Graduate School of Communication
___________________________________________________________________________ Master thesis
The effect of the intruder frame on the European attitudes of Dutch citizens
Student name Richelle Werners
Student ID 10296980
Master Communication Science: Political Communication
Supervisor Joost van Spanje
Purpose Master thesis
1 Abstract
Based on academic consensus it can be said that political attitudes are formed and affected by news media and especially by news media framing concerning different political issues. This also holds for attitudes concerning the European Union. The present study assesses to which extent the intruder frame, as developed by Boomgaarden, Schuck, Elenbaas and de Vreese (2011), when applied to the European migration of Bulgarians and Romanians, affect the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union. The effect of the intruder frame was investigated in a survey-embedded experiment with two conditions that differed with respect to the type of frame in the news story: the intruder frame or a neutral frame. A total of 121 participants participated in the study. The participants who were assigned to the experimental group (i.e. the group that was exposed to the intruder frame) read a fictive news article in which Romanian and Bulgarian migrants were implicitly labelled as intruders. The participants who were assigned to the control group (i.e. the group that was exposed to the neutral frame) read a fictive news article in which Romanian and Bulgarian migrants were implicitly neutral labelled. The present study also tested if lower educated participants who were assigned to the experimental group had more negative political attitudes towards the European Union than higher educated participants. The findings indicate that there is no significant effect of the intruder frame on the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the EU. The findings also show no significant difference between higher educated participants and lower educated participants when it comes to the effect of the intruder frame on their political attitudes towards the European Union. However, based on the small sample size and the novelty of the present study, further research would be very much recommended.
2 Introduction
‘The Dutch don’t want the Bulgarians and Romanians’1
(“The Dutch don’t…”, 2013). That was the title of a recently posted news item on Parool.nl, the website linked to the Dutch newspaper Het Parool. Such news items are not new. In recent years, the issue of migration, which stands for state-designated forms of mobility (Favell & Hansen, 2002), has been central to political and public debates in most Western European countries (Vliegenthart &
Roggeband, 2007). Also migration is one of the strategic priorities in the external relations of
the European Union (EEAS, n.d.). However, migration is not a recent phenomenon in Europe (Igartua & Cheng, 2009). In the following years after World War II, when Europe was re-united again (Favell, 2008), the governments of North-Western European countries aimed to reactivate their economies, which needed a large work force, by stimulating migration (Igartua & Cheng, 2009). This has led to North-West Europe and later on the entire Western part of Europe receiving an extensive net of migration (Favell & Hansen, 2002). European
migration can also be seen as necessary for the European Union because of its importance to
the evolving and expanding European single market (Givens & Luedtke, 2004). The fact that one of the 1986 Single European Act’s ‘four freedoms’ of movement is the free movement of labour confirms this importance (Givens & Luedtke, 2004). This shows that migration is a pivotal issue to the future of the European Union (Favell & Hansen, 2002).
With the importance of migration in mind, the present study asks the question how media framing concerning European migration can affect the political attitudes of individuals towards the European Union. The present study will use the case of the new European migration of Romanians and Bulgarians to the Netherlands as its context because the Netherlands is a good case for studying the relationship between media use and political attitudes (Aarts & Semetko, 2003). This leads to the following research question:
1
3 RQ To which extent does the intruder frame when applied to the
European migration of Bulgarians and Romanians affect the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union?
Although, migration is important for the European Union and the European Union has expanded several times during its existence (Azrout, van Spanje, & de Vreese, 2012), some European enlargements are uncontroversial whereas other expansions are widely contested (Azrout, van Spanje, & de Vreese, 2012). One of those contested enlargements was the European Union’s expansion to Central and Eastern Europe in 2004 and 2007 (Ram, 2013). These recent enlargements and consequently new European migration, which represents Eastern European workers leaving their countries of origin to work in Western European countries (Stan & Erne, 2014), have caused a broader debate in the media (Maier & Rittberger, 2008).
Media are important when it comes to forming attitudes concerning Europe. Prior research
shows that, much of what citizens know about the European Union derives from the mass
media (Vliegenthart, Schuck, Boomgaarden, & de Vreese, 2008). Prior research also shows that media play an essential role in informing European citizens about European integration
(De Vreese, 2003) and that public attitudes towards European enlargement are strongly
affected by mass media exposure (Maier & Rittberger, 2008). This can be explained by the finding that citizens depend on information from the mass media when they form their opinions about political issues (Maier & Rittberger, 2008; Vliegenthart et al., 2008). In addition, media also play an important role in defining and spreading public understandings of migration; media defines what is acceptable in societies (Fox, Moroşanu, & Szilassy, 2012). Thus, it can be said that citizen’s attitudes concerning the European Union will be affected by the way media report on European migration.
4 Framing is present in the recent migration media debate (Lakoff & Ferguson, 2006). The way media frame a certain issue or topic can be defined as applying a meta-communicative
message to news, which gives the news meaning and provides the context (Van Gorp, 2005). The type of frame stressed in a news story about migration has a significant effect on
attitudes toward migration, the perception of the importance of migration as a problem, and on beliefs about the consequences of migration for the receiving country and its citizens (Igartua and Cheng, 2009; Igartua, Moral-Toranzo, & Fernández, 2011). Migrants are often framed as aliens in news coverage (Fox et al., 2012). A frame that holds this comparison of migrants with aliens or outsiders is the intruder frame by Van Gorp (2005). Although Van Gorp (2005) originally applied this frame to the issue of asylum seekers and it has not yet been applied to the issue of European migration, there is a strong similarity between asylum
seekers and migrants; migrants are also represented as outsiders because the prevailing
stereotype of a migrant is an incompetent and untrustworthy outsider (Lee & Fiske, 2006). If we assume that migration is an important political issue in a growing number of countries (Vliegenthart & Boomgaarden, 2007), that migration is of increasing importance for the European Union, and that media exposure indeed affects political attitudes towards the European Union, there is a need to learn more about the factors that influence these political attitudes towards the European Union. This is especially important because political attitudes influence citizen’s support via elections (Gabel, 1998). The latter furthermore emphasizes why a better understanding of media effects on political attitudes towards the European Union is of great importance since political systems, such as the European Union depend on public support (De Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2005).
The present study makes an attempt to fill the gap that is present in European attitude knowledge and tries to add knowledge to the current European migration literature.
