Immigration debates often lump together non-naturalized residents (stock) and future arrivals (flow), but new research shows native Americans differentiate between them significantly.
The study, replicating two widely cited experiments in the United States, finds that attitudes toward these groups diverge because people feel a stronger moral obligation toward those already residing in their country.
Key Findings:
- Natives are systematically more accepting of immigrants who have already entered and settled (stock).
- This acceptance gap between stock and flow is partially explained by feelings of moral obligation. Why It Matters:
This distinction fundamentally changes how we interpret existing immigration studies, showing that earlier findings lumping stocks and flows together may require nuanced reinterpretation.
Why US?:
The evidence comes from two American experiments replicating previous work in the United States. This suggests similar patterns likely hold elsewhere.
