CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 11Social and Intergroup PsychologyPsychometric Methodologies and TestingMigration, Refugees, and Integration

A measure of positive and negative perception of migration: Development and psychometric properties of the Positive and Negative Perception of Immigrants Scale (PANPIS)

Open access
Panno, Angelo, Pellegrini, Valerio, De Cristofaro, Valeria, Donati, Maria Anna·2023·Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy
DOI 10.1111/asap.12338
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This paper reports the validation and psychometric properties of the Positive and Negative Perception of Immigrants Scale (PANPIS)—a new measure to assess positive and negative attitude towards immigrants. Across two studies ( N = 956), the psychometric evidence of the PANPIS is presented. As expected, exploratory factor analysis suggested a two factors and 14‐item structure, which was ratified using a confirmatory factor analysis. Corroboration of the measure's robustness was provided by a multigroup‐CFA, which yielded evidence for the gender invariance of the measure (Study 1). Study 2 showed measurement invariance of the online version with respect to the paper‐and‐pencil version. Reliability, discriminant, and criterion validities were examined across Studies 1 and 2 showing satisfactory results for both paper‐and‐pencil and online versions, respectively. These results suggest that the PANPIS is a psychometrically sound measure having the distinctive characteristic to simultaneously investigate prejudice by capturing both positive and negative attitudes towards immigrants.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/asap.12338

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • AI systems exhibit network externality: the larger the data network they access, the more intense their training.

    “AI systems exhibit this network externality too: the larger the data network they access, the more intense their training (LeCun et al., 2015;Panno et al., 2023).”

    From Deepfakes, Democracy, and the Ethics of Synthetic Media: A Synthesis of the SOLARIS Project (2026) · cites this paper as Panno et al., 2023

    The Introduction discusses attitudes toward immigrants, and the Reliability and validity section evaluates the PANPIS scale. Searches for AI network externalities, training data, and machine learning found no passage addressing the claim. The available passages provide neither support nor a contrary finding. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 58