5 media on European attitudes. This is important because the current knowledge of the
emergence of European attitudes is mostly aimed at attitudes towards European integration (see De Vreese, 2003; De Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2005; Vliegenthart & Boomgaarden,
2007; Vliegenthart et al., 2008) or European enlargement (see Azrout, van Spanje, & de
Vreese, 2012; De Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2006; Maier & Rittberger, 2008; Schuck & de Vreese, 2006). Fewer studies focus on the effects of media on political attitudes of European citizens towards the European Union in its entirety. Furthermore, most of the studies on European migration focus on third-country nationals and especially those countries that are Muslim or African (Ram, 2013). Thus, not only are studies aimed at media effects on political attitudes towards the European Union underrepresented, there is also an underrepresentation of studies that focus on European migration of Eastern European countries such as Bulgaria and Romania. However, this can be explained by the recent accession of Bulgaria and Romania into the Schengen area.
Theoretical framework
European Union & European enlargement
Since the beginning of the European Union, migration has become an important aspect of European integration, mostly because it is of big importance to the evolving European Union single market (Givens & Luedtke, 2004). In 1958 the European Union was established by six countries, namely Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands and Luxembourg (Marks & McAdam, 1996). The European Union was established in an effort to 'lay the foundations of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe' (Marks & McAdam, 1996, p. 254). After the Second World War, Western Europe was trying to rebuild its economic base (Marks & McAdam, 1996). Consequently European integration and migration were considered as a solution (Marks & McAdam, 1996). This has led to an increase of migration
6 (Favell & Hansen, 2002). Migration can be characterized as the movement of people who want to improve their life, which has consequences for the receiving country (Citrin, Green, Muste, & Wong, 1997). The Netherlands has been one of the three major destinations for migrant workers2 (Favell & Hansen, 2002).
The Schengen Convention and Bulgaria & Romania
Of great importance for migration in Europe is the Schengen Convention. Bulgaria and Romania will be the next European countries that get accession into the Schengen area. The Schengen Convention is an international treaty that includes European migration policies and makes migration possible through government cooperation (Weng & Zheng, 2010). This means that the area of Schengen gives European citizens the possibility to travel and work legally in European countries (Malmström, 2011). Although the agreement stimulated the process of European integration, it also caused negative issues towards European migration activities (Weng & Zheng, 2010). This applies to the accession of Bulgaria and Romania into the Schengen area.
Although Bulgaria and Romania got accession into the Schengen area just recently, they have been part of the European Union since 2007 (Papadimitriou & Gateva, 2009). Their accession to the European Union has been laborious and they can be seen as the ‘outliers’ of the 2004– 2007 European enlargement (Papadimitriou & Gateva, 2009). Because of their weak
institutions, lagging marketization and the fact that they did not meet the European requirements, the European Union did not consider them as credible accession candidates (Noutcheva & Bechev, 2008). Even after 2007, when Romania’s citizens were allowed to travel freely, they still had no accession to the labor markets of most European countries (Stan & Erne, 2013). In late 2010 the question of Bulgaria’s and Romania’s entry into the
2
7 Schengen free movement area arose (Spendzharova & Vachudova, 2012). However, in June 2011 the European member states delayed the entrance in the Schengen area for both
countries (Spendzharova & Vachudova, 2012).
European migration & labor
The possible entry of Bulgaria and Romania into the Schengen area might cause a growth in Bulgarians and Romanians migrant workers coming to the Netherlands and other European countries, which in turn affects the receiving countries (Ceobanu & Escandell, 2010). Bulgarians and Romanians migrant workers coming to the Netherlands and other European countries can be defined as ‘new’ European migration (Stan & Erne, 2013). New European migration causes an increase in Bulgarians and Romanians migrant workers coming to
European countries because many Romanians and Bulgarians need and rely on the circulation between where they work and where they have their family and social lives (Stanek, 2009). Also, for many citizens of Central and Eastern European countries (CEEC’s) the income and unemployment gap in their countries represent a major determinant in the decision to migrate to the west (Okkerse, 2005).
New European migration has several impacts on the receiving European countries since migration affects the receiving countries in many ways (Ceobanu & Escandell, 2010). An inflow of migrants (such as cheaper workers from CEECs) decreases the wages of local labor, pushes native workers out of their jobs, and increases the income of capital owners jobs (Bauer & Zimmermann, 1999). However, since labor is not a homogeneous concept, a distinction should be made between skilled and unskilled labor (Okkerse, 2005). An inflow of migrants, who are mostly unskilled, will increase the marginal products of capital and skilled labor, while at the same time it will decrease the marginal product of similar unskilled natives (Okkerse, 2005). Furthermore, migrants are more likely to work in non-union jobs, on
fixed-8 term contracts, or illegally (Angrist & Kugler, 2003).
Social identity theory & ethnic competition theory
The influence of new European migration on the labor markets of Western European countries affects the attitudes of the residents of the receiving countries. Competition and social identity underlie the negative attitudes of individuals towards migrants. Because of political, economic, and social changes that marked the end of the 20th century, the 21st century will be a global village, which might cause negative attitudes or threats towards migrants (Esses, Dovidio, Jackson, & Armstrong, 2001). These threats may be material, which can be seen as perceived challenges to one’s well-being, or symbolic, which can be seen as perceived challenges to one’s social identity (Esses et al., 2001). At the same time, the increase of migration has been associated with high levels of anti-foreigner attitudes and the view that migrants take jobs from natives (Bauer, Lofstrom, & Zimmermann, 2000 as cited in Angrist & Kugler, 2003). Furthermore, anxiety about a national economic recession does boost opposition to migration and migrants (Citrin et al., 1997). Hence, attitudes
towards migrants can be explained by social identity theory and by ethnic competition theory, which derives from social identity theory (Scheepers, Gijsberts, & Coenders, 2002 as cited in Savelkoul, Scheepers, Tolsma, & Hagendoorn, 2011).
