1 Introduction
Migration has increased all over the world and societies have become increasingly diverse. More and more people from heterogeneous cultural and ethnic
However, despite the great significance of language skills for integration, we must not forget that integration is a reciprocal process of mutual adaption (Berry, 2011). The attitudes and the openness of the host society are very important for the successful integration of immigrants as well (Christ et al., 2013). Therefore, in the second part of this chapter, we describe how the process of social categorization can promote the development and maintenance of stereotypes and prejudices which can hinder openness and integration or even lead to hostility, discrimination, and extremism towards immigrants. In this context, we posit that language is not only a means of communication but also reflects a meaningful intergroup category. In the last part of the chapter, we summarize two studies from different contexts which demonstrate the important role of language for the openness of people of the host society.
2 The Crucial Role of Language Skills for Integration
In order to understand the crucial role of language in the integration of immigrants, it is important to be aware of the multiple functions of language. First of all, language is a medium for communication which enables understanding between people within a society. If migrants want to interact with the people of their host society, it is very helpful for them to speak the national language in order to communicate effectively (Martinovic et al., 2009). Further, language is a valuable resource that can foster access to other resources, particularly in terms of educational achievement and occupational opportunities. Thus, language skills can be understood as part of a person’s human capital (Esser, 2006). And finally, language is a symbol of relatedness (which can enhance integration) or dissimilarity (which can hinder integration) and thus reflects an important intergroup category for social categorization which can lead to stereotypes and discrimination (Esser, 2006; Kinzler, 2013).
In the next section, we present an overview of findings on the important role of language regarding three different aspects: educational achievement,
2.1 Language as the Key to Educational Success
Host country language skills are a key element of integration in terms of the academic achievement and educational success of immigrants (e.g. Stanat & Christensen, 2006). In many countries, immigrant and migrant young people generally lag behind their local peers in their academic achievement and, as a result, they obtain lower educational qualifications (Esser, 2006; Haug, 2008). Although many factors play a role in the disadvantageous educational situation of children and adolescents with immigration backgrounds, language skills may play a central role in ensuring educational success throughout the whole curriculum, starting even early in childhood. For instance, due to their lower levels of language skills, there is a higher likelihood that the primary school enrolment of immigrant children is delayed (Kempert et al., 2016). Further, throughout the whole school career, educational achievement is strongly connected to host country language skills (Kempert et al., 2016; Stanat & Christensen, 2006). Moreover, language skills are relevant not only for language-based domains (e.g. reading, writing, literature, etc.), but also for mathematics, science, and other subjects (e.g. Kempert et al., 2016; Moe et al., 2015). The language of the host country is typically the language of instruction throughout the curriculum, and sufficient knowledge of the language of instruction is central to the acquisition of skills and abilities in various subjects (Stanat & Christensen, 2006). In this context, language can be understood as a resource that helps or hinders learning (Esser, 2006). In mathematics, for instance, conceptual understanding of mathematical terms, operations, and principles is conveyed through the medium of language (Ellerton & Clarkson, 1997). Thus, a lack of language skills will impede learning and restrict the acquisition of skills. In turn, proficient language skills can enhance immigrants’ chances of educational success. For instance, academic disadvantages are lower for children of families who speak the host country language at home; and for some countries of origin, children’s disadvantages are eliminated when controlled for by the language spoken at home (Stanat et al., 2010). Thus, it is recommended to send children with low levels of German language input at home to preschool early as they will likely benefit from a longer duration of preschool attendance (Klein & Becker, 2017) and as this can lay the foundation for the successful development of host society language skills. Being of
2.2 Language as the Key to Occupational Opportunities
Language is also the key to the successful integration of immigrants in the labour market (Esser, 2006; Geis-Thöne, 2019). It has been shown that people with an immigrant background have a higher risk of unemployment and lower incomes than local people even if they have the same level of education (Geis-Thöne, 2019). One reason for this is that migrants are often not employed in accordance with their professional qualifications due to a lack of language skills (Geis-Thöne, 2019). Weaker host-country language competence is also one important reason for the increased risk of unemployment for people with an immigration background (Geis-Thöne, 2019). In turn, it has been shown that attending language courses can compensate for the language deficit and can reduce the risk of unemployment for immigrants (Auer, 2018). Other disadvantages of immigrants on the labour market also vanish when immigrants have sophisticated language skills (Brücker et al., 2014; Geis-Thöne, 2019; Heath et al., 2008). A clear example of this is the study by Kalter (2006), which demonstrated that proficient host country language skills tremendously improved the employment opportunities of Turkish young people in Germany. Hence, language skills enhance migrants’ chances of finding a job, obtaining a good professional position, and earning a higher salary (Auer, 2018; Esser, 2006).
There are two main reasons why host-country language skills are so important for occupations and professional careers. First, in many jobs, elaborate language skills are necessary for most operational processes, and a lack of language skills would lead to inefficiency and high transaction costs (Esser, 2006). Further, without proficient language skills, the transferability of previously acquired human capital (e.g. educational qualifications and work experiences obtained in the country of origin) is limited (Friedberg, 2000; Kalter, 2005). And although English is becoming increasingly important as a global language due to increasing globalization, in many fields host-country language skills are still critically important for occupational opportunities (Attanasio, 2013; Pusch, 2010).
Significantly, it is important to note that the mere understanding of the host country’s language is but a minimum condition; to enhance success on the labour market, proficiency in written language is essential as well (Esser, 2006). Thus, one key to successfully integrating migrants into the labour market is successful language acquisition.
