Conflict and Consensus on American Public Opinion on Illegal Immigration

  • Wright M
  • Levy M
  • Citrin J
  • 4

    Readers

    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • N/A

    Citations

    Citations of this article.

Abstract

The literature on public attitudes toward immigration devotes more attention to mass preferences over the admission and treatment of legal immigrants than to explaining attitudes toward illegal immigration. We theorize both similarity and difference in the nature and underpinnings of public opinion across domains. Two recent surveys, each employing a novel variant of conjoint analysis, help us test these expectations. We underline “categorical” response – that is, the rejection or acceptance of all profiles regardless of traits – on the pathway issue, both extensive in absolute terms (roughly 40% of respondents) and relative to assessments on legal admissions. This tendency also explains the entirety of the favorability gap between legal and illegal profiles assessed. On the other hand, those who do not express categorical responses emphasize the importance of both ethnocultural and human capital-related considerations, and the relative weight of these considerations is stable both regardless of the legality condition and across numerous political predispositions.

Author-supplied keywords

  • american public opinion on
  • flict and consensus on
  • illegal

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document

Authors

  • Matthew Wright

  • Morris E. Levy

  • Jack Citrin

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free