Social identity theory
Based on social identity theory it can be said that the citizens of the receiving country will perceive migrants negatively. This can be explained by the proposition that the citizens of the receiving country will identify themselves as the in-group (which includes the self) and migrants as the out-group (which is different than the self) (Esses et al., 2001). Social identity theory focuses on concepts such as prejudice, discrimination, ethnocentrism, stereotyping,
9 intergroup conflict, conformity, and normative behavior (Hogg, 2006). According to social identity theory, as developed by Tajfel (1982), every individual has an urge to belong to a social group (Tajfel, 1982 as cited in Lubbers, Scheepers, & Vergeer, 2000). A group contains of three or more individuals who evaluate themselves in terms of shared attributes that distinguish them from other individuals or groups (Hogg, 2006). Belonging to a group that provides values and norms allows individuals to understand their social reality (Lubbers et al., 2000). Hence, groups that do not conform to the values and norms of the in-group are evaluated negatively, while groups that hold similar values and norms are evaluated
positively (Lubbers et al., 2000). This means that individuals are motivated to achieve and protect their social identity, what may result in negative attitudes derived from perceived threat to their in-group values or their social identity (Tajfel & Turner, 1986 as cited in Meeusen, Phalet, van Acker, Montreuil, & Bourhis, 2013). Thus, when applied to EU
migration, the citizens of a receiving country can be seen as the in-group and migrants as the out-group. It is also the case that feeling threatened by others or by an out-group, matches with ethnic competition theory, which holds the proposition that threat and competition with the out-group results in anti-immigrant attitudes.
Ethnic competition theory
Based on ethnic competition theory it can be said that Europeans who compete with migrants in the labor market have more negative attitudes towards foreigners (Gang, Rivera-Batiz, & Yun, 2002). This is based on one of the most confirmed propositions that derives from ethnic competition theory, namely that economic vulnerability and competition for scarce resources predicts an increase of negative attitudes towards migrants (Citrin et al., 1997). Ethnic competition theory aims at explaining anti-immigrant attitudes such as anti-immigrant prejudice and ethnic exclusionism (Schneider, 2008). An explanation for ethnic competition
10 theory is the theory of scapegoating, which holds that economic downturn results in anxiety and anger towards minority groups (Citrin et al., 1997). There are at least two factors that may increase the degree of ethnic competition in a country (Schneider, 2008) and that may support ethnic discrimination (Coenders, Lubbers, Scheepers, & Verkuyten, 2008). The first is migration and the second is the level of unemployment (Schneider, 2008). Both create a situation of competition in which there are more people who have to share a limited amount of resources such as houses and jobs (Schneider, 2008). For example, Citrin et al. (1997) found significant relationships between anti-migrant attitudes and pessimism about the current state of the national economy.
News media and the framing of migrants
Newspapers are, because of the stereotypical framing of migrants as an incompetent and untrustworthy outsider or intruder (Lee & Fiske, 2006), responsible for a continued process of polarization between ‘us’ and ‘them’ (Lubbers et al., 2000). This, in turn, leads readers to believe that migration poses a threat to society (Lubbers et al., 2000). News media usually do not report on minority groups in general (Meeusen et al., 2013). However, when they do report about minority groups, they are less often associated with positive or neutral themes such as culture, employment, and education (Lubbers, Scheepers, & Wester, 1998 as cited in Meeusen et al., 2013). Instead, news media apply stereotyping (Schemer, 2012), define interpersonal events such as violence or crime or define social problems (Lubbers et al., 1998 as cited in Meeusen et al., 2013). News coverage about minority groups also mentions the minority group membership of the actor (Meeusen et al., 2013). These findings also hold for Dutch news media (Lubbers et al., 1998 as cited in Meeusen et al., 2013). Such news
coverage about migration plays a role in the formation of anti-migration attitudes
11 think about migration issues but also activates racial or ethnic stereotypes that will be used in politically meaningful ways, such as in the formation of issue positions or evaluations
(Domke, McCoy, & Torres, 1999). The association of ethnic minorities with stereotypes and interpersonal events can be seen as framing.
Framing
Framing influences an individual’s political attitudes or opinion (Nelson & Oxley, 1999) by applying certain interpretations to political issues (De Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2003). This can be explained by the highlighting aspect of frames, which leads to the fact that a frame determines what characteristics of the attitude object (Nelson & Oxley, 1999) most individuals notice, how they understand and remember the attitude object and how they evaluate it (Entman, 1993). Framing involves selection and salience (Entman, 1993). To frame is to ‘select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for the item described’ (Entman, 1993, p. 52). Thus, frames highlight some bits of information about an issue what makes these bits of information more noticeable (Entman, 1993). This means that media frames give news coherence and meaning (Van Gorp, 2005). It is important to note that frames are either good or bad and carry either positive or negative elements (De Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2003). Framing makes it possible for news to ‘tell’ individuals how to
understand political issues (De Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2003). De Vreese (2003) found that when it comes to political issues in the media, the presence of a news frame can be as important to the receiving audiences as the most important facts in a news story, which suggests that news frames are an important resource to citizens when processing European issues (De Vreese, 2003 as cited in de Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2003). However, although
12 framing implies that the frame has a common effect on the receiving audience, it will not have an universal effect on all the receivers (Entman, 1993).
Framing migrants
Framing is also present in the recent migration debate and it is anything but neutral (Lakoff & Ferguson, 2006). The frame that incorporates ethnic competition theory and social identity theory is the intruder frame by Van Gorp (2005). The language of the framing of migrants is striking; migrants are being referred to as illegal migrants, illegals, aliens, undocumented workers, and temporary workers (Lakoff & Ferguson, 2006). Such linguistic references are anything but neutral; each frame defines and addresses migration differently (Lakoff & Ferguson, 2006).The present study applies the intruder frame by Van Gorp (2005) to the subject of European migration because of the match with ethnic competition theory and social identity theory. Van Gorp (2005) originally conducted a frame analysis of the news coverage of asylum-seekers, refugees and illegal immigration in Belgian newspapers. Van Gorp (2005) applied two frames to the context of the asylum issue; on the on the one hand asylum-seekers can be depicted by a frame that refers the innocent victim (‘asylum-seekers are innocent victims’), while on the other hand they can be referred to as intruders or dangerous strangers (‘all strangers are intruders’). The latter, also referred to as the intruder frame, has several characteristics (Van Gorp, 2005). The moral and emotional basis of the frame is to protect the interests of the native people (Van Gorp, 2005). Furthermore, the emotional aspect that is present in the frame is xenophobia, which stands for an aversion to and distrust of strangers (Van Gorp, 2005). In addition, the metaphor for this frame is a flood of garbage and the stereotype is the dangerous stranger (Van Gorp, 2005). Thus, the intruder frame refers to individuals as dangerous strangers who cannot be trusted and who, together with their companions, violate the interests of the native people (Van Gorp, 2005).