2.3
It is quite evident that host-country language skills are not only crucial for educational and occupational success but also for integration in terms of social inclusion and participation in social life (Haug, 2006; Masgoret & Ward, 2006). Language skills are necessary for communication and aid individuals in interacting with members of the host society (Martinovic et al., 2009). Proficient language skills make it easier to communicate with locals and to establish interpersonal relationships and friendships (Masgoret & Ward, 2006; Schacht et al., 2014). The likelihood of interethnic friendships is much higher for immigrants who have elaborate skills in the language of the host society (Martinovic et al., 2009; Schacht et al., 2014). A lack of language skills can lead to difficulties in social interactions and communication in formal as well as in informal situations (McBrien, 2005), and language barriers can lead to the exclusion or marginalization of migrants in everyday life (Beisenherz, 2006) as well as to misunderstandings that could lead to attributions of hostile intentions in ambiguous situations. Interestingly, the relationship between language skills and social inclusion is reciprocal: while language proficiency enhances migrants’ options for participation and social interactions, increased participation in turn supports competent acquisition of the local language (Clement et al., 2001). Further, interactions with peers are especially important for the acquisition of informal language (Haug, 2008). All in all, language skills are a key factor for social inclusion and sociocultural adjustment (Beisenherz, 2006; von Grüningen et al., 2012).
3 The Attitudes of the Host Society: Social Categorization as a Basis for Prejudice, Hostility, and Discrimination
Although language plays a crucial role in integration, one must keep in mind that integration is a reciprocal process of mutual accommodation (Berry, 2011). In other words, integration cannot be achieved by migrants alone but always depends on the attitudes and the openness of the host society (Christ et al., 2013).
For instance, in many Western European countries, public opinion regarding immigration and multiculturalism is not very positive (Froehlich & Schulte, 2019; Pew Forum, 2011; Zick et al., 2008). This unwelcoming social climate is related to tendencies towards the discrimination and exclusion of immigrants and can impede successful integration (Cuddy et al., 2007; Froehlich & Schulte, 2019). Such negative attitudes and a lack of openness to immigration and multiculturalism are related to prejudices, intergroup processes, and social
Social categorization is the process of classifying people into groups. This means that people categorize themselves and others into differentiated groups based on similar characteristics (Brewer, 2001). In the same way that we build taxonomies to categorize plants or animals based on their similarities, we also classify people into social groups based on their typical characteristics, such as ethnicity, gender, or any other characteristic (Aronson et al., 2014). For instance, race and ethnicity are characteristics that people use from an early age as intergroup categories (Nesdale, 2013).
Social categorization is a natural part of social perception and simplifies the perception and cognition related to the complex social world (Aronson et al., 2014). Given our limited capacity for processing information, it would be impossible to process the social world in its full complexity. Thus, it is efficient for us to use cognitive short cuts in terms of heuristics that help us to simplify and organize our social information processing (Jones, 1990). This is helpful for structuring our complex social world and makes social categorization a functional mechanism of our cognition (Aronson et al., 2014). However, the mechanism of social categorization also enables the development of prejudices and their detrimental consequences, such as hostility, aggression, or, in the worst case, extremism (Alizadeh et al., 2014; Aronson et al., 2014).
In order to understand how social categorization leads to prejudices, it is important to know what prejudices are, how they develop, and how they can lead to discrimination, hostility, and aggression.
Prejudice can be defined as a ‘hostile or negative attitude toward people in a distinguishable group, based solely on their membership in that group’ (Aronson et al., 2010, p. 423). This means that when individuals are prejudiced against immigrants, they have a general negative attitude towards people with migrant backgrounds and perceive all migrants as being the same. Such prejudice regarding immigrants is widespread in many countries and can already be found in children during middle childhood (Nesdale, 2013). Research in the United Kingdom even indicated that ethnic stereotypes are so common that they are becoming normalized in schools (Jones & Rutland, 2018).
Like all attitudes, prejudices include three components: a cognitive component (stereotypes), an affective component (emotions), and a behavioural component (discrimination) (Aronson et al., 2014; Bohner & Wänke, 2002).
3.1 Stereotypes: The Cognitive Component
Stereotypes are ‘generalizations about a group of people in which identical characteristics are assigned to virtually all members of the group, regardless of
3.2 Emotions: The Affective Component
As described above, prejudices are attitudes regarding specific groups. The affective component is the emotional reaction to such a group and, related to this, the evaluation of the respective group. Anxiety (e.g. fear of the unknown) or anger (e.g. blaming immigrants for economic and social problems) are important emotions in the context of stereotypes regarding immigrants. For instance, intergroup anxiety towards people from other ethnicities has been shown to result in the avoidance of interracial encounters and in feelings of hostility (Plant & Devine, 2003).
The affective aspect of prejudice is of particular importance as such group-related emotions often run deep. As a consequence, it is very difficult to use rational arguments in order to change individuals’ attitudes concerning a specific group towards which they have strong emotions (Aronson et al., 2014). Therefore it is possible that individuals can continue to harbour negative emotions towards a specific group even though they actually know that their prejudice is not true (Aronson et al., 2014). In the context of immigration, this is important because emotional prejudices are closely related to discriminatory behaviour (Talaska et al., 2008). This is also relevant for the development of extremism as strong emotions can lead to the derogation of out-groups (Brewer, 2001; Hewstone et al., 2002) and ethnic violence (Petersen, 2002).
3.3 Discrimination: The Behavioural Component
The behavioural component of prejudice is at play when an existing stereotype results in the discriminatory or unfair treatment of persons of a certain group. Discrimination is defined as ‘an unjustified negative or harmful action
For instance, young people from ethnic minorities are more likely to be excluded or bullied at school (Plenty & Jonsson, 2017); being teased and harassed because of their ethnicity, culture, skin colour, or accent are common experiences for migrant young people (Pachter et al., 2010). Immigrants often experience discrimination in terms of unequal chances or unfair treatment when seeking opportunities, for instance in the housing market (Fuhrmann, 2011).
