IAFF 2040 Final Paper Review: Analysis of Hager & Veit's Article

This document presents a comprehensive review of a student's final paper for the IAFF 2040 course, focusing on the analysis of an article by Hager and Veit (2019) regarding public attitudes towards asylum seekers in Germany. The review meticulously examines various aspects of the study, including its purpose, literature review