13 The characteristics of the intruder frame make this frame very much applicable to the context of the European migration issue. First of all, the intruder frame can be applied to the context of the European migration issue because the prevailing stereotype of an migrant is an
incompetent and untrustworthy outsider (Lee & Fiske, 2006), which matches clearly with the characteristics of the intruder frame. This overlap in references and stereotypes also strongly matches with the in-group and out-group concept that is part of social identity theory. The characteristics of the intruder frame also overlap with ethnic competition theory, as this theory is usually used to explain attitudes towards migrants and states that newcomers are more likely to be framed as a threat when there is a competition for jobs, houses, and public services (Pardos-Prado, 2011). Thus, the intruder frame is found to be a relevant and very suitable frame to be applied to the context of the European migration issue.
EU attitudes
Anti-immigrant attitudes negatively affect political attitudes towards the European Union (i.e. EU attitudes). Feelings of identity and fear of migration have become parts of the
explanations of public opinion towards the European Union (De Vreese, Boomgaarden & Semetko, 2008). Anti-immigration attitudes are an important variable for understanding aversion towards European integration (De Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2005). Attitudes are latent constructs that manifest themselves in different responses (Azjen, 2005). These responses are directed at a certain object or target such as a person, an institution, a policy, a system or an event (Azjen, 2005). When it comes to attitudes towards the European Union, it seems that these attitudes are not only predicted by hard economic and utilitarian predictors but also by soft predictors such as feelings of identity and attitudes towards migrants (De Vreese et al., 2008). For example, people’s negative out-group bias explains opposition to the European Union (De Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2005) and it also seems that people are averse
14 towards Europe because of their perception of threat posed by others (McLaren, 2002).
Individuals with anti-immigrant attitudes see other Europeans as an out-group and are averse towards the European Union (Azrout, van Spanje, & de Vreese, 2011). This shows that social identity theory, which focuses on identity and group distinction, and that ethnic competition theory, which focuses on competition with migrants concerning resources, can be used to explain negative attitudes towards the European Union. Thus, when European migration is framed in terms of out-groups, this will increase opposition towards the European Union (Azrout et al., 2011). Hence, this strongly overlaps with the intruder frame.
Hypotheses & conceptual model
From these different theoretical approaches the present study is able to deduce different expectations about the effect of framing concerning the European migration of Bulgarians and Romanians on the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union. First it can be expected that the presence of the intruder frame in news media framing on the topic of European migration of Bulgarians and Romanians negatively affects the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union. This leads to the first hypothesis:
H1 The presence of the intruder frame in news media framing concerning the European migration of Bulgarians and Romanians negatively affects the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union.
Second, the present study expects that Dutch citizens who are lower educated will have more negative political attitudes towards the European Union when being exposed to the intruder frame applied to the European migration of Bulgarians and Romanians, than higher educated Dutch citizens. This leads to the second and last hypothesis:
15 H2 Dutch citizens who are lower educated will have more negative political
attitudes towards the European Union when exposed to the intruder frame applied to the European migration of Bulgarians and Romanians than higher educated Dutch citizens.
Method
The method that was used to answer the research question and test the hypotheses is a survey-embedded experiment.
Design
The survey-embedded experiment was distributed via the Internet and contained a self-administered survey since this has many advantages (‘t Hart, Boeije, & Hox, 2009). Such surveys are fast, reduce the likelihood of errors and can be completed anonymously, which is very beneficial for the reliability of the results. Another advantage of surveys that are
administered via the Internet is that there is a possibility to show other content than just questions, which was very beneficial for the present study (‘t Hart et al., 2009). The survey contained questions about people’s political attitudes towards the European Union before and after they were exposed to the stimulus. The design was a 2 x 2 survey-embedded
experiment. The survey included a between-subjects design what means that not all
participants were part of the treatment group. Some participants were assigned to the control group.
Participants
16 cases it appeared that 121 individuals completed the survey (N = 121). The participants were selected via the social network Facebook, via e-mail, and via door-to-door sampling in a neighborhood in Arnhem, the Netherlands. They were asked to forward the survey to their friends, family members or other social contacts. This means that the present study used snowball sampling as the sampling method. Both the higher and the lower educated
participants received the same survey and had an equal chance to be assigned to the treatment group or to the control group.
Materials
For the survey different materials were used. The most important material was the stimulus (see appendix 1 and appendix 2). The stimulus was a news article. Some participants were exposed to a news article without characteristics from the intruder frame whereas other participants were exposed to a news article that contained characteristics from the intruder frame. The stimulus was designed by combining existing news articles about the European migration of Bulgarians and Romanians and by modifying words. The used news articles were found via three popular online news websites, namely Elsevier.nl, Trouw.nl and
Volkskrant.nl. The titles from the used articles were ‘CPB: Romanians and Bulgarians rather migrate to South-Europe’, ‘Asscher raises displacement of workers in the EU’, and ‘Lower educated Bulgarians and Romanians not really welcome’3
.
Measurements
The dependent variable was ‘political attitudes towards the European Union’. Inspired by a study by Lee and Capella (2001) political attitudes towards the European Union were
measured by gauging favorability toward certain political issues such as the European Union,
3
My translation. Official titles were: ‘CPB: Roemenen en Bulgaren gaan liever naar Zuid-Europa’, ‘Asscher kaart verdringen werknemers in EU aan’ and ‘Laaggeschoolde Bulgaren en Roemenen niet echt welkom’.
17 European migration and the European migration of Romanians and Bulgarians to the
Netherlands. This is done by direct assessment because it is the simplest to ask respondents directly about their own attitudes (Azjen, 2005), or to ask respondents to evaluate an attitude object by checking a numeric response on multiple items (Bohner & Dickel, 2011).
Therefore, the present study measured the dependent variable, namely ‘political attitudes towards the European Union’, by using the concept as defined and measured by
Boomgaarden, Schuck, Elenbaas and de Vreese (2011). Boomgaarden et al. (2011) used an exploratory rotated principal components factor analysis on 25 EU attitudes items, which resulted in five components that together form ‘EU attitudes’ (see Boomgaarden et al. (2011) for factor loadings and interpretations of the components). The present study used the same concept to measure political attitudes towards the European Union including the 25 EU attitudes items and seven-point agree-disagree scales by Boomgaarden et al. (2011). A list of the 25 EU attitude items can be found in appendix 54.