Prejudices can also manifest themselves in more subtle forms of behaviour as, for example, in the social distance we keep (e.g. when someone does not sit down next to the black man on the bus) or in our language. The way we speak about people from specific groups can reflect discrimination (Ng, 2007). However, especially strong emotions regarding stereotyped groups pave the way towards explicit and violent forms of discrimination and aggression (Petersen, 2002; Talaska et al., 2008).
3.4 The Development of Prejudice
The causes for the development of prejudice are manifold and can be found at different social levels: at the individual level, resulting from our category-based social information processing; at group level, due to competition; and at societal level, based on pressures to comply and conform. The latter refers to the fact that we develop many of our prejudices and discriminatory behaviours because we are socialized in a society with many stereotypic mindsets in which discriminatory practices are in line with the prevalent social norms (Aronson et al., 2014). It is difficult to challenge these social norms because doing so might result in being rejected or excluded.
But where do these prejudices in society come from and why is it so hard to get rid of them? Social identity theory (SIT; Tajfel & Turner, 1979) offers a theoretical perspective on how social identities (e.g. ethnicity, nationality, gender) and categorizations based on those identities shape individuals’ attitudes and behaviours in intergroup contexts.
As described above, prejudices have their base in social categorization, i.e. the way in which we process social information. One important aspect to consider is that social categorization does not only lead to the classification of the social world. In line with SIT, when we make categorizations, we often differentiate between the in-group—a group with which we psychologically
SIT states that individuals tend to perceive their in-group members as more positive (in-group bias) than out-group members to protect the group’s distinctiveness and to enhance their self-esteem through identification with the in-group (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). Further, SIT argues that social categorization might also lead to negative attitudes and behaviours, including prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination towards targeted out-groups (Tajfel & Turner, 2004). Drawing on the ideas of SIT, we will now delineate the ways in which social categorization might play a role in the development of prejudice.
The problem starts with a phenomenon called intergroup bias, which is the tendency to favour members of the in-group over out-group members (Nesdale, 2004; Hewstone et al., 2002). This means that people tend to prefer, and to have affinity for, their in-group over the out-group. Intergroup bias can be expressed in many different ways, e.g. when evaluating others or when allocating resources (Taylor & Doria, 1981). In terms of migration, people prefer their in-group (natives) over the out-group (immigrants) in various contexts (Hewstone et al., 2002).
As argued by SIT (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), the main motive behind this bias is to enhance self-esteem, and it can be understood as a mechanism to protect one’s own positive social identity as people define their social identity through group memberships (Billig & Tajfel, 1973; Tajfel, 2010). On the one hand, intergroup bias consists of in-group favouritism, but on the other hand, people can also enhance and protect their positive social identity through the derogation of the out-group (Hewstone et al., 2002). In-group favouritism can be found very early in children’s development. Babies as young as three months of age demonstrate a visual preference for a familiar race (Anzures et al., 2013). Throughout their preschool years, children prefer playing with and helping peers from their own ethnic in-group, indicating that children are motivated to pursue social contacts with in-group members (Kinzler & Spelke, 2011). This in-group preference can develop into out-group negativity when children attribute positive traits to ‘us’ and negative traits to ‘them’ to boost their in-group social identities (van Bavel & Cunningham, 2009). According to meta-analytic findings, prejudicial attitudes towards different out-groups increase during early and middle childhood (three to seven years of age) and can manifest in several ways, including stereotypes and discrimination (Raabe & Beelmann, 2011).
Whereas in-group favouritism is very common in various situations and settings, out-group derogation occurs specifically when out-groups are associated
Therefore, when the cognitive component of prejudice, i.e. stereotypes, is combined with the affective component of stereotypes, i.e. strong emotions, this can easily lead to discrimination, i.e. the behavioural component of prejudice. And particularly the perception of threat can be an indicator of someone’s attitudinal tendencies towards violent extremism (Borum, 2014).
In this context, perceived or real conflicting goals and competition for limited resources are also important aspects that can intensify prejudices, conflicts, and hostility (Jackson, 1993). If members of the host society perceive immigrants as a threat or as competitors for limited resources such as money, jobs, power, or social status, this perception can intensify hostility and lead to increased aggression and violence towards immigrants (Aronson et al., 2010; Borum, 2014; Jackson, 1993). This is highly relevant in the context of development of extremism because the escalation of intergroup conflict can promote extremism (Alizadeh et al., 2014). The more tensions exist between groups, the more individuals become extremist in a society.
Another phenomenon which is relevant for the development of prejudice is the so-called out-group homogeneity effect, which refers to one’s perception of out-group members as being more similar to one another than in-group members (Quattrone & Jones, 1980). Together, intergroup bias and the out-group homogeneity effect pave the way for prejudice and discrimination which can finally lead to racism and extremism: due to intergroup bias, we depreciate members of the out-group; and due to the out-group homogeneity effect, we assign the negative characteristics of individual members to the whole out-group.
This promotes a type of dualistic thinking in which the out-group is perceived as generally bad while the in-group is perceived as generally good with only some exceptions. Dualistic thinking can be described as part of a fundamentalist mindset which may make a person more open to extremism (Borum, 2014).
This section has outlined how problematic and detrimental prejudice can be for integration and which role social categorization plays in this context. In the next section, we propose that language is an important social category. Knowledge of the host-country language can reduce the perception of immigrants as being different; it therefore has the potential to reduce prejudice and can lead to increased openness and more positive attitudes of members of the host society.
