<p>Amanda N. Faherty, Brien K. Ashdown:<br><br>We have reached a decision regarding your submission to Revista Interamericana de Psicología/Interamerican Journal of Psychology, "White, Professional, or Female Immigrants Only, Please: U.S. American’s Desired Social Distance from Immigrants".<br><br>Our decision is to: Decline Submission<br><br></p>
<p>Reviewers' comments</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>In the manuscript “<em>White, Professional, or Female Immigrants Only, Please: U.S. American’s Desired Social Distance from Immigrants</em>,” the author(s) sought to compare the “social distance that participants desire from immigrants” by utilizing fictional examples of immigrants. The manuscript refers to many important factors that impact the “desirability” of incoming immigrants including historical context, race, gender, and social class. This reviewer commends the author(s) for focusing their research on an understudied area of psychology that is important and timely. Despite the importance of the topic, in its current form, the manuscript lacked clarity and offered little new information to the existing body of knowledge regarding immigration. Some of the major challenges with the manuscript include insufficient expansion on the literature, writing and organization, lack of clarity regarding the methodology utilized, and insufficient evidence to support the claims made. These challenges are described in more detail below.</p>
<p><strong>Title:</strong></p>
<ol>
<li>The title is of the manuscript is abstract, and it does not leave the reader with much clarity regarding what the article is about.</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>Abstract:</strong></p>
<ol>
<li>The abstract included a brief introduction to the topic which was effective in grabbing attention. However, the abstract did not explicitly state the goals, purpose, and or hypothesis of the manuscript.</li>
<li>In the abstract, the authors state “The official discrimination is reflected in the personal prejudice of many U.S. Americans.” It is unclear what “official discrimination” means and what the author(s) intend to convey with this statement. It is also unclear how this statement is connected with the goal and purpose of the study.</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>Literature Review</strong></p>
<p>Overall, the literature review needs to be expanded to provide a deeper context for the issue at hand; it needs to provide definitions of the terms utilized; and the statements made need to be supported by the literature. Moreover, seminal articles on this topic need to be included. Thus, literature review lacks depth, context, nuance, and evidence to support the claims made by the author(s). Below please find some specific areas to address in this section.</p>
<ol>
<li>The manuscript would be enhanced by providing a strong topical sentence that sets the tone for the content of the manuscript. In its current form, the first sentence seems vague and unclear.</li>
<li>A clear description on the difference between asylum-seekers, immigrants, and refugees would is necessary. Using these terms interchangeably may confuse the readers as each group has different rights and responsibilities within the U.S.</li>
<li>In the “Attitudes about Immigration in the United States” paragraph, the author(s) include the statement “…different immigrant groups have had a turn, so to speak, at being oppressed and discriminated against.” In its current form, this sentence implies that immigrant groups were waiting in line, almost voluntary, to be oppressed. In addition, this statement minimizes the significantly different treatments that immigrants from Non-white countries have experienced, and the unique challenges they have faced. For instance, the history of Irish immigrants to the U.S. is very different than that of immigrants from Africa, Mexico and Central America.</li>
<li>In addition to the above mentioned paragraph, the author(s) state “When immigrants are perceived as threatening…”. However, it is unclear what this term is intended to mean. For instance, immigrants are perceived as “threatening” by whom, and why? This would have been an excellent opportunity for the author(s) to address the racial history of this country. Using this term without any context may leave the reader with the impression that the immigrants are indeed threatening which would further foment dangerous stereotypes and prejudices about immigrants.</li>
<li>I encourage the authors to unpack and describe more in depth what they mean by wanting to “determine if the campaign rhetoric of 2016 matched people’s more implicit attitudes towards immigration and immigrants (page 3). For instance, when they say “people” who are they talking about? is it the entire population of the U.S. or particular groups, and how this are these statements supported by the literature? Also, suggest for the author(s) to describe how they define implicit attitudes and why they are important to this study, as well as provide evidence from the literature on the connection between implicit biases and perceptions of immigrants.</li>
<li>In the section referencing the history of immigration in the United Sates is too short. This section needs to be expanded to provide more context for the current challenges experienced by immigrants. Critical immigration laws that have affected well-being of immigrants are missing from this section including IRCA and IIRIRA. Also, statistics regarding the number of legislations introduced to the U.S. congress since 9/11 need to be discussed.</li>
<li>The author(s) state that previous studies had found that people prefer immigrants who are white, “highly-skilled,” and men, but they do not provide a context for this statement. Why are women preferred, what is the historical context surrounding this preference. What about “highly-skilled” where does this preference come from and what does it mean given the current socio-political context. Also, in looking at the history of immigration the preference for “highly skilled immigrants” has impacted who has actually immigrated to this country and the types of jobs that they have performed and continue to perform today. Also, it is unclear how this study would further expand on the previously mentioned research findings.</li>
<li>Author(s) are encouraged to operationally define social distance and discuss how, why this is important, and how does social distance affect immigrants from different nationalities in the U.S.</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>Method, Procedure &amp; Results Section </strong></p>
<ol>
<li>In the methods section the terms race and ethnicity are used interchangeably even though they do not mean the same thing. A clear distinction between these terms needs to be made.</li>
<li>It is unclear why the specific countries of origin were chosen (e.g., England, India, Syria). Also, how are these nationalities related with the current immigration context of the U.S., and in particular with the author(s) described interest in the topic. For instance, the author(s) state this study emerged from the anti-immigrant rhetoric expressed during the 2016 presidential campaign. This statements made during the campaign specifically referred to immigrants coming from Mexico and other Latin American countries not from India or England.</li>
<li>Within the demographics section, the author(s) race was not included, yet the author(s) mention how “physical racial characteristics of immigrants influence the way that they are perceived by U.S. Americans” (page 10). Hence, it is unclear why race not an included as a variable.</li>
<li>The results of the study are a bit unclear and need to be expanded to provide context, and clarity regarding what specifically was found and what the implications of the results are.</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>Discussion: </strong></p>
<p>The discussion section would have to be revised once the author(s) correct the major challenges with the methods and results section.</p>
<p><strong>Other Notes:</strong></p>
<ol>
<li>The writing needs to be thoroughly edited for APA style and several typographical errors to accurately follow the APA manual (6th edition) requirements.</li>
<li>The manuscript also needs to be proof read to address challenges with flow, transitions, organization, and overall readability.</li>
</ol>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Recommendation: Decline Submission<br><br>------------------------------------------------------</p>
<p>Looking forward to future contributions.<br><br>Yours sincerely</p>
<p>Dr. Fernando Polanco</p><br/>The following message is being delivered on behalf of Interamerican Journal of Psychology.
_____________________________________________________________