The present study conducted a rotated principal components factor analysis (now PCA) to measure if the 25 EU items came up with the same five components as Boomgaarden et al. (2011). The PCA suggests that there are indeed five components with an eigenvalue higher than 1.00. This becomes clear when looking at the curve in the scree plot in appendix 4. Together, these five components explain 71.43% of the total variance. Varimax rotation was applied to the PCA. The first component consists of five items, has an eigenvalue of 11.19 and a percentage of explained variance of 44.77%. The second component consists of five items, has an eigenvalue of 2.85 and a percentage of explained variance of 11.40%. The third component consists of five items, has an eigenvalue of 1.53 and a percentage of explained variance of 6.10%. The fourth component consist of five items, has an eigenvalue of 1.23 and a percentage of explained variance of 4.93%. The fifth and last component consists of four
4 The values in this appendix show the factor loadings of the 25 EU attitude items by Boomgaarden et al. (2011)
18 items, has an eigenvalue of 1.06 and a percentage of explained variance of 4.22%. The items of each component have a positive consistency with its component. As can be seen in
appendix 5, which presents the components and their factor loadings, the PCA indicates that there are 24 EU attitude items. This is not in line with the 25 EU attitude items from
Boomgaarden et al. (2011). However, the present study will still adopt and apply all 25 EU attitudes because of the theoretical justifications Boomgaarden et al. (2011) rely on and because of the satisfactory level of internal consistency of the scale.
After conducting the PCA the present study also conducted two reliability tests to measure the internal consistency of the scale and to test how closely related the sets of items were as a group. Although the PCA distinguishes 24 items, the present study found that the 25 EU attitudes items altogether have a Cronbach’s alpha of .80 in the post-test and a Cronbach’s alpha of .85 in the pre-test. This indicates a high and thus very satisfactory level of internal consistency for the scale used to measure the dependent variable ‘political attitudes towards the European Union’. Thus, although the PCA found 23 factor loadings, the entire scale has a very satisfactory level of internal consistency and will be used to measure the dependent variable ‘political attitudes towards the European Union’. After conducting the reliability tests, the 25 EU attitudes items in the pre-test were aggregated, which resulted in a variable that measured political attitudes towards the European Union in the pre-test, namely ‘political attitudes before the stimulus’. The same is done for the 25 EU attitudes items in the post-test, which resulted in a variable that measured political attitudes towards the European Union in the post-test, namely ‘political attitudes after the stimulus’.
The independent variable was ‘the presence of the intruder frame’. A dummy variable was made to measure if a participant was exposed to the intruder frame or not, namely ‘being exposed to the intruder frame or not’. Exposure to the intruder frame represented the value ‘1’ and no exposure to the intruder frame represented the value ‘0’.
19 The moderating variable was the ‘level of education’ of the respondents. This was measured with a nominal variable that included six possible response options, namely ‘basisonderwijs (lagere school)’, ‘lager beroepsonderwijs(lbo/huishoudschool/vergelijkbaar)’, ‘middelbaar beroepsonderwijs (mavo/mulo/mbo/lts/vergelijkbaar)’, ‘middelbaar voortgezetonderwijs (havo/vwo/athenaeum/hbs/gymnasium)’, ‘hoger beroepsonderwijs (hbo)’, and
‘wetenschappelijk onderwijs (wo/universitair: bachelor, master, phd)’. The Central
Commission for Statistics5 distinguishes three levels of education, namely low, middle and high (CBS, n.d.). This distinction is also present in the response options that were used to measure the moderating variable ‘level of education’. The present study followed the definition by the Central Commission for Statistics and narrowed the six reponse options down to either low or high. The present study chose to aggregate the options ‘basisonderwijs (lagere school)’, ‘lager beroepsonderwijs (lbo/huishoudschool/vergelijkbaar)’, ‘middelbaar beroepsonderwijs (mavo/mulo/mbo/lts/vergelijkbaar)’, and ‘middelbaar voortgezetonderwijs (havo/vwo/athenaeum/hbs/gymnasium)’ into lower educated and the remaining options ‘hoger beroepsonderwijs (hbo)’, and ‘wetenschappelijk onderwijs (wo/universitair: bachelor, master, phd)’ into higher educated. Consequently, a dummy variable was made that measured if a participant was higher educated or not, namely ‘being higher educated or not’, and in which the value ‘1’ represented that a participant was higher educated and ‘0’ that a participant was not higher educated.
Results
Before examining the hypotheses, descriptive data of the data were retrieved. The data suggests that 121 individuals participated in the present study (N = 121) including 84 higher educated individuals (n = 84), 37 lower educated individuals (n = 37), 58 males (n = 58) and
5
20 63 females (n = 63). The relevant variables for examining the hypotheses were the two
independent dummy variables ‘being exposed to the intruder frame or not’ and ‘being highly educated or not’ and the dependent variables ‘political attitudes before the stimulus’ and ‘political attitudes after the stimulus’. Descriptive data of these variables show that 60 participants (n = 60) were assigned to the treatment group and 61 participants (n = 61) were assigned to the control group. These descriptive data also show that the dependent variable ‘political attitudes before the stimulus’ has an average score of 4.23 on the seven-point agree-disagree scale (M = 4.23, SD = 0.63, Mdn = 4.30) and ‘political attitudes after the stimulus’ has an average score of 4.23 on the seven-point agree-disagree scale (M = 4.23, SD = 0.71, Mdn = 4.16). Last, the descriptive data show that the independent dummy variable ‘being highly educated or not’ has an average score of 0.70 (M = 0.70, SD = 0.46, Mdn = 1.00 ).
Hypotheses
The present study examined two hypotheses. The first hypothesis stated that the presence of the intruder frame in news media framing on the topic of European migration of Bulgarians and Romanians affects the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union (H1). The second hypothesis stated that Dutch citizens who are lower educated will have more negative political attitudes towards the European Union when being exposed to the intruder frame when applied to the European migration of Bulgarians and Romanians than higher educated Dutch citizens (H2). To examine the first hypothesis (H1) a paired samples t-test was conducted. This t-t-test determines whether there is a significant difference between the average scores of the population that were made under two different conditions (i.e. before exposure to the stimulus and after exposure to the stimulus). To examine the second hypothesis (H2) a multivariate analysis was conducted because this analysis makes it possible to test the moderating effect of level of education on political attitudes towards the European
21 Union.
H1
A paired samples t-test was conducted after removing the cases that were assigned to the control group. The paired samples t-test included the two dependent variables ‘political attitudes before the stimulus’ and ‘political attitudes after the stimulus’. The experimental group scored on average higher before being exposed to the intruder frame (M = 4.31, SD = 0.59) than after being exposed to the intruder frame (M = 4.30, SD = 0.68). This difference is not significant, t (59) = 0.21 p = 0.833, 95% CI = [-0.07, 0.09]. Thus, H1 cannot be
confirmed.
