Does the framing of immigration induce welfare chauvinism? The effects of negativity bias and motivated reasoning - Replication data (doi:10.7910/DVN/XG3VJU)

View:

Part 1: Document Description
Part 2: Study Description
Part 3: Data Files Description
Part 4: Variable Description
Part 5: Other Study-Related Materials
Entire Codebook

Does the framing of immigration induce welfare chauvinism? The effects of negativity bias and motivated reasoning - Replication data

doi:10.7910/DVN/XG3VJU

Harvard Dataverse

2023-12-15

1

Savage, Lee; Avdagic, Sabina, 2023, "Does the framing of immigration induce welfare chauvinism? The effects of negativity bias and motivated reasoning - Replication data", https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/XG3VJU, Harvard Dataverse, V1, UNF:6:TprVN5TIHOfUSelatoO6Gw== [fileUNF]

Does the framing of immigration induce welfare chauvinism? The effects of negativity bias and motivated reasoning - Replication data

doi:10.7910/DVN/XG3VJU

Savage, Lee (King's College London)

Avdagic, Sabina (University of Sussex)

Harvard Dataverse

Savage, Lee

Savage, Lee

2023-12-15

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/XG3VJU

Social Sciences

Should immigrants have the same access to welfare as the native population? Fuelled by the populist radical right, the notion of restricting access to benefits to native citizens – welfare chauvinism – has been increasingly prominent in political debates. But can welfare chauvinistic attitudes be induced (or attenuated) by the negative (or positive) information individuals receive about immigrants? Combining insights from research on negativity bias and motivated reasoning, we argue that negative frames which emphasize fiscal costs of immigration are more consequential than positive frames that emphasize fiscal benefits, but this effect is primarily visible among those whose ideological priors are congruent with the negative information. Since more extreme attitudes are associated with increased selective judgement, those who occupy a more extreme ideological position should be particularly affected. A survey experiment in Germany supports this argument and shows that while a negative frame is stronger than a positive frame, this effect is moderated by one’s ideology and is most evident among more extreme ideologues who hold frame-congruent attitudes. We also show that ideology, rather than economic circumstances, is a more important moderator of framing effects.

• Number of cases: 4158

• No. of variables per record: 17

• Type of File: text/tab-separated-values

UNF:6:TprVN5TIHOfUSelatoO6Gw==

• iid - ï»¿ID
• starttime
• endtime
• educ_neu
• hinc
• virtual_btw_13_quote - virtual_BTW_13_Quote
• work_stat
• job
• pro
• scale
• soc_grade
• z_geschlecht - Z_geschlecht
• z_age_omnibus_18
• w8 - W8
• treatment_group
• imm_access - POL_Q3__pol_q3_1___POL_Q3_grid
• high_hincome_v2

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: Min. 1.0; StDev 1200.4555385352678; Max. 4158.0; Valid 4158.0; Mean 2079.5

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:fggBRI+1xR3PTMkA9PHVoQ==

f7675650 Location:

Variable Format: character

Notes: UNF:6:TM5PlYxphJltIk+SXqWbyw==

f7675650 Location:

Variable Format: character

Notes: UNF:6:VQL5CwwpqGSQSNTcDmE4vQ==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: Valid 4051.0; Mean 3.3006665020982453; Max. 5.0; StDev 0.7386654967974741; Min. 2.0

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:5tRkQfRvQMpqfpjCYxznhA==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: Mean 5.499554234769691; Min. 1.0; StDev 2.6593814227244468; Valid 3365.0; Max. 12.0

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:fJwSTkhF9IUK2EGJwZQN0w==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: Mean 4.235690235690251; Min. 1.0; Valid 4158.0; Max. 8.0; StDev 2.928505131755287

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:oG2fEzi8gPOGQdNaRuYoFw==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: StDev 1.4195006482158652; Max. 4.0; Mean 2.7087050880154377; Min. 1.0; Valid 4147.0

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:fJjSSox680aVFzplWkUaRA==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: Max. 5.0; StDev 1.699687212009776; Valid 4158.0; Min. 1.0; Mean 2.8015873015873

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:HiDQtMIEibM2jtB93QcNcw==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: StDev 0.8117469100535559; Max. 5.0; Valid 3982.0; Mean 2.985936715218481; Min. 1.0;

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:h7N0VqMf9dGMYFfrd4z16Q==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: StDev 1.2726526985169555; Mean 3.8802816901408446; Min. 1.0; Valid 3550.0; Max. 7.0

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:esrYb+Hou+FDTxtlpo5HgA==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: Valid 4158.0; Max. 9.0; StDev 2.5411893172765923; Min. 1.0; Mean 4.28451178451179;

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:45QACpnDgxAp7fRMJabQgg==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: Min. 1.0; StDev 0.49992683791069426; Max. 2.0; Mean 1.5115440115440122; Valid 4158.0;

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:A5MT/Oc3MNw1YX23uEOdKA==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: Valid 4158.0; Min. 1.0; Max. 5.0; StDev 1.3831089838122252; Mean 3.7087542087542307;

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:RhoCIZShoXlvZAWHBL+Gug==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: Mean 0.9999894022998926; Valid 4158.0; StDev 0.24705560738832658; Max. 2.0928761959075928; Min. 0.4172588288784027;

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:ixBvxq7a8TY+yHLwx7vjOQ==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: Valid 4158.0; Max. 3.0; Mean 2.0117845117845112; Min. 1.0; StDev 0.8157728483655861;

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:25BTvVaRzwJIjAkQteZ56Q==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: Max. 5.0; Valid 4158.0; StDev 1.1756086347357664; Mean 2.582491582491588; Min. 1.0;

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:FgLPAtNres5554Cq1zEikw==

f7675650 Location:

Summary Statistics: Valid 3365.0; Max. 1.0; StDev 0.30181968052289976; Mean 0.1013372956909364; Min. 0.0

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:6:q8l4+vFEVCdm7EqkGRE17g==

Label:

replication_code.do

application/x-stata-syntax