4
So far, we have argued that language is a means of communication and a resource. But in addition, language itself is an important social category (Kinzler, 2013; Mulvey et al., 2018). Scholars who apply SIT (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) to the language context argue that language serves as one of the key social categories that shape individuals’ perceptions about in-group and out-group belonging (Keblusek et al., 2017; Peltokorpi & Pudelko, 2020; Reiche et al., 2015). More specifically, individuals can use language as a category for differentiating in-group members from out-group members based on the language proficiency that they have (Peltokorpi & Pudelko, 2020).
Hence, language is a symbol of relatedness or dissimilarity and thus represents an obvious marker of group membership (Esser, 2006; Kinzler, 2013). Language transmits information about the nationality, ethnicity, and social status of a person (Kinzler et al., 2009). Hence, speaking another language is a salient factor in the perception of others as being different, and this makes language an important intergroup category for social categorization. Moreover, as language is such a salient marker of group membership, it can be a particularly strong trigger for activating stereotypes (Giles & Rakic, 2014; Rakic & Stößel, 2013).
Whereas there is a huge body of research on the relevance of language as a means of communication and as an instrument for educational success or occupational opportunities, there are only a few studies on language as an intergroup category. For instance, it has been shown that in line with general findings on in-group favouritism, children prefer friends who speak the same language as they do (Kinzler et al., 2009), and that this preference can already be found before children themselves can actually speak (Kinzler, 2013). Further, Mulvey and colleagues (2018) revealed that language represents a relevant factor for exclusion in intergroup contexts. Given that language is an important intergroup category, we argue that the language skills of immigrants should play an important role in the reactions of members of the host society towards immigrants and, as a consequence, can support integration. Speaking the same language creates similarity with others, and this perceived similarity can have a positive impact on the openness of members of the host society.
Therefore, research is necessary that investigates the potential of language to reduce dissimilarity and enhance the openness of the host society. In this section, we present two research studies which examine the impact of language skills on the openness of members of the host society (in our case, Germany) to include foreigners in their social interactions. More specifically, by applying SIT to the context of language in Study 1, we investigated the role that
4.1 Study 1: Secondary School Students’ Openness towards Refugee Peers
One group of immigrants that has been of special interest in recent years is refugees. Due to current crises and conflicts, particularly in the Near and Middle East and in Africa, the number of refugees worldwide has increased tremendously. In 2018, 70.8 million people were forcibly displaced worldwide (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, 2019). Especially since the outbreak of the civil war in Syria in 2011, increasing numbers of refugees have sought shelter in the Western world, with Germany attracting the highest number of all European countries (Eurostat, 2020). These huge refugee movements challenge the host societies in terms of promoting successful integration.
As mentioned before, integration is a reciprocal process of mutual adaption (Berry, 2011), and thus the attitudes of the members of the host society are crucial for integration. For children and adolescents, the attitudes and openness of their peers are of particular significance. Being accepted by and belonging to others is a fundamental need and necessary for healthy development (Baumeister & Leary, 1995), but especially so for young refugees who represent a particularly vulnerable group (Ruf et al., 2010). Hence it is important to investigate the attitudes, and specifically the openness, of German young people towards refugees. In Study 1, we used hypothetical scenarios to examine how open German young people are to including refugee peers in their social interactions and if language skills are an important factor for determining that openness. We focused on Syrian refugees as Syrians represent the biggest group of incoming refugees in Germany (Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge, 2018).
The study was conducted as part of the project ‘Socio-Moral Development of Children and Adolescents’ at the Leibniz Institute for Research and Information in Education, Germany. For a full description of the procedural details and a thorough description of all analyses, see Beißert et al. (2019).
The study included 100 adolescents from northern Germany (Mage = 13.65 years; SD = 1.93; range 10–17 years; 51 females, 49 males). 39% of the participants had an immigration background, i.e. they or at least one of their parents were not born as a German citizen. All participants were presented with three hypothetical scenarios in which groups of adolescents were planning leisure time activities. In each scenario, there was an additional peer from either the participants’ own country (Germany) versus another country (Syria) who wanted to join the group. The level of German language skills was varied for the Syrian
In order to measure participants’ openness to including refugee peers, we used three measures in each story. Participants were asked: first, if they would let the protagonist join (own inclusion decision); second, what they thought their group would do (expected group decision); and third, what they thought their group should do (prescriptive group decision). All questions were answered using a 6-point Likert-type scale from not at all to very much. Afterwards, participants were asked to justify their decisions regarding all three measures via open-ended questions.
Data was analysed using repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with participants’ intergroup contact, language spoken at home, immigration background, and age as covariates in all analyses. Encouragingly, we found high rates of inclusion on all three measures regarding the Syrian protagonists. This revealed that German adolescents are generally open towards including Syrian refugee peers in their peer activities. However, as expected we found differences in the openness to inclusion based on the language skills of the Syrian protagonists. The Syrian protagonist with poor German language skills was less likely to be included than the other two protagonists, whereas there were no differences between the German protagonist and the Syrian protagonist with good German language skills. This pattern holds across all three measures (see Figure 6.1). These results are line with SIT (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) as
Likelihood of inclusion for all three protagonists in Study 1. (Note: High numbers indicate a high likelihood of inclusion, scale 1–6)
We also found differences between the three measures. For all three protagonists, participants expected their group to be less inclusive than they thought it should be and than they themselves would be. As this finding is not related to language skills, we do not cover this aspect in detail.
When analysing the open-ended justifications of participants’ decisions, we found further evidence that language skills are an important factor influencing adolescents’ openness towards refugees. When speaking about the Syrian peer with poor language skills, participants based their decisions on language-related reasons much more often than when speaking about the Syrian peer with good German skills.
However, one important limitation of our study is that our data was assessed in hypothetical scenarios via self-reports. As social desirability is especially relevant regarding explicit measures on intergroup attitudes (Nesdale & Durking, 1998; Rutland et al., 2005), future research should try to connect our findings with behavioural observations in order to examine how self-reports correspond with actual behaviour.
But despite this restriction, based on the inclusion decisions as well as on the adolescents’ considerations behind these decisions, we found strong evidence overall that language skills play an important role in young people’s openness towards refugee peers.
At this point, it is important to note that we used scenarios with activities that do not require much talking (basketball, beach volleyball, swimming). In other words, elaborate language skills were not even necessary for these activities. This enables us to interpret our findings as a strong indicator that language as a social category is the significant point here, and that language skills play an important role in integration above and beyond their basic role as a means of communication.
4.2 Study 2: University Students’ Openness towards International Students
In times of globalization, more and more students take the opportunity to study abroad, and international students are a growing group of students at higher education institutions in many countries. International students are foreign students who obtained their university entrance qualification in a country other than where they are studying. In 2018, the proportion of international students among newly matriculated students in Germany was 11%
The study was conducted in the context of university settings with current university students as participants. For a full description of the procedural details and a thorough description of all analyses, see Kosian (2019).
The study included 189 students of universities and other higher education institutions in Erfurt, Germany (Mage = 21.84 years; SD = 2.58; range 19–32 years; 142 females, 43 males, two diverse). Most of the participants were enrolled in psychological or educational programmes (68%) or programmes related to architecture and urban planning (22%). The remaining 10% of participants were from a huge variety of different programmes. Eight per cent of the participants had an immigration background, i.e. they or at least one of their parents were not born as a German citizen. All participants were presented with two hypothetical scenarios including situations with group activities in university settings. One scenario was about student project work, and the other was about a fun rally during university orientation days. In both scenarios, the participants were told that they were part of a group of peers which had only room for one more person. The participants had to decide who of two individuals they would most likely choose for their group. They had to choose between two international students: Protagonist A, who was culturally dissimilar (Thailand/Vietnam) but had good German language skills; and Protagonist B, who was culturally similar (France/Poland) but had poor German language skills. The combination of countries and the order of the scenarios was varied randomly between the participants.
Data was analysed using repeated measures ANCOVA with participants’ immigration backgrounds as a covariate. Across both contexts and for almost all measures, participants had a slight tendency to choose the culturally dissimilar protagonist with good German language skills (Protagonist A) over the culturally similar one with poor language German skills (Protagonist B) as shown in Figure 6.2. Only for the prescriptive group decision in the rally scenario was this not the case. The tendency to choose the protagonist with good German language skills was generally stronger in the project work scenario than in the rally scenario. These results suggest that the significance of language as an intergroup category for social categorization might depend on the respective context.
Likelihood of inclusion of Protagonist A versus Protagonist B in Study 2. (Note: Protagonist A is culturally dissimilar but with good German language skills. Protagonist B is culturally similar but with poor German language skills. Negative values indicate a tendency to choose protagonist A. Positive values indicate a tendency to choose protagonist B)
However, when analysing the considerations underlying participants’ decisions, we found that language was the most important aspect. The most frequently
Thus, in line with SIT (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), the decisions as well as the reasoning behind them indicate that language was a relevant factor in determining participants’ openness towards the inclusion of international students, especially in the project scenario. This could be due to the dual role of language as a social category and a means of communication. In the project work scenario, elaborate German language skills may also be important for successful work.
However, as a limitation, one must note again that our results are based on hypothetical scenarios and that we applied a forced-choice design. This means that we can only compare the relative inclusivity regarding two protagonists without knowing whether, in real life, they would have included either of the two. But even though this was only an initial pilot study and there might be other relevant variables that influenced participants’ decisions (e.g. participants’ own language skills in the native language of the respective protagonists), the results can be seen as initial evidence that language skills are relevant for the openness of host society members to including international students in higher education institutions.
5 Conclusion and Practical Implications
In this chapter, we have given an overview of various findings on the important role of language in the integration of immigrants. We have highlighted the crucial role of language skills as a resource and a tool for educational and professional success, and as a necessary means of communication for social inclusion in terms of social relationships with members of the host society. Further, we have discussed the significance of language as a symbol reflecting an important intergroup category for social categorization: On the one hand, speaking different languages can express dissimilarity and can thus enhance stereotypes and rejection which, in turn, might be facilitators for the development of extreme views towards others and for radicalization. On the other hand, a shared language can increase perceived similarity and thus has the potential to reduce hostility and prejudice. Finally, we have provided two empirical examples that demonstrate this latter aspect and that show the crucial role of language for the openness of host society members towards two different groups of immigrants: refugees and international students.
Further, one important way to enable families to engage informally with the host society language is to ensure that immigrant and refugee families have the opportunity to live in the same areas as native families. Thus, residential segregation should be addressed by policies and programmes in order to foster opportunities for positive intergroup contact.
Language has a great potential for promoting successful integration, and societies should make use of this potential as extensively and comprehensively as possible.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Dominique Drees and Franziska Kosian for the data collection and for their contributions to the development of the scenarios. We would like to thank Lorena Sarter and Lino Szekely for their support with the manuscript. And we are grateful to all students who participated in this study.
Alizadeh, M., Coman, A., Lewis, M., & Cioffi-Revilla, C. (2014). Intergroup conflict escalation leads to more extremism. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 17(4). https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.2559
Anzures, G., Quinn, P. C., Pascalis, O., Slater, A. M., Tanaka, J. W., & Lee, K. (2013). Developmental origins of the other-race effect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(3), 173–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721412474459
Apolinarski, B., & Brandt, T. (2016). Ausländische Studierende in Deutschland: Ergebnisse der Befragung bildungsausländischer Studierender im Rahmen der 21. Sozialerhebung des Deutschen Studentenwerks durchgeführt vom Deutschen Zentrum für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsforschung [Foreign students in Germany: Results of a survey of foreign students in the context of the 21st social survey of the German Association of Student Affairs conducted by the German Centre for Higher Education Research and Science Studies]. Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung.
Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (2010). Social psychology (7th ed., global ed.). Pearson.
Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. (2014). Sozialpsychologie [Social psychology] (8th ed.). Pearson Studium.
Attanasio, P. (2013). Ungenutztes Humankapital. Qualifikationen von Zuwanderern in Südtirol als Schlüssel für deren Integration am heimischen Arbeitsmarkt. Gesamtbericht zum Forschungsprojekt [Unused human capital. The qualifications of immigrants in South Tyrol supporting their integration into the domestic economy]. Apollis.
Auer, D. (2018). Language roulette—the effect of random placement on refugees’ labour market integration. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(3), 341–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2017.1304208
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529.
Beisenherz, G. (2006). Sprache und Integration [Speech and integration]. In C. Alt (Ed.), Schriften des Deutschen Jugendinstituts: Kinderpanel: Bd. 4. Kinderleben—Integration durch Sprache? Band 4: Bedingungen des Aufwachsens von türkischen, russlanddeutschen und deutschen Kindern (1st ed., pp. 39–69). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Beißert, H., Gönültaş, S., & Mulvey, K. L. (2019). Social inclusion of refugee and native peers among adolescents: It is the language that matters! Journal of Research on Adolescence, 30(1), 219–233. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12518
Berry, J. W. (2011). Integration and multiculturalism: Ways towards social solidarity. Papers on Social Representations, 20(1), 2.1–2.21.
Billig, M., & Tajfel, H. (1973). Social categorization and similarity in intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3(1), 27–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420030103
Bohner, G., & Wänke, M. (2002). Attitudes and attitude change. Social Psychology. Psychology Press.
Borum, R. (2014). Psychological vulnerabilities and propensities for involvement in violent extremism. Behavioral Sciences & The Law, 32(3), 286–305. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2110
Brewer, M. B. (2001). Ingroup identification and intergroup conflict: When does ingroup love become outgroup hate? In R. D. Ashmore, L. J. Jussim, & D. Wilder (Eds.), Rutgers series on self and social identity: v. 3. Social identity, intergroup conflict and conflict reduction (pp. 17–41). Oxford University Press.
Brücker, H., Liebau, E., Romiti, A., & Vallizadeh, E. (2014). Arbeitsmarktintegration von Migranten in Deutschland: Anerkannte Abschlüsse und Deutschkenntnisse lohnen sich [Integrating migrants in the labour market: Recognized qualifications and German language skills are worthwhile]. IAB-Kurzbericht No. 21.3/2014. Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB).
Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge. (2018). Schlüsselzahlen Asyl [Key data on asylum]. Bundesministerium des Innern. Retrieved June 18, 2018 from http://www.bamf.de/SharedDocs/Anlagen/DE/Publikationen/Flyer/flyer-schluesselzahlenasyl-2017.pdf
Christ, O., Asbrock, F., Dhont, K., Pettigrew, T. F., & Wagner, U. (2013). The effects of intergroup climate on immigrants’ acculturation preferences. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 221(4), 252–257. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000155
Clement, R., Noels, K. A., & Deneault, B. (2001). Interethnic contact, identity, and psychological adjustment: The mediating and moderating roles of communication. Journal of Social Issues, 57(3), 559–577. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00229
Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2007). The BIAS map: Behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(4), 631–648. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.4.631
Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst & Deutsches Zentrum für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsforschung GmbH. (2019). Wissenschaft weltoffen Kompakt: Daten und Fakten zur Internationalität von Studium und Forschung in Deutschland [Data and facts regarding the international dimension of degree courses and research in Germany]. wbv Media. https://www.wissenschaft-weltoffen.de/content/uploads/2021/09/wiwe_kompakt_2019_deutsch.pdf
Ellerton, N. F., & Clarkson, P. C. (1997). Language factors in mathematics teaching and learning. In A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & C. Laborde (Eds.), Kluwer international handbooks of education: Vol. 4. International handbook of mathematics education. Part 1 (pp. 987–1033). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1465-0_27
Esser, H. (2006). Migration, language and integration. WZB.
Eurostat. (2020). Asylum and first time asylum applicants—annual aggregated data (rounded). https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-datasets/-/TPS00191
Friedberg, R. M. (2000). You can’t take it with you? Immigrant assimilation and the portability of human capital. Journal of Labor Economics, 18(2), 221–251. https://doi.org/10.1086/209957
Froehlich, L., & Schulte, I. (2019). Warmth and competence stereotypes about immigrant groups in Germany. PLOS One, 14(9), e0223103. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223103
Fuhrmann, B. (2011). Ethnische Segregation in Deutschland durch Diskriminierung auf dem Wohnungsmarkt [Ethnic segregation in Germany resulting from discrimination in the housing market]. Quartiere neu denken, 98–109.
Galchenko, I., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2007). The role of perceived cultural distance in the acculturation of exchange students in Russia. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31(2), 181–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2006.03.004
Geis-Thöne, W. (2019). Sprachkenntnisse entscheidend für die Arbeitsmarktintegration [Language skills are crucial for integration into the labour market]. IW-Trends—Vierteljahresschrift zur empirischen Wirtschaftsforschung, 46(3), 73–89. https://doi.org/10.2373/1864-810X.19-03-05
Giles, H., & Rakic, T. (2014). Language attitudes: social determinants and consequences of language variation. In T. M. Holtgraves (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 11–26). Oxford University Press.