H2
The multivariate analysis included the two independent dummy variables ‘being exposed to the intruder frame or not’6 and ‘being highly educated or not’7, and the dependent variable ‘political attitudes after the stimulus’8
. The graph in appendix 3 presents how these variables interact with each other. The results shows that there seems to be no significant interaction effect between level of education and being exposed to the intruder frame or not, F (1, 117) = 1.52, p = 0.221, n² = 0.00. This means that H2 cannot be confirmed.
Conclusion
The main purpose of the present study was to assess to which extent news media framing about the European migration of Bulgarians and Romanians affects the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union. To do so, the present study applied the intruder frame by Van Gorp (2005) to the concept of European migration of Bulgarians and
6 In the graph presented as ‘Stimulus’. 7
In the graph presented as ‘Education_lowhigh’.
8
22 Romanians to the Netherlands. It was hypothesized that the presence of the intruder frame in news media framing concerning the European migration of Bulgarians and Romanians negatively affects the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union (H1). It was also hypothesized that Dutch citizens who are lower educated will have more negative political attitudes towards the European Union when being exposed to the intruder frame applied to the European migration of Bulgarians and Romanians than higher educated Dutch citizens (H2). Both hypotheses could not be confirmed.
A paired samples t-test suggested that there is no significant effect of the intruder frame on the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union. This means that the political attitudes towards the European Union of Dutch citizens do not get more negative after being exposed to the intruder frame. A multivariate analysis suggested that the level of education does not significantly moderate the effect of the intruder frame on the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union. This means that there is no
significant difference between higher educated participants and lower educated participants when it comes to the effect of the intruder frame on the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union. Hence, with regard to the research question it can be concluded that the intruder frame, when applied to the European migration of Bulgarians and
Romanians, does not affect the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union.
Discussion
The findings clearly do not support the literature that was used to compose the hypotheses. However, the present study should not be seen as complete but rather as an inspiration. The results show that there is no significant effect of the intruder frame on the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union. The findings also show that the level of
23 education of the participants does not moderate the effect of the intruder frame on the
political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union in the obtained data. This means that there is no significant difference between higher educated participants and lower educated participants when it comes to the effect of the intruder frame on the political attitudes of Dutch citizens towards the European Union. The implications of these
conclusions for the understanding of the effect of the intruder frame on attitudes towards the European Union, is that with the current knowledge about this frame it is not suitable to be applied to European migration. However, based on academic consensus that framing indeed affects attitudes, it can also be said that the shortcomings and limitations of the present study have affected the results and might have caused a deficiency. Thus, they need to be
acknowledged.
Shortcomings
A possible explanation for the non-significant results can be found in the intruder frame. The present study applied the intruder frame in a novel way, which may have caused the non-significant results. Van Gorp (2005) originally applied the intruder frame to the context of asylum seekers instead of migrants. Furthermore, Van Gorp (2005) did not incorporate the intruder frame into a news message but looked for the presence of the intruder frame in existing news messages. Therefore, it was not possible to apply prior research that
investigated a similar subject and to lay a foundation for understanding the research problem the present study was investigating. Thus, the new mode of application of the intruder frame may have caused some weaker hypotheses and could be the cause for the non-significant results. However, in spite of the non-significant results, it should be noted that it is not
completely unexpected that the novelty of the present study would lead to, somewhat, weaker results and shortcomings. Currently too little is known about the characteristics, the effects
24 and the circumstances in which these effects occur of the intruder frame to successfully apply this frame to other contexts. Nevertheless, the intruder frame is well suitable to be applied to, and should be applied to, the context of European migration, because of the strong overlap with social identity theory, ethnic competition theory and the way migrants are framed.
Limitations
The present study also holds limitations due to practical issues. The most important limitation concerns the sample size. The small sample size could be the cause for the non-significant results as it is difficult to find significant relationships from the data because statistical analyses require a larger sample size. This limitation restricts the extent to which the findings can be generalized. Also, lower educated people were underrepresented in the sample. This could be explained by the sampling method; because of the snowballing method there is no control over the participants. It could be the case that lower educated people did not receive the survey or that they simply weren’t interested in participating. Also, the timing may have affected the sample size; the survey was launched during the Christmas holiday when people tend to be less online than during normal weekdays. Another factor could be the large amount of questions the participant had to answer; this could have caused irritation or boredom, which in turn led to participants premature quitting the survey.
Future research
The fact that the results do not support the hypotheses clearly implies that further research is much needed. Future research needs to take various measures when trying to answer the research questions of the present study adequately. To do so future research should first of all overcome the shortcomings and limitations of the present study. Second, more studies should incorporate the intruder frame by Van Gorp (2005) into their research on framing of
25 European migration. Although this would not directly lead to a perfect applicability of the intruder frame to the issue of European migration, it would result in more knowledge about the applicability of the intruder frame on European Union migration. Third, future studies should examine the effect of the intruder frame on individual aspects of political attitudes towards the European Union. The present study measured political attitudes towards the European Union in its entirety and did not look at the individual components of the concept by Boomgaarden et al. (2011). By looking at the individual components, future research could find significant results as the intruder frame may have an effect on some on the individual components. Also, by examining the effects of the intruder frame on the political attitudes towards the European Union of other European citizens instead only Dutch citizens, may increase the possibility for obtaining significant results.
References
’t Hart, H., Boeije, H., & Hox, J. (2009). Onderzoeksmethoden (8th
ed.). Den Haag: Boom Lemma uitgevers.
‘The Dutch don’t want the Bulgarians and Romanians’. (2013). Retrieved October 22, 2013, from
http://www.parool.nl/parool/nl/224/BINNENLAND/article/detail/3502319/2013/09/0 2/Nederlander-wil-Bulgaren-en-Roemenen-niet.dhtml
Aarts, K., & Semetko, H. A. (2003). The divided electorate: Media use and political involvement. Journal of Politics, 65(3), 759-784. doi:10.1111/1468-2508.00211 Ajzen, I. (2005). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Berkshire: McGraw-Hill International. Angrist, J. D., & Kugler, A. D. (2003). Protective or counter‐productive?: Labour market
institutions and the effect of immigration on EU natives*. The Economic Journal, 113(488), F302-F331. doi:10.1111/1468-0297.00136
26 Azrout, R., van Spanje, J., & de Vreese, C. (2011). Talking Turkey: Anti-immigrant attitudes
and their effect on support for Turkish membership of the EU. European Union Politics, 12(1), 3-19. doi:10.1177/1465116510389498
Azrout, R., van Spanje, J., & de Vreese, C. (2012). A threat called Turkey: Perceived religious threat and support for EU entry of Croatia, Switzerland and Turkey. Acta Politica, 48(1), 2-21. doi:10.1057/ap.2012.20
Bauer, T., Lofstrom, M., & Zimmermann, K. F. (2000). Immigration policy assimilation of immigrants and native's sentiment towards immigrants: evidence from 12 OECD countries. (Discussion paper). Institute for the Study of Labor. Retrieved from http://www.ssrn.com/abstract=251988
Bauer, T. K., & Zimmermann, K. F. (1999). Assessment of possible migration pressure and its labour market impact following EU enlargement to Central and Eastern Europe (3rd ed.). Bonn: IZA.
