New Findings on Immigration Framing
This paper examines how immigration threat frames influence partisan views of democratic citizenship across three countries. Using embedded vignette surveys in the US, UK, and Germany, I show that immigration threats filter through partisanship differently in polarized societies.
US Responses: Democrat Voters
US Democrats reacted most strongly against immigration threat framing by devaluing behavioral norms—such as voting and being informed—but maintaining liberal values otherwise.
UK Reactions: Labor Supporters
UK Labour supporters demonstrated a contrasting response, repudiating liberal norms like tolerance while emphasizing national belonging.
Germany Outcomes: Consensus Effect
In Germany, we observed the strongest consensus among citizens on how to respond to immigration threats—suggesting more unified reactions than in other countries.
Why This Matters for Political Science
These findings reveal that immigration threat framing is strategically deployed by different parties across political systems. The differential effects highlight a key tension: while all three societies experienced shifts toward traditionalist attitudes among the partisan left, Germany showed less divergence between parties and more alignment with core democratic values.
