Does International Terrorism Affect Public Attitudes toward Refugees? Evidence from a Large-Scale Natural Experiment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Does international terrorism affect attitudes toward refugees? Does terrorism mobilize the public to pressure legislators to restrict refugee policy? Are these effects long- or short-lived? To answer these questions, this article presents results from a large-scale natural experiment to investigate the effects of the 2015 Islamic State terrorist attacks in Paris on attitudes toward Syrian refugees in a country that is a major recipient of refugees (Canada). The results demonstrate that the attacks increased (1) anxiety over refugee resettlement, (2) perceptions of refugees as a security and cultural threat, and (3) opposition to resettlement. Furthermore, the attacks increased mobilization among resettlement’s opponents. Using a large-scale survey (n=18,634) fielded daily across a three-week period, however, we show that these effects were decidedly short-lived. The findings are highly relevant to our understanding of public reactions to major terrorist attacks and the responses of political entrepreneurs in their aftermath.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it