Haug, S. (2006). Interethnische Freundschaften, interethnische Partnerschaften und soziale Integration [Interethnic friendships, interethnic partnerships, and social integration]. Diskurs Kindheits- und Jugendforschung, 1(1), 75–91.
Haug, S. (2008). Sprachliche Integration von Migranten in Deutschland [Linguistic integration of migrants in Germany] (Working Paper der Forschungsgruppe des Bundesamtes 14). Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge.
Heath, A. F., Rothon, C., & Kilpi, E. (2008). The second generation in Western Europe: Education, unemployment, and occupational attainment. Annual Review of Sociology, 34(1), 211–235. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134728
Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup bias. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 575–604. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135109
Hilton, J. L., & Hippel, W. (1996). Stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 237–271. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.47.1.237
Hooghe, M., Reeskens, T., Stolle, D., & Trappers, A. (2009). Ethnic diversity and generalized trust in Europe. Comparative Political Studies, 42(2), 198–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414008325286
Jackson, J. W. (1993). Realistic group conflict theory: A review and evaluation of the theoretical and empirical literature. Psychological Record, 43(3), 395–415. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1994-05428-001
Jones, E. E. (1990). A series of books in psychology. Interpersonal perception. W. H. Freeman.
Jones, S., & Rutland, A. (2018). Attitudes toward immigrants among the youth. European Psychologist, 23(1), 83–92. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000310
Kalter, F. (2005). Ethnische Ungleichheit auf dem Arbeitsmarkt [Ethnic inequality in the job market]. In M. Abraham & T. Hinz (Eds.), Arbeitsmarktsoziologie. Probleme, Theorien, empirische Befunde (pp. 303–332). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Kalter, F. (2006). Auf der Suche nach einer Erklärung für die spezifischen Arbeitsmarktnachteile von Jugendlichen türkischer Herkunft: Zugleich eine Replik auf den Beitrag von Holger Seibert und Heike Solga: ‘Gleiche Chancen dank einer abgeschlossenen Ausbildung? (ZfS 5/2005) [Searching for an explanation for the specific disadvantages of young people of Turkish origin in the labour market; also a reply to the article by Holger Seibert and Heike Solga titled ‘Equal opportunities courtesy of a completed education? (ZfS 5/2005)]. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 35(2). https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-2006-0204
Keblusek, L., Giles, H., & Maass, A. (2017). Communication and group life: How language and symbols shape intergroup relations. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20, 632–643. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217708864
Kempert, S., Edele, A., Rauch, D., Wolf, K. M., Paetsch, J., Darsow, A, Maluch, J., & Stanat, P. (2016). Die Rolle der Sprache für zuwanderungsbezogene Ungleichheiten im Bildungserfolg [The role of language in fostering unequal educational outcomes for migrants]. In C. Diehl, C. Hunkler, & C. Kristen (Eds.), Ethnische Ungleichheiten im Bildungsverlauf. Mechanismen, Befunde, Debatten (pp. 157–241). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-04322-3_5
Kinzler, K. D. (2013). The development of language as a social category. In M. R. Banaji & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Oxford series in social cognition and social neuroscience. Navigating the social world. What infants, children, and other species can teach us (pp. 314–317). Oxford University Press.
Kinzler, K. D., Shutts, K., Dejesus, J., & Spelke, E. S. (2009). Accent trumps race in guiding children’s social preferences. Social Cognition, 27(4), 623–634. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2009.27.4.623
Kinzler, K. D., & Spelke, E. S. (2011). Do infants show social preferences for people differing in race? Cognition, 119(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.019
Klein, O., & Becker, B. (2017). Preschools as language learning environments for children of immigrants. Differential effects by familial language use across different preschool contexts. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 48, 20–31.
Kosian, F. (2019). Ingroup-Outgroup–Prozesse im Kontext sozialer Ausgrenzung—Inklusionsentscheidungen gegenüber internationalen Studenten an Erfurter Hochschulen [In-group-out-group processes in the context of social exclusion—Inclusion decisions regarding international students at Higher Education Institutions in Erfurt]. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Erfurt.
Lee, T. L., & Fiske, S. T. (2006). Not an outgroup, not yet an ingroup: Immigrants in the Stereotype Content Model. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30(6), 751–768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2006.06.005
Martinovic, B., van Tubergen, F., & Maas, I. (2009). Changes in immigrants’ social integration during the stay in the host country: The case of non-western immigrants in the Netherlands. Social Science Research, 38(4), 870–882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2009.06.001
Masgoret, A.-M., & Ward, C. (2006). Culture learning approach to acculturation. In D. L. Sam & J. W. Berry (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of acculturation psychology (pp. 58–77). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511489891.008
McBrien, J. L. (2005). Educational needs and barriers for refugee students in the United States: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 329–364. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075003329
Moe, E., Härmälä, M., Kristmanson, P. L., Pascoal, J., & Ramoniené, M. (2015). Language skills for successful subject learning. Council of Europe Publishing.
Mulvey, K. L., Boswell, C., & Niehaus, K. (2018). You don’t need to talk to throw a ball! Children’s inclusion of language-out-group members in behavioral and hypothetical scenarios. Developmental Psychology, 54(7), 1372–1380. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000531
Nesdale, D. (2004). Social identity processes and children’s ethnic prejudice. In M. Bennett & F. Sani (Eds.), The development of the social self (pp. 219–246). Psychology Press.
Nesdale, D. (2013). Social identity and children’s intra-and intergroup attitudes: The role of social acumen. In M. R. Banaji & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Oxford series in social cognition and social neuroscience. Navigating the social world. What infants, children, and other species can teach us (pp. 323–326). Oxford University Press.
