Political and media discourses about integrating refugees in the <scp>UK</scp>

Goodman, Simon; Kirkwood, Steve

doi:10.1002/ejsp.2595

Cited by 29 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even though this relationship can be somewhat instrumental in explaining the intention–behaviour gap, examining some other factors that can feed into this connection might be more useful. For instance, the political and media discourses about the victims of a global emergency may play a role in shaping individual responses (Goodman & Kirkwood, 2019), which then could affect the feelings of competency to help. Likewise, the cause of the global disaster (i.e., humanly caused versus naturally caused) can signpost victims’ efforts to help themselves (Zagefka et al ., 2011) and this may influence how much potential helpers feel competent or incompetent to help.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring global bystander intervention and exploring its antecedents for helping refugees

Albayrak‐Aydemir

Gleibs

2020

British J of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the bystander intervention model provides a useful account of how people help others, no previous study has applied it to a global emergency. This research aims to develop a scale for measuring global bystander intervention and investigate its potential antecedents in the Syrian refugee emergency. In Study 1 (N = 80) and Study 2 (N = 205), a 12‐item scale was established through a substantive‐validity assessment and a confirmatory factor analysis, respectively. Study 3 (N = 601) explored the potential antecedents of the global bystander intervention, employing British and German samples. Results show that the global bystander intervention model worked for both samples, but there were significant between‐group differences in terms of the extent to which they notice the emergency, know how to help, show political support, and donate money. Overall, the visibility of the global emergency aftermaths within the context has been deduced as a meaningful driver for between‐group differences. This research provides the first empirical evidence on global bystander intervention and it offers timely suggestions to promote support for refugees or other victims of global disasters, especially among those who are distant to the disaster zone.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring global bystander intervention and exploring its antecedents for helping refugees

Albayrak‐Aydemir

Gleibs

2020

British J of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Residents’ willingness to participate in collective action against refugees is predicted by their autochthony beliefs, that is, their sense of entitlement to defend their homeland against the influx of refugees (Hasbún López et al., ). Refugee‐specific vulnerabilities are extracted from speeches by UK politicians and from UK newspaper articles (Goodman & Kirkwood, ). Stereotypes about refugee groups are compared to stereotypes about other target groups of prejudice (Kotzur, Friehs, Asbrock, & van Zalk, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Special Issue on “The Social Psychology of Forced Migration and Refugee Integration” in the European Journal of Social Psychology

Echterhoff

Hellmann

Back

et al. 2019

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The storyteller says, ‘Ordinary workers lost their jobs, and some eventually lost everything’ (03:15–03:31). This argument strongly emphasizes the needs of the nation and its people and places these needs above refugees (Goodman & Kirkwood, 2019; Lynn & Lea, 2003). Such discourses, juxtaposing immigration and the maintenance of the welfare system as mutually exclusive and justifying a stricter asylum policy as patriotic and protecting welfare, frequently feature in previous studies of radical right‐wing rhetoric (Goodman & Burke, 2011; Goodman & Kirkwood, 2019; Lynn & Lea, 2003; Mols & Jetten, 2016; Sakki & Pettersson, 2016).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobilizing collective hatred through humour: Affective–discursive production and reception of populist rhetoric

Sakki

Martikainen

2020

British J Social Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research examines the mobilization of populist rhetoric of the 2019 Finns Party election video. By focusing on both the FP's election video (production) and Youtube users' comments (reception), we examine the constructions and uses of social categories and humour as well as responses to their rhetorical deployment among like-minded supporters and opponents. The multimodal analysis of the production of a populist campaign video demonstrates the construction of social categories and humour through the five steps of collective hate. These humorous messages are differently received by like-minded and opposing YouTube users. Two supportive affective-discursive practices glorification and schadenfreudeboth express shared joy and laughter, but while glorification emphasizes the positive self-understanding of the in-group, schadenfreude belittles the 'political Other'. Two opposing affective-discursive practicesirritation and scornplace FP voters in subject positions of morally and intellectually inferior fascists, racists, and idiots. The populist message fosters expressions of social anger and polarization between FP supporters and opponents. Humour entangled with hatred encourages a sense of moral superiority in both groups. This study contributes to the current knowledge of mobilizing populist rhetoric and polarization, and responds to the call to broaden analysis of political communication in the field of multimodality. Recently, populism has been central to public and academic debate. Political and socialscientific discussion of its definitions have been lively: it has been defined as an ideology (Mudde, 2004), discourse (Laclau, 2005), and rhetorical style (Jagers & Walgrave, 2007), and a combination of these (see e.g. Rooduijn, 2019). Social psychology has approached populism as an intergroup differentiation based on its vertical and horizontal dimensions (Staerkl e & Green, 2018). While its vertical differentiation refers to the gap between 'good people' and a 'bad elite', its horizontal dimension concerns the confrontation between 'in-' and 'out-groups', the latter often referring to refugees, characterized as 'the dangerous Other' (Brubaker, 2020; Wodak, 2015). From this model, it follows that a combination of high-level vertical and horizontal differentiation best describes national (right-wing) populism, whereas a combination of high-level vertical and low-level horizontal differentiation best describes social (left-wing) populism. Previous studies suggest that This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

show abstract

Political and media discourses about integrating refugees in the UK

Cited by 29 publications

References 22 publications

Measuring global bystander intervention and exploring its antecedents for helping refugees

Measuring global bystander intervention and exploring its antecedents for helping refugees

Special Issue on “The Social Psychology of Forced Migration and Refugee Integration” in the European Journal of Social Psychology

Mobilizing collective hatred through humour: Affective–discursive production and reception of populist rhetoric

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About