IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v57y2013i4p841-857.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Better Angels of Our Nature: How the Antiprejudice Norm Affects Policy and Party Preferences in Great Britain and Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Scott Blinder
  • Robert Ford
  • Elisabeth Ivarsflaten

Abstract

Existing research on public opinion related to race and immigration politics emphasizes the role of prejudice or bias against minority groups. We argue that the social norm against prejudice, and individual motivations to comply with it, are crucial elements omitted from prior analyses. In contemporary Western societies, most citizens receive strong signals that prejudice is not normatively acceptable. We demonstrate that many majority‐group individuals have internalized a motivation to control prejudiced thoughts and actions and that this motivation influences their political behavior in predictable ways. We introduce measures capturing this motivation, develop hypotheses about its influence, and test these hypotheses in three separate experimental and nonexperimental survey studies conducted in Britain and Germany. Our findings support a dual‐process model of political behavior suggesting that while many voters harbor negative stereotypes, they also—particularly when certain contextual signals are present—strive to act in accordance with the “better angels of their natures.”

Suggested Citation

  • Scott Blinder & Robert Ford & Elisabeth Ivarsflaten, 2013. "The Better Angels of Our Nature: How the Antiprejudice Norm Affects Policy and Party Preferences in Great Britain and Germany," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(4), pages 841-857, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:57:y:2013:i:4:p:841-857
    DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12030
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ajps.12030?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Auer, Daniel & Ruedin, Didier, 2023. "Experimental evidence on how implicit racial bias affects risk preferences," SocArXiv wrebf, Center for Open Science.
    2. Amalia Álvarez & Fabian Winter, 2018. "Normative change and culture of hate: An experiment in online environments," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2018_03, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    3. Tim Hatton, 2013. "The Slump and Immigration Policy in Europe," CEPR Discussion Papers 686, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Economics, Australian National University.
    4. Chia-Jung Tsai & R. Gordon Rinderknecht & Emilio Zagheni, 2023. "The interplay between refugee inflows and media coverage in determining attitudes towards immigration in Germany," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2023-035, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    5. Cengiz Erisen & Sofia Vasilopoulou, 2022. "The affective model of far‐right vote in Europe: Anger, political trust, and immigration," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(3), pages 635-648, May.
    6. Ziller, Conrad & Helbling, Marc, 2019. "Antidiscrimination Laws, Policy Knowledge and Political Support," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 49(3), pages 1027-1044.
    7. Amalia Álvarez-Benjumea & Fabian Winter, 2020. "The Breakdown of Anti-Racist Norms: A Natural Experiment on Normative Uncertainty after Terrorist Attacks," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2020_05, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:57:y:2013:i:4:p:841-857. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.