Abstract: International migration in the process of globalization and rural-to-urban migration in the process of urbanization highlight the importance of group boundary permeability on prejudice toward immigrants, which has received substantial attention. However, the existing theoretical and empirical evidence has suggested that the impact of group boundary permeability on prejudice toward immigrants was inconsistent. Overall, there were three opinions. That is, group boundary permeability had positive, negative, and no effect on prejudice toward immigrants. This was mainly because the psychological mechanisms underlying the complex relationship between group boundary permeability and prejudice were still unclear. Two possible psychological mechanisms are proposed in the present study to explain the inconsistent results between group boundary permeability and prejudice toward immigrants.
Firstly, the complicated relationship between group boundary permeability and prejudice toward immigrants was moderated by individual, group, and situational factors. First of all, for ingroup factors, previous studies revealed that individual's diversity beliefs moderated the impact of group boundary permeability on prejudice toward immigrants. It has been shown that individuals with high diversity beliefs had an adverse impact on prejudice when the group boundary was permeable (vs. impermeable). Conversely, individuals with low diversity beliefs increased prejudice when the group boundary was permeable (vs. impermeable). Moreover, socioeconomic status of the members of the ingroup may be another moderator factor between group boundary permeability and prejudice toward immigrants. Then, for factors of migrant groups, previous studies have shown that the status of immigrants moderated the relationship between group boundary permeability and prejudice. It has been shown that group boundary permeability decreased the prejudice toward immigrants from European Union countries (i.e., high status), but increased the prejudice toward those from Third World countries (i.e., low status). Additionally, the size of immigrants may be another moderator factor between group boundary permeability and prejudice toward immigrants. At last, from the perspective of situational factors, previous studies demonstrated that the culture moderated the relationship between group boundary permeability and prejudice. Specifically, a robust positive relationship was found between group boundary permeability and cooperation for collectivism culture as opposed to individualism culture.
Secondly, the direction-of-effect between group boundary permeability and prejudice was unclear. We proposed that there were two opposing psychological paths between group boundary permeability and prejudice. Group boundary permeability triggered the intergroup threat and common ingroup identity. When the group boundary was permeable, people from diverse outgroups were considered as competitors to the scarce resources and cultures. According to the intergroup threat theory, the threatened individuals are more likely to manifest prejudice toward the outgroup. Meanwhile, a permeable group boundary also blurs the salience of the subgroup boundaries, and then, highlights the salience of superordinate boundaries. Based on the common ingroup identity model, common ingroup identity negatively predicts prejudice toward the outgroup. Therefore, we proposed that the intergroup threat and common ingroup identity played the opposing mediated roles underlying the relationship between group boundary permeability and prejudice.
Future studies should pay attention to the following fields. Firstly, from the perspective of cross-sectional research, future studies should explore the integrated psychological mechanisms underlying the relationship between group boundary permeability and prejudice toward immigrants. Secondly, from the perspective of longitudinal study, future studies are likely to consider longitudinal studies to explore the effect of intergroup boundary permeability on prejudice toward immigrants over time. Finally, from the perspective of practical intervention, future research should explore possible intervention approaches to reduce the prejudice caused by group boundary permeability

Key words: immigrants, prejudice, group boundary permeability, psychological mechanisms

摘要： 在全球化背景下,群际边界通透性对移民偏见的影响颇具热点性和争议性。当前这一领域的研究存在着群际边界通透性增加、减少和不影响移民偏见三种不同结论,然而导致不一致结论背后的心理机制尚不清楚。本文在梳理群际边界通透性对移民偏见影响的基础上,提出了二者之间的作用机制模型。群际边界通透性对移民偏见的影响可能受到内群体、移民和环境等因素的调节作用。此外,群际边界通透性也可能通过影响不同的心理路径,继而对移民产生不同的偏见。对群际边界通透性影响移民偏见心理机制的探讨,对改善群际关系和移民治理工作具有重要的理论和现实意义。

关键词: 移民, 偏见, 群际边界通透性, 心理机制