The article is structured in four parts related to four key questions: (1) who belongs, (2) how to get along,
(3) what is the relevant context, and (4) how to achieve a better social psychology. The first question
relates to the literature on ethnic and civic nationhood and I will discuss the importance of studying
citizenship and the return of biology. The second relates to the extensive social psychological literature
on threat and prejudice and the relative lack of interest in prosocial behavior and intergroup toleration.
As a third point, I discuss the limiting implications of the majority–minority framework that is
predominantly used in social psychology. In the fourth part I briefly discuss the relevance of studying
immigration for the so-called evidentiary value movement (Finkel, Eastwick, & Reis, 2015) that has
developed in response to the current ‘crisis’ in (social) psychology.
The field of migration studies is extensive, and various forms of migration and important legal and social
categories are distinguished, such as short-term and long-term migration, back-and-forth migration,
internal and international migration, forced migration, return migration, chain migration, cross-border
workers, first and later generation immigrants, and undocumented migrants, illegals, asylum seekers and
refugees. These important distinctions are not always understood and appreciated by the public and also
not considered much by social psychologists. Despite their importance, I do not have the space here to
go into these many forms of migration and types of migrants. Rather, I will use the terms ‘immigrants’
and ‘immigrant-origin’ (recent history of immigration and children of immigrants) in a general sense, and
I will also consider issues of cultural diversity that result from immigration.
Who Belongs
The term ‘immigrant’ denotes someone who is from elsewhere and who is an outsider both legally and
socially. Legally, a (non-naturalized) immigrant is an outsider because he or she has no citizenship, and
socially he/she is an outsider because of not being recognized as belonging to the same imagined
national community. The former aspect refers to membership in the state that grants the legal status of
citizen with the related rights and duties, and the latter refers to the status of national as one's place in
an affective community. In practice these two elements of the term ‘nation-state’ are often conflated,
but the implied equivalence is challenged by international migration. Naturalization policies turn
immigrants and their children into citizens, but that does not have to make them nationals in the eyes of
themselves and others, and dual citizenship can raise public doubts about national commitment and
loyalty. Even advocates of dual citizenship for American citizens have argued for a modified citizenship
oath in which new citizens must pledge their core political loyalty to the United States (Schuck, 1998).
Citizenship
Citizenship is a major topic of study in political science, political philosophy, legal studies, and to a lesser
degree in sociology and anthropology. In its most basic form, citizenship refers to a status of legal and
political membership of a state. Citizenship is considered a force of justice, equality and national
cohesion, and an essential basis of democratic governance: the unitary status of citizen means that
everybody enjoys the same rights. From a legal and political perspective, citizenship would counteract
social inequalities and social exclusion and would contribute to the commitment and solidarity necessary
for a functioning democratic welfare state. A few social psychologists have addressed the issue of
citizenship and its importance for progressive social reform already in the first half of the 20th century
(see Stevenson, Dixon, Hopkins, & Luyt, 2015), and there are recent papers (e.g., Andreouli, Kadianaki, &
Xenitidou, 2017; Barnes, Auburn, & Lea, 2004), special issues (e.g., Condor, 2011; Stevenson et al., 2015)
and edited volumes (Borgida, Federico, & Sullivan, 2009). Yet, compared to the large body of work in
This study source was downloaded by 100000852681095 from CourseHero.com on 12-06-2022 13:07:24 GMT -06:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/119305039/The-article-is-structured-in-four-parts-related-to-four-key-questionsdocx/
(3) what is the relevant context, and (4) how to achieve a better social psychology. The first question
relates to the literature on ethnic and civic nationhood and I will discuss the importance of studying
citizenship and the return of biology. The second relates to the extensive social psychological literature
on threat and prejudice and the relative lack of interest in prosocial behavior and intergroup toleration.
As a third point, I discuss the limiting implications of the majority–minority framework that is
predominantly used in social psychology. In the fourth part I briefly discuss the relevance of studying
immigration for the so-called evidentiary value movement (Finkel, Eastwick, & Reis, 2015) that has
developed in response to the current ‘crisis’ in (social) psychology.
The field of migration studies is extensive, and various forms of migration and important legal and social
categories are distinguished, such as short-term and long-term migration, back-and-forth migration,
internal and international migration, forced migration, return migration, chain migration, cross-border
workers, first and later generation immigrants, and undocumented migrants, illegals, asylum seekers and
refugees. These important distinctions are not always understood and appreciated by the public and also
not considered much by social psychologists. Despite their importance, I do not have the space here to
go into these many forms of migration and types of migrants. Rather, I will use the terms ‘immigrants’
and ‘immigrant-origin’ (recent history of immigration and children of immigrants) in a general sense, and
I will also consider issues of cultural diversity that result from immigration.
Who Belongs
The term ‘immigrant’ denotes someone who is from elsewhere and who is an outsider both legally and
socially. Legally, a (non-naturalized) immigrant is an outsider because he or she has no citizenship, and
socially he/she is an outsider because of not being recognized as belonging to the same imagined
national community. The former aspect refers to membership in the state that grants the legal status of
citizen with the related rights and duties, and the latter refers to the status of national as one's place in
an affective community. In practice these two elements of the term ‘nation-state’ are often conflated,
but the implied equivalence is challenged by international migration. Naturalization policies turn
immigrants and their children into citizens, but that does not have to make them nationals in the eyes of
themselves and others, and dual citizenship can raise public doubts about national commitment and
loyalty. Even advocates of dual citizenship for American citizens have argued for a modified citizenship
oath in which new citizens must pledge their core political loyalty to the United States (Schuck, 1998).
Citizenship
Citizenship is a major topic of study in political science, political philosophy, legal studies, and to a lesser
degree in sociology and anthropology. In its most basic form, citizenship refers to a status of legal and
political membership of a state. Citizenship is considered a force of justice, equality and national
cohesion, and an essential basis of democratic governance: the unitary status of citizen means that
everybody enjoys the same rights. From a legal and political perspective, citizenship would counteract
social inequalities and social exclusion and would contribute to the commitment and solidarity necessary
for a functioning democratic welfare state. A few social psychologists have addressed the issue of
citizenship and its importance for progressive social reform already in the first half of the 20th century
(see Stevenson, Dixon, Hopkins, & Luyt, 2015), and there are recent papers (e.g., Andreouli, Kadianaki, &
Xenitidou, 2017; Barnes, Auburn, & Lea, 2004), special issues (e.g., Condor, 2011; Stevenson et al., 2015)
and edited volumes (Borgida, Federico, & Sullivan, 2009). Yet, compared to the large body of work in
This study source was downloaded by 100000852681095 from CourseHero.com on 12-06-2022 13:07:24 GMT -06:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/119305039/The-article-is-structured-in-four-parts-related-to-four-key-questionsdocx/
