Abstract:

Several European countries have introduced integration programs that oblige immigrants to adopt the host culture. While research has shown that members of national majority groups consider host culture adoption by immigrants as desirable, the effect of making host culture adoption mandatory on attitudes toward immigrants has so far not been investigated. We argue that perceiving host culture adoption as mandatory yields less positive evaluation of immigrants than voluntary adoption. Moreover, we contend that this effect is explained by a lower perception of identification with the host nation by immigrants in the former case than in the latter. To test this hypothesis, we conducted a first study in France (N = 63) and a second preregistered study in Switzerland (N = 110). In both studies, participants received information about an immigrant who adopted the host culture either voluntarily or as part of a mandatory integration program. As expected, granting civic rights to the immigrant is perceived as more legitimate in the voluntary adoption condition than in the mandatory adoption condition, and this effect was mediated by perception of host nation identification. These results highlight the role of the situational context of acculturation practices in social judgments about immigrants. Implications for mandatory integration policies are discussed. Keywords: acculturation, integration, policies, dispositional inference, identification How to Cite: Roblain, A., De Guissmé, L., Azzi, A., & Licata, L. (2020). Being Forced (or Free) to Adopt the Host Culture: The Influence of Mandatory Integration Programs on Majority Members’ Evaluation of Immigrants. International Review of Social Psychology, 33(1), 6. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.321 Handling Editor: Constantina Badea Université Paris X, FR X close 533 Views 97 Downloads 1 Twitter   Published on 15 Apr 2020 Peer Reviewed  CC BY 4.0  Accepted on 09 Mar 2020            Submitted on 01 Jul 2019 Introduction Over the last decade, several European countries have decided to force immigrants, who want to obtain nationality or to be granted certain civic rights, to adopt the host culture, or, at least, to prove through successful tests that they have learned the cultural norms and codes (Groenendijk, 2011). Although civic integration policies vary widely between countries in terms of both label and form (Bauböck & Joppke, 2010), these integration programs cover a similar content: the obligation for immigrants to acquire the language of the host society and to gain a detailed understanding of its political institutions, history, and culture (Joppke, 2017). In line with these integration policies, research has shown that national majority members favor immigrants who adopt the host culture (Matera, Stefanile, & Brown, 2012; Roblain, Azzi, & Licata, 2016). However, the effect of making host culture adoption mandatory on perception of immigrants by host nationals has never been investigated. More broadly, research on acculturation expectations has neglected to examine how majority members make sense of immigrants’ acculturative practices and how this affects their evaluation of immigrants. We reason that majority members evaluate immigrants by taking into consideration the situational context in which immigrants’ acculturation strategies are endorsed and, more precisely, whether (or not) they are constrained by a mandatory integration program. The present paper examines this issue by experimentally assessing the influence of perceived host culture adoption, related (or not) to a mandatory integration program, on majority members’ evaluation of immigrants and, more precisely, on their attitude toward granting them legal recognition (i.e. granting civic rights, nationality or residential permits).

Keywords: