perception of migration threats do not stop at national borders. The empirical results based on spatial econo-metrics and data on all terrorist attacks in Europe for the post-9/11 period support these claims. The effect of terrorism on migration concern is strongly present within a country, but also diffuses across states in Europe. This finding improves our understanding of public opinion on migration , spill-over effects of terrorism, and it highlights crucial lessons for scholars interested in the security implications of population movements.
Article
Over the last decade, issues related to immigration have become increasingly salient across Western democracies. This increasing salience has made it more important to understand people’s attitudes toward immigration, including the effects of media use on those attitudes. Differentiating between attitudes toward different types of immigration, attitudes toward immigration from different parts of the world, and perceptions of immigration’s impact, this article investigates the effects of media use on attitudes toward and perceptions of immigration in Sweden. Based on a three-year, three-wave panel study, it investigates the effects of media use on the individual level. Among other things, results show that there are limited effects of using traditional news media but more substantial effects on people’s immigration attitudes of using anti-immigration, right-wing alternative media and pro-immigration, left-wing alternative media. These findings imply that it is highly relevant to account for media use, especially alternative media use, when studying public attitudes toward immigration. Further, we find that variations in people’s immigration attitudes, to a high degree, depend on the type of immigration and on where migrants are coming from. This finding underlines the importance of measuring both of these aspects when the aim is understanding general attitudes toward immigration and/or key predictors behind immigration attitudes.
Article
Over the past years, an increasing number of terrorist attacks committed in the name of Islam and targeting civilians have taken place in several Western democracies, calling for more research on the impact of these exogenous events on citizens’ attitudes towards immigrants. Using a quasi‐experimental approach, our study examines the short‐term effect of the Paris attacks of the night of November 13, 2015 on the attitudes towards EU and non‐EU immigrants across 28 EU countries. Employing Eurobarometer 84.3 survey data collected in 28 European countries between November 7 and 17, 2017, our design allows us to test individual attitudes before and after the Paris attacks and the spill‐over effects of this event in all European countries. We find that the Paris attacks had a significant negative effect on attitudes towards immigrants, especially among educated and left‐wing leaning individuals. Moreover, the negative effect was stronger in countries where the national political‐ideological climate was more positive towards immigrants. We explain these findings by theorizing that first emotional reactions to the attack are the results of coping mechanisms whereby individuals are confronted with disconfirmation/confirmation of their previous beliefs: individuals who experience stronger stereotype disconfirmation are the most negatively affected by the terrorist attack. Overall, our study holds important implications for the understanding of the short‐term impact of terrorist attacks on public attitudes towards immigrants. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved
Article
Despite the centrality of national identity in the exclusionary discourse of the European radical right, scholars have not investigated how popular definitions of nationhood are connected to dispositions toward Muslims. Moreover, survey‐based studies tend to conflate anti‐Muslim attitudes with general anti‐immigrant sentiments. This article contributes to research on nationalism and out‐group attitudes by demonstrating that varieties of national self‐understanding are predictive of anti‐Muslim attitudes, above and beyond dispositions toward immigrants. Using latent class analysis and regression models of survey data from 41 European countries, it demonstrates that conceptions of nationhood are heterogeneous within countries and that their relationship with anti‐Muslim attitudes is contextually variable. Consistent with expectations, in most countries, anti‐Muslim attitudes are positively associated with ascriptive – and negatively associated with elective (including civic) – conceptions of nationhood. Northwestern Europe, however, is an exception to this pattern: in this region, civic nationalism is linked to greater antipathy toward Muslims. It is suggested that in this region, elective criteria of belonging have become fused with exclusionary notions of national culture that portray Muslims as incompatible with European liberal values, effectively legitimating anti‐Muslim sentiments in mainstream political culture. This may heighten the appeal of anti‐Muslim sentiments not only on the radical right, but also among mainstream segments of the Northwestern European public, with important implications for social exclusion and political behaviour.
Article
Across two studies, U.S. participants read a fictional transcript of a law enforcement officer who observed a speeding infraction and made a discretionary traffic stop. The car carried occupants who displayed either high or low fit with Anglocentric constructions of U.S. identity and were of presumptive Mexican (Studies 1 and 2), Canadian (Study 1), or Irish (Study 2) origin. The officer decided over the course of the traffic stop that the occupants’ behavior aroused “reasonable suspicion” about documentation status, so he asked them to produce identification documents and detained them when they failed to do so. Participants indicated their suspicion about occupants’ documentation status and rated the appropriateness of law enforcement actions. Results indicate effects of origin across both studies for all outcomes: participants considered occupants of Mexican origin (vs. Canadian or Irish) as more suspicious, and rated law enforcement actions related to traffic and immigration violations as more appropriate when the interaction involved occupants of Mexican origin (vs. Canadian or Irish). Results indicate effects of fit across both studies for all outcomes: participants considered occupants who showed low‐fit (vs. high‐fit) as more suspicious, and rated law enforcement actions related to traffic and immigration violations as more appropriate when occupants showed low‐fit (vs. high‐fit). Discussion focuses on how participant support for punitive anti‐immigration measures is less about neutral enforcement of law than about racialized exclusion to defend an Anglocentric construction of U.S. identity.