Regression of American pride on socio-demographic factors (Model 1) and attitudes on immigration(Model 2). Model 1Model 2 VariableCoefficient Age 0.25*** 0.24*** Education-0.61*** -0.72*** Sex 2.38** 2.08* Race * Foreign-Born * Pol. Views. 0.83* 0.85* Protestant a Catholic a 5.48*** 4.84** Jewish a 13.94*** 13.16*** Other Rel. a immameco -2.16*** amcult -0.97* Constant R2R Source: General Social Survey (2004). Note: N=902; b= unstandardized regression coefficient; BETA= standardized regression coefficient. a. Compared to respondents citing no religion. * p<0.05; ** p<0.01; *** p<0.001 MethodsMethods IntroductionIntroduction There have been various studies (Lewin-Epstein 2005, Heath, Tilley 2005, Medrano 2005) that indicate a tie between national pride and negative attitudes towards immigrants. These studies describe national pride as emerging from an in-group mentality, which causes group members (citizens) to readily recognize differences between themselves and foreigners and see the cultural diversity brought by immigrants as a threat to the values of their group. In this study we will test this hypothesis with multiple dimensions of opinions on immigration, namely cultural assimilation of immigrants and the effects of immigrants on the economy. If the hypothesis remains true, it is expected that respondents who believe that immigrants cannot become fully American and that immigrants are bad for the economy will have higher national pride. To test our hypothesis, we analyzed 2004 data from the General Social Survey (GSS). The GSS is a source of data on societal trends tracking the opinion of U.S residents on demographic, behavioral, and attitudinal questions since Using questions measuring one’s pride in American achievements, we created a National pride scale on a scale of to determine their level of national pride. The pride scale is based on a given respondent’s pride in the way democracy works in the U.S., America’s economic achievements, American advancements in science and technology, American art and literature, American history, the political influence of the U.S. government, America’s social security system, American sports, the U.S. military, and the fair and equal treatment of groups in the U.S. ResultsResults Methods – con’t Our first model examines the relationship between a respondent’s level of pride in American achievements and various demographic measures to control for external indicators of national pride. These measures include age, race (Black or White), sex (male or female), education (in years), religious preference (Protestant, Catholic, Judaism, or non- religious), political conservatism, and whether the respondent was born in America. Respondents who either did not provide information for one of these fields or provided a response other than the ones listed were excluded form our analysis. Our second model includes the respondent’s attitudes on immigration. To measure attitudes on both the cultural and economic aspects of immigration, respondents were asked to what extent they agree or disagree (on a five-point scale, 1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree) with the following statements: It is impossible for people who do not share American customs and traditions to become fully American (GSS variable: amcult) Immigrants are generally good for the American economy (GSS variable: immameco) Model 1 and model 2 show that in both samples, pride in the overall American achievement grows with age. Education is shown to have the opposite effect; pride decreases on average with every additional year of education, controlling for the other factors. Sex is also statistically significant in each model, but quantitatively underwhelming with only a 2-point change in the 100-point scale in either model. Race and foreign-born status are much the same as sex, except they are not statistically significant in the reduced model; whites experience more national pride than blacks, and people born in America experience more pride than foreign-born people living in America. Results – con’t Conclusions Conclusions ReferencesReferences Results – con’t Lewin-Epstein, Noah. “National Identity and Xenophobia in an Ethnically Divided Society.” International Journal on Multicultural Societies (IJMS). Vol. 7, No. 2, Heath, Anthony F. and Tilley, James R. “British National Identity and Attitudes Towards Immigration.” International Journal on Multicultural Societies (IJMS). Vol. 7, No. 2, Medrano, Juan-Diez. “Nation, Citizenship, and Immigration in Contemporary Spain.” International Journal on Multicultural Societies (IJMS). Vol. 7, No. 2, Singer, Andy. “No Exit.” Political conservatism also has a statistically significant relationship with pride in American achievement, where conservative people experience more pride on average. Religion also affects national pride, where being Catholic and Jewish (compared to people citing no religion) are positively correlated to the pride scale. People who agree with the statement ‘Immigrants are generally good for the American economy’ have more pride than those who disagree, on average and controlling for the other factors. People who agree with the statement ‘It is impossible for people who do not share American customs and traditions to become fully American’ have more pride than those who disagree, on average and controlling for other factors. Further, the r 2 of Model 2 is statistically significant with a p<0.000 in comparison to Model 1; it provides additional explanation on the variance with the pride variable. The hypothesis proved to be only partially true: respondents who felt that immigrants could not assimilate into American culture had higher national pride. However, the opposite was observed for the economic condition of immigration: respondents who believe immigrants are good for the American economy had higher national pride as well. These data indicate a complex view of immigration in American society. While Americans who have more national pride are skeptical of the cultural diversity brought by immigrants, they are able to recognize some of the practical benefits of immigration, including its potential benefit to the economy. If nothing else, the results invalidate the question “is immigration good or bad?” as such an all-encompassing response is not representative. Going forward, continuing research might investigate this multi-layered view of immigration further: to what extent are Americans with more national pride willing to accept cultural differences for the benefit of the country they adore? Also, what other practical aspects besides economic benefits do proud Americans recognize in immigration? Pride