Off-campus UMass Amherst users: To download campus access dissertations, please use the following link to log into our proxy server with your UMass Amherst user name and password.

Non-UMass Amherst users: Please talk to your librarian about requesting this dissertation through interlibrary loan.

Dissertations that have an embargo placed on them will not be available to anyone until the embargo expires.


Access Type

Open Access Thesis

Document Type


Degree Program


Degree Type

Master of Science (M.S.)

Year Degree Awarded


Month Degree Awarded



Research on attitudes towards immigration policies typically considers the economic and cultural threats that compel many Americans to favor exclusionary policies that curb immigration. Less is understood about how indifference to inequality shapes Americans’ attitudes towards immigration policies—that is, how ‘not caring’ about the unequal conditions faced by immigrants likely has detrimental consequences for their safety and wellbeing. The present research examines indifference to inequality as a predictor for policies that impact opportunities for immigrants to come to the U.S., and who are otherwise undocumented and/or at great risk for exploitation. Using survey data from the American National Election Studies gathered in 2016 (Study 1; n = 3,187) and 2020 (Study 2; n = 6,941), we find that greater indifference to inequality is associated with less support for providing a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and greater support for building a wall between the U.S. and Mexico, independently of other explanatory intergroup variables (e.g., prejudice, threat, and demographic characteristics). However, these associations tend to be moderated by ethnoracial background, such that although indifference to inequality predicts immigration policy attitudes among U.S.-born White Americans, it is not predictive of attitudes among U.S.-born Latino and Black Americans. Furthermore, these associations are not moderated by recent family history of immigration, suggesting that respondents’ group status in the U.S. ethnoracial hierarchy, and not the personal relevance of immigration, may well be driving these associations.


First Advisor

Linda R. Tropp

Second Advisor

Scott Blinder

Third Advisor

Nilanjana Dasgupta