Nesdale, D., & Durkin, K. (1998). Stereotypes and attitudes: Implicit and explicit processes. In K. Kirsner & G. Speelman (Eds.), Implicit and explicit mental processes (pp. 219–232). Erlbaum.
Ng, S. H. (2007). Language-based discrimination. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 26(2), 106–122. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X07300074
Pachter, L. M., Bernstein, B. A., Szalacha, L. A., & García Coll, C. (2010). Perceived racism and discrimination in children and youths: An exploratory study. Health & Social Work, 35(1), 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1093/hsw/35.1.61
Peltokorpi, V., & Pudelko, M. (2020). When more is not better: A curvilinear relationship between foreign language proficiency and social categorization. Journal of International Business Studies, No 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-020-00316-y
Petersen, R. (2002). Understanding ethnic violence: Fear, hatred, and resentment in twentieth-century Eastern Europe (Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics). Cambridge University Press.
Pew Forum. (2011). The future of the global Muslim population. Projections for 2010–2030. Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life.
Plant, E. A., & Devine, P. G. (2003). The antecedents and implications of interracial anxiety. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(6), 790–801. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203029006011
Plenty, S., & Jonsson, J. O. (2017). Social exclusion among peers: The role of immigrant status and classroom immigrant density. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(6), 1275–1288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0564-5
Pusch, B. (2010). Zur Verwertung ausländischen Wissens und Könnens auf dem türkischen Arbeitsmarkt [On the use of foreign knowledge and skills in the Turkish labour market]. In A.-M. Nohl, K. Schittenhelm, O. Schmidtke, & A. Weiß (Eds.), Kulturelles Kapital in der Migration (1st ed., pp. 83–94). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Quattrone, G. A., & Jones, E. E. (1980). The perception of variability within in-groups and out-groups: Implications for the law of small numbers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(1), 141–152. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.141
Raabe, T., & Beelmann, A. (2011). Development of ethnic, racial, and national prejudice in childhood and adolescence: A multinational meta-analysis of age differences. Child Development, 82(6), 1715–1737. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01668.x
Rakic, T., & Stößel, K. (2013). Die Wirkung fremder Akzente [The impact of foreign accents]. Deutsch als Fremdsprache, 50(1), 11–18.
Reiche, B. S., Harzing, A. W., & Pudelko, M. (2015). Why and how does shared language affect subsidiary knowledge inflows? A social identity perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 46, 528–551. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2015.3
Ruf, M., Schauer, M., & Elbert, T. (2010). Prävalenz von traumatischen Stresserfahrungen und seelischen Erkrankungen bei in Deutschland lebenden Kindern von Asylbewerbern [The prevalence of traumatic stressful experiences and mental illness in children of asylum seekers living in Germany]. Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 39(3), 151–160. https://doi.org/10.1026/1616-3443/a000029
Schacht, D., Kristen, C., & Tucci, I. (2014). Interethnische Freundschaften in Deutschland [Interethnic friendships in Germany]. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 66(3), 445–458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-014-0280-7
Smith, E. R. (1993). Social identity and social emotions: Toward new conceptualizations of prejudice. In D. M. Mackie & D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping. Interactive processes in group perception (pp. 297–315). Academic Press.
Stanat, P., Rauch, D., & Segeritz, M. (2010). Schülerinnen und Schüler mit Migrationshintergrund [Pupils with migration backgrounds]. In E. Klieme, C. Artelt, J. Hartig, N. Jude, O. Köller, M. Prenzel, W. Schneider, & P. Stanat (Eds.), PISA 2009. Bilanz nach einem Jahrzehnt (pp. 200–230). Waxmann.
Stanat, P., & Christensen, G. (2006). Where immigrant students succeed: a comparative review of performance and engagement in PISA 2003. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Stephan, W. S., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 23–45). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Tajfel, H. (Ed.). (2010). European studies in social psychology: Vol. 7. Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge University Press.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations. (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole Pub Co.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2004). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In J. T. Jost & J. Sidanius (Eds.), Political psychology: Key readings. (pp. 276–293). Psychology Press.
Talaska, C. A., Fiske, S. T., & Chaiken, S. (2008). Legitimating racial discrimination: emotions, not beliefs, best predict discrimination in a meta-analysis. Social Justice Research, 21(3), 263–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-008-0071-2
Taylor, D. M., & Doria, J. R. (1981). Self-serving and group-serving bias in attribution. The Journal of Social Psychology, 113(2), 201–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1981.9924371
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2019, June 20). Global trends: Forced displacement in 2018. https://www.unhcr.org/globaltrends2018/
van Bavel, J. J., & Cunningham, W. A. (2009). Self-categorization with a novel mixed-race group moderates automatic social and racial biases. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(3), 321–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208327743
von Grüningen, R., Kochenderfer-Ladd, B., Perren, S., & Alsaker, F. D. (2012). Links between local language competence and peer relations among Swiss and immigrant children: the mediating role of social behavior. Journal of School Psychology, 50(2), 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.09.005
Worbs, S., & Baraulina, T. (2017). Geflüchtete Frauen in Deutschland: Sprache, Bildung und Arbeitsmarkt [Refugee women in Germany: Language, education and labour market]. BAMF-Kurzanalyse, Vol 1. Bundesministerium des Innern. https://www.bamf.de/SharedDocs/Anlagen/DE/Forschung/Kurzanalysen/kurzanalyse7_gefluchetete-frauen.html;nn=404000
Zick, A., Pettigrew, T. F., & Wagner, U. (2008). Ethnic prejudice and discrimination in Europe. Journal of Social Issues, 64(2), 233–251. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.00559.x