  1. Allport, G.W., Clark, K. & Pettigrew, T. (1954) The nature of prejudice. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  2. Anderson, J.R. (2018) The prejudice against asylum seekers scale: presenting the psychometric properties of a new measure of classical and conditional attitudes. The Journal of Social Psychology, 158(6), 694-710. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00224545.2017.1404958 · DOI
  3. Bentler, P.M. (1990) Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238-246. https:// doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Brown, T.A. (2006) Confirmatory factory analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  5. Byrne, B. M. (2004). Testing for multigroup invariance using AMOS graphics: A road less traveled. Structural equation modeling, 11(2), 272-300. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1102_8 · DOI
  6. Cavaillé, C. & Marshall, J. (2019) Education and anti-immigration attitudes: evidence from compulsory school- ing reforms across Western Europe. American Political Science Review, 113(1), 254-263. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0003055418000588 · DOI
  7. Ceobanu, A.M. & Escandell, X. (2010) Comparative analyses of public attitudes towards immigrants and immigra- tion using multinational survey data: a review of theories and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 309-328. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102651 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Chen, F.F. (2007) Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14, 464-504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Coll, M.P., Viding, E., Rütgen, M., Silani, G., Lamm, C., Catmur, C. & Bird, G. (2017) Are we really measur- ing empathy? Proposal for a new measurement framework. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 83, 132-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.10.009 · DOI
  10. Curran, P.J., West, S.G. & Finch, J.F. (1996) The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1(1), 16-29.
  11. Davidov, E., Cieciuch, J., Meuleman, B., Schmidt, P., Algesheimer, R. & Hausherr, M. (2015) The comparability of measurements of attitudes towards immigration in the European Social Survey: exact versus approximate measurement equivalence. Public Opinion Quarterly, 79(S1), 244-266. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfv008 · DOI
  12. Davidov, E. & Depner, F. (2011) Testing for measurement equivalence of human values across online and Paper- and-Pencil Surveys. Quality & Quantity, 45(2), 375-390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-009-9297-9 · DOI
  13. Davis, M.H. (1980) A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 85.
  14. De Cristofaro, V., Pellegrini, V., Baldner, C., van Zomeren, M., Livi, S. & Pierro, A. (2019) Need for closure effect on collective action intentions and behavior towards immigrants in Italy: the mediation of binding foundations and political conservatism. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 49(10), 611-622. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12620 · DOI
  15. De Cristofaro, V., Pellegrini, V., Livi, S. & van Zomeren, M. (2022) Explaining immigrant threat perceptions and pro- immigrant collective action intentions through issue-specific moral conviction and general need for closure: the case of the US-Mexico border wall. European Journal of Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2853 · DOI
  16. Deng, L. & Chan, W. (2017) Testing the difference between reliability coefficients alpha and omega. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 77(2), 185-203. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164416658325 · DOI
  17. 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. https://doi. org/10.1111/0022-4537.00220 · DOI
  18. Fabrigar, L.R., Wegener, D.T., MacCallum, R.C. & Strahan, E.J. (1999) Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272-299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Falomir-Pichastor, J.M., Berent, J., Mugny, G. & Faniko, K. (2015) Egalitarianism and sexual prejudice: the role of ingroup distinctiveness motives. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 18. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2015. · DOI
  20. Federico, C.M., Ergun, D. & Hunt, C. (2014) Opposition to equality and support for tradition as mediators of the relationship between epistemic motivation and system-justifying identifications. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 17, 524-541. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430213517273 · DOI
  21. Green, E.G., Visintin, E.P., Sarrasin, O. & Hewstone, M. (2020) When integration policies shape the impact of intergroup contact on threat perceptions: a multilevel study across 20 European countries. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46(3), 631-648. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2018.1550159 · DOI
  22. Guimond, S., Dambrun, M., Michinov, N. & Duarte, S. (2003) Does social dominance generate prejudice? Inte- grating individual and contextual determinants of intergroup cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 697-721. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.697 · DOI
  23. Ha, S.E. (2010) The consequences of multiracial contexts on public attitudes towards immigration. Political Research Quarterly, 63(1), 29-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912908325255 · DOI
  24. Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. & Black, W.C. (1998) Multivariate data analysis, 5th edition, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  25. Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179-185. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289447 · DOI
  26. Hoxhaj, R. & Zuccotti, C.V. (2021) The complex relationship between immigrants' concentration, socioeconomic environment and attitudes towards immigrants in Europe. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 44(2), 272-292. https://doi. org/10.1080/01419870.2020.1730926 · DOI
  27. Hu, L.T. & Bentler, P.M. (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/10705519909540118 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Ivaldi, G., Lanzone, M.E. & Woods, D. (2017) Varieties of populism across a left-right spectrum: the case of the front national, the northern league, podemos and five star movement. Swiss Political Science Review, 23(4), 354-376. https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12278 · DOI
  29. Kaiser, H.F. (1961) A note on Guttman's lower bound for the number of common factors 1. British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 14(1), 1-2.
  30. Kauff, M., Beneda, M., Paolini, S., Bilewicz, M., Kotzur, P., O'Donnell, A. W., . . . & Christ, O. (2021). How do we get people into contact? Predictors of intergroup contact and drivers of contact seeking. Journal of Social Issues, 77(1), 38-63. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12398 · DOI
  31. Kline, R.B. (2010) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 3rd edition, New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  32. Kruglanski, A.W., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L. & De Grada, E. (2006) Groups as epistemic providers: need for closure and the unfolding of group-centrism. Psychological Review, 113(1), 84-100. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.113.1.84 · DOI
