In this article, we discuss the role of perceived competition for resources in determining negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration in North America. We first provide background information on immigration policies and levels of immigration to Canada and the United States. Following an overview of our theoretical perspective, we then describe the research we have conducted in Canada and the United States indicating that perceived zero-sum competition between

High levels of worldwide migration paired with increasingly negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration in host countries indicate that it is crucial to gain an understanding of the bases of these attitudes. This article discusses one determinant of negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration: perceived competition for resources. We present our instrumental model of group conflict, which suggests that competition for resources, and attempts to remove this competition, are importunt determinants of intergroup attitudes and behaviol: We then review relevant research on perceived competition and attitudes toward immigrants and immigration. We conclude by discussing the implications of this research for attempts to alleviate tension between immigrants and members of host populations, and for our more general model of group conflict.

Links between religion and prejudice have been interpreted to suggest that religion can both reduce and exacerbate prejudice. Here, the analysis of religion as a meaning system illuminates how religion can affect intergroup attitudes. Traditional psychological perspectives on religion and prejudice are summarized, followed by a discussion of religion and prejudice in cross-cultural and cross-religious contexts, involving varying target groups. Next, we explore possible explanatory mechanisms by proposing how four levels of meaning associated with religioncognitive, motivational, societal, and intergroup-may both promote and attenuate prejudice. Finally, additional factors that might facilitate the paradoxical coexistence of religious egalitarian intentions with prejudiced attitudes are considered, and we speculate about the potential for religious groups to reduce prejudice within their adherents.

Based on models of intergroup competition and social dominance, we examined the impact of perceived economic competition with immigrants on support for empowering and non-empowering forms of assistance for immigrants. In Study 1, a manipulation of perceived economic competition with immigrants caused attenuated support for empowerment but not for non-empowering forms of help. In Study 2, people higher in social dominance orientation were less willing to endorse empowerment for immigrants than were people lower in social dominance orientation, and this relation was mediated by the belief that economic and power gains for immigrants result in economic and power losses for members of host populations. It is suggested that people’s desire to maintain a discrepancy in economic and power resources between immigrants and host populations undermines support for empowering forms of help for immigrants.