Bohner, G., & Dickel, N. (2011). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 391-417. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.121208.131609
Boomgaarden, H. G., Schuck, A. R., Elenbaas, M., & de Vreese, C. H. (2011). Mapping EU attitudes: Conceptual and empirical dimensions of Euroscepticism and EU
support. European Union Politics, 12(2), 241-266. doi:10.1177/1465116510395411 Boomgaarden, H. G., & Vliegenthart, R. (2009). How news content influences anti‐
immigration attitudes: Germany, 1993–2005. European Journal of Political Research, 48(4), 516-542. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.2009.01831.x
CBS. (n.d.). Opleidingsniveau. Retrieved from http://www.cbs.nl/nl-NL/menu/methoden/toelichtingen/alfabet/o/opleidingsniveau3.htm
Ceobanu, A. M., & Escandell, X. (2010). Comparative analyses of public attitudes toward immigrants and immigration using multinational survey data: A review of theories
27 and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 309-328.
doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102651
Citrin, J., Green, D. P., Muste, C., & Wong, C. (1997). Public opinion toward immigration reform: The role of economic motivations. Journal of Politics, 59, 858-881.
doi:10.2307/2998640
Coenders, M., Lubbers, M., Scheepers, P., & Verkuyten, M. (2008). More than two decades of changing ethnic attitudes in the Netherlands. Journal of Social Issues, 64(2), 269-285. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.00561.x
De Vreese, C. H. (2003). Framing Europe: television news and European integration. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.
De Vreese, C. H., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2003). Valenced news frames and public support for the EU. Communications, 28(4), 361-381. doi:10.1515/comm.2003.024
De Vreese, C. H., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2005). Projecting EU referendums fear of
immigration and support for European integration. European Union Politics, 6(1), 59-82. doi:10.1177/1465116505049608
De Vreese, C. H., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2006). Media effects on public opinion about the enlargement of the European Union. JCMS: Journal of Common Market
Studies, 44(2), 419-436. doi:10.1177/1465116508095149
De Vreese, C. H., Boomgaarden, H. G., & Semetko, H. A. (2008). Hard and soft public support for Turkish membership in the EU. European Union Politics, 9(4), 511-530. doi:10.1177/1465116508095149
Domke, D., McCoy, K., & Torres, M. (1999). News media, racial perceptions, and political cognition. Communication Research, 26(5), 570-607.
doi:10.1177/009365099026005003
28 http://www.eeas.europa.eu/migration/index_en.htm
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
Esses, V. M., Dovidio, J. F., Jackson, L. M., & Armstrong, T. L. (2001). The immigration dilemma: The role of perceived group competition, ethnic prejudice, and national identity. Journal of Social Issues, 57(3), 389-412. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00220 Favell, A. (2008). The new face of East–West migration in Europe. Journal of Ethnic and
Migration Studies, 34(5), 701-716. doi:10.1080/13691830802105947
Favell, A., & Hansen, R. (2002). Markets against politics: migration, EU enlargement and the idea of Europe. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 28(4), 581-601.
doi:10.1080/1369183021000032218
Fox, J. E., Moroşanu, L., & Szilassy, E. (2012). The racialization of the new European migration to the UK. Sociology, 46(4), 680-695. doi:10.1177/0038038511425558 Gabel, M. (1998). Public support for European integration: An empirical test of five
theories. Journal of Politics, 60, 333-354. doi:10.2307/2647912
Gang, I., Rivera-Batiz, F., & Yun, M. S. (2002). Economic strain, ethnic concentration and attitudes towards foreigners in the European Union. (Discussion paper). Institute for the Study of Labor. Retrieved from http://www.ssrn.com/abstract=331475
Givens, T., & Luedtke, A. (2004). The politics of European Union immigration policy: Institutions, salience, and harmonization. Policy Studies Journal, 32(1), 145-165. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2004.00057.x
Hogg, M. A. (2006). Social identity theory. In P. J. Burke (Ed.), Contemporary social psychological theories (pp. 111-136).
Igartua, J. J., & Cheng, L. (2009). Moderating effect of group cue while processing news on immigration: Is the framing effect a heuristic process?. Journal of
29 Communication, 59(4), 726-749. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01454.x
Igartua, J. J., Moral-Toranzo, F., & Fernández, I. (2011). Cognitive, attitudinal, and emotional effects of news frame and group cues, on processing news about immigration. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 23(4), 174. doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000050
Lakoff, G., & Ferguson, S. (2006). The framing of immigration. (Paper). The Rockridge Institute. Retrieved from
http://academic.evergreen.edu/curricular/ppandp/PDFs/Lakoff%20Framing%20of%2 0Immigration.doc.pdf
Lee, G., & Cappella, J. N. (2001). The effects of political talk radio on political attitude formation: Exposure versus knowledge. Political Communication, 18(4), 369-394. doi:10.1080/10584600152647092
Lee, T. L., & Fiske, S. T. (2006). Not an outgroup, not yet an ingroup: Immigrants in the stereotype content model. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30(6), 751-768. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2006.06.005
Lubbers, M., Scheepers, P., & Vergeer, M. (2000). Exposure to newspapers and attitudes toward ethnic minorities: A longitudinal analysis. Howard Journal of
Communications, 11(2), 127-143. doi:10.1080/106461700246661
Lubbers, M., Scheepers, P., & Wester, F. (1998). Ethnic minorities in Dutch newspapers 1990-5 patterns of criminalization and problematization. International
Communication Gazette, 60(5), 415-431. doi:10.1177/0016549298060005004 Maier, J., & Rittberger, B. (2008). Shifting Europe's boundaries mass media, public opinion
and the enlargement of the EU. European Union Politics, 9(2), 243-267. doi: 10.1177/1465116508089087
30 http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/malmstrom/a-wboell-functioning-schengen/
Marks, G., & McAdam, D. (1996). Social movements and the changing structure of political opportunity in the European Union 1. West European Politics, 19(2), 249-278. doi:10.1080/01402389608425133
McLaren, L. M. (2002). Public support for the European Union: Cost/benefit analysis or perceived cultural threat?. Journal of Politics, 64(2), 551-566. doi:10.1111/1468-2508.00139
Meeussen, L., Phalet, K., Meeus, J., Van Acker, K., Montreuil, A., & Bourhis, R. (2013). “They are all the same”: Low perceived typicality and outgroup disapproval as buffers of intergroup threat in mass media. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 37(2), 146-158. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2012.05.002
Nelson, T. E., & Oxley, Z. M. (1999). Issue framing effects on belief importance and opinion. The Journal of Politics, 61(04), 1040-1067. doi:10.2307/2647553
Noutcheva, G., & Bechev, D. (2008). The successful laggards: Bulgaria and Romania's accession to the EU. East European Politics & Societies, 22(1), 114-144. doi:10.1177/0888325407311793
Okkerse, L. (2005). The impact of immigrants on the labour market. In H. De Smedt (Ed.), Unexpected approaches to the global society (pp. 37-60). Antwerpen-Apeldoorn: Garant.
Papadimitriou, D., & Gateva, E. (2009). Between enlargement-led Europeanisation and Balkan exceptionalism: An appraisal of Bulgaria's and Romania's entry into the European Union. Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 10(2), 152-166. doi:10.1080/15705850902899172
Pardos-Prado, S. (2011). Framing attitudes towards immigrants in Europe: When competition does not matter. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 37(7), 999-1015.
31 doi:10.1080/1369183X.2011.572421
Ram, M. H. (2013). European integration, migration and representation: The case of Roma in France. Ethnopolitics. doi:10.1080/17449057.2013.844430
Savelkoul, M., Scheepers, P., Tolsma, J., & Hagendoorn, L. (2011). Anti-Muslim attitudes in the Netherlands: Tests of contradictory hypotheses derived from ethnic competition theory and intergroup contact theory. European Sociological Review, 27(6), 741-758. doi:10.1093/esr/jcq035
Scheepers, P., Gijsberts, M., & Coenders, M. (2002). Ethnic exclusionism in European countries: Public opposition to civil rights for legal migrants as a response to perceived ethnic threat. European Sociological Review, 18, 17-34.
doi:10.1093/esr/18.1.17
Schemer, C. (2012). The influence of news media on stereotypic attitudes toward immigrants in a political campaign. Journal of Communication, 62(5), 739-757.
doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01672.x
Schneider, S. L. (2008). Anti-immigrant attitudes in Europe: Outgroup size and perceived ethnic threat. European Sociological Review, 24(1), 53-67. doi:10.1093/esr/jcm034
Schuck, A. R., & De Vreese, C. H. (2006). Between risk and opportunity news framing and its effects on public support for EU enlargement. European Journal of
Communication, 21(1), 5-32. doi: 0.1177/0267323106060987
Spendzharova, A. B., & Vachudova, M. A. (2012). Catching up?: Consolidating liberal democracy in Bulgaria and Romania after EU accession. West European Politics, 35(1), 39-58. doi:10.1080/01402382.2012.631312
Stanek, M. (2009). Patterns of Romanian and Bulgarian migration to Spain. Europe-Asia Studies, 61(9), 1627-1644. doi:10.1080/09668130903209160
32 to development trajectories. Labor History, 55(1), 21-46.
doi:10.1080/0023656X.2013.843841
Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33(1), 1-39. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.33.020182.000245
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In S. Worchel, & L. W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Van Gorp, B. (2005). Where is the frame?: Victims and intruders in the Belgian press coverage of the asylum issue. European Journal of Communication, 20(4), 484-507. doi:10.1177/0267323105058253
Vliegenthart, R., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2007). Real-world indicators and the coverage of immigration and the integration of minorities in Dutch newspapers. European Journal of Communication, 22(3), 293-314. doi:10.1177/0267323107079676
Vliegenthart, R., & Roggeband, C. (2007). Framing immigration and integration Relationships between press and parliament in The Netherlands. International Communication Gazette, 69(3), 295-319. doi:10.1177/1748048507076582 Vliegenthart, R., Schuck, A. R., Boomgaarden, H. G., & De Vreese, C. H. (2008). News
coverage and support for European integration, 1990–2006. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20(4), 415-439. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edn044
Weng, L., & Zheng, S. W. (2010). Schengen agreement and its impact on international migration. US-China Law Review, 7, 8. Retrieved from
http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/uschinalrw7&div=31&g_sent= 1&collection=journals#208
33 Appendix 1
34 Appendix 2
35 Appendix 3
36 Appendix 4
37 Appendix 5
Factor loadings PCA
Table 1
Factor loadings principle component factor analysis.
Components 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
1. I am afraid of the European Union. 0.84 2. I feel threatened by the European Union. 0.86 3. I am angry about the European Union. 0.84 4. I am disgusted with the European Union. 0.87 5. The European Union poses a threat to Dutch 0.63 identity and culture .
6. Being a citizen of the European Union means 0.72 a lot to me.
7. Europeans share a common tradition, culture 0.61 and history.
8. I feel close to fellow Europeans. 0.72
9. The European flag means a lot to me. 0.75
10. I am proud to be a European citizen. 0.78
11. The decision-making process in the European 0.84 Union is transparent.
12. The European Union functions well as it is. 0.72
13. The European Union is wasting a lot of tax 0.58
38
Components 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
14. The European Union functions according to 0.58 democratic principles.
15. I trust the European Parliament. 0.63
16. The European Union fosters peace and 0.65 stability.
17. The European Union fosters the preservation 0.65 of the environment.
18. Dutch membership of the European Union 0.76
is a good thing.
19. The Netherlands has benefited from being 0.79 a member of the European Union.
20. I personally benefit from the Netherlands’ 0.71 EU membership.
21. The European Union should become one 0.58
country.
22. I support more decision/policy-making at 0.76
EU level.
23. The decision-making power of the European 0.68
Union should be extended.
24. Desired speed of European integration.
25. The EU should be enlarged with other countries. 0.48
Note. Principal components analysis with varimax rotation. Factor loadings below 0.45 were omitted from the table.