  33. Leach, C.W., Van Zomeren, M., Zebel, S., Vliek, M.L., Pennekamp, S.F., Doosje, B., Ouwerkerk, J.W. & Spears, R. (2008) Group-level self-definition and self-investment: a hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 144-165. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95. 1.144 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Lewis, I.M., Watson, B.C. & White, K.A. (2009) Internet versus paper-and-pencil survey methods in psychologi- cal experiments: equivalence testing of participant responses to health-related messages. Australian Journal of Psychology, 61(2), 107-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530802105865 · DOI
  35. Panno, A. (2018) Social dominance and attitude towards immigrants: the key role of happiness. Social Sciences, 7, 126. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7080126 · DOI
  36. Panno, A., De Cristofaro, V., Pellegrini, V., Leone, L., Giacomantonio, M. & Donati, M.A. (2022) Proud to support social equality: investigating the roles of pride, guilt, anger, and disgust in attitudes towards immigrants. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302221098633 · DOI
  37. Pehrson, S., Vignoles, V.L. & Brown, R. (2009) National identification and anti-immigrant prejudice: individual and contextual effects of national definitions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 72(1), 24-38. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 019027250907200104 · DOI
  38. Pellegrini, V., De Cristofaro, V., Salvati, M., Giacomantonio, M. & Leone, L. (2021) Social exclusion and anti- immigration attitudes in Europe: the mediating role of interpersonal trust. Social Indicators Research. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11205-021-02618-6 · DOI
  39. Pellegrini, V., Salvati, M., De Cristofaro, V., Giacomantonio, M. & Leone, L. (2022) Psychological bases of anti- immigration attitudes among populist voters. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp. 12871 · DOI
  40. Pettigrew, T.F. (1998) Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 65-85. https://doi.org/10.1146/ annurev.psych.49.1.65 · DOI · Paper page
  41. Ponce, A. (2017) Gender and anti-immigrant attitudes in Europe. Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, (3), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023117729970 · DOI
  42. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L.M. & Malle, B.F. (1994) Social dominance orientation: a personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 741-763. https://doi. org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741 · DOI
  43. Roets, A., Kruglanski, A.W., Kossowska, M., Pierro, A. & Hong, Y.Y. (2015) The motivated gatekeeper of our minds: new directions in need for closure theory and research. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 52, 221-283. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2015.01.001 · DOI
  44. Roets, A. & Van Hiel, A. (2011) Item selection and validation of a brief, 15-item version of the Need for Closure Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(1), 90-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.09.004 · DOI
  45. Rustenbach, E. (2010) Sources of negative attitudes towards immigrants in Europe: a multi-level analysis. International Migration Review, 44(1), 53-77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2009.00798.x · DOI
  46. Salvati, M., Basili, E., Carone, N. & Giacomantonio, M. (2020) Italian Adaptation and Psychometric Properties of the Prejudice Against Immigrants Scale (PAIS): assessment of validity, reliability, and measure invariance. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01797 · DOI
  47. Salvati, M., Carone, N., De Cristofaro, V., Giacomantonio, M. & Baiocco, R. (2020) Support for discriminatory behaviours against immigrants in Italy: perceived threat and positive beliefs mediate the effect of contact with immigrants. International Journal of Psychology, 55(4), 543-552. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12638 · DOI
  48. 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(1), 17-34. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/18.1.17 · DOI
  49. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H. & Müller, H. (2003) Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
  50. Schlueter, E., Meuleman, B. & Davidov, E. (2013) Immigrant integration policies and perceived group threat: a multilevel study of 27 Western and Eastern European countries. Social Science Research, 42(3), 670-682. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.12.001 · DOI
  51. Tabachnick, B.G. & Fidell, L.S. (2001) Using multivariate statistics, 4th edition. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  52. Tucker, L.R. & Lewis, C. (1973) A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1-10.
  53. Vandenberg, R.J. & Lance, C.E. (2000) A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: sugges- tions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4-70. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002 · DOI · Paper page
  54. Varela, J.G., Gonzalez, E.J., Clark, J.W., Cramer, R.J. & Crosby, J.W. (2013) Development and preliminary validation of the Negative Attitude Towards Immigrants Scale. Journal of Latina/O Psychology, 1(3), 155-170. https://doi. org/10.1037/a0033707 · DOI
  55. Ward, C. & Masgoret, A.M. (2008) Attitudes towards immigrants, immigration, and multiculturalism in New Zealand: a social psychological analysis. International Migration Review, 42(1), 227-248. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1747-7379.2007.00119.x · DOI
  56. Warschauer, M. (2004) Technology and social inclusion: rethinking the digital divide. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  57. Wells, W., Cavanaugh, M.R., Bouffard, J.A. & Nobles, M.R. (2012) Non-response bias with a web-based survey of col- lege students: differences from a classroom survey about carrying concealed handguns. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 28(3), 455-476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-011-9148-4 · DOI
  58. Wood, E., Nosko, A., Desmarais, S., Ross, C. & Irvine, C. (2006) Online and traditional paper-and-pencil survey administration: examining experimenter presence, sensitive material, and long surveys. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 15(3-4), 147-155. How to cite this article: Panno, A., Pellegrini, V., De Cristofaro, V. & Donati, M.A. (2023) A measure of positive and negative perception of migration: Development and psychometric properties of the Positive and Negative Perception of Immigrants Scale (PANPIS). Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 23, 73-105. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12338

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Panno, A., Pellegrini, V., De Cristofaro, V., & Donati, M. A.
Affiliations
  • European University of Rome (IT)
  • Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
  • Department of Social and Developmental Psychology Sapienza University of Rome Rome Italy
  • University of Florence (IT)
Corresponding author
Panno, Angelo
ORCID
Venue
Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2023-02
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
73-105
ISSN
  • 1529-7489 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-2415
DOI
10.1111/asap.12338
OpenAlex
W4319808062
Cited by
11
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
FWCI
4.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Florence Research (University of Florence) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca - Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Migration, Refugees, and Integration
Keywords
attitudes toward immigrants, scale development, psychometric validation, measurement invariance, gender invariance, prejudice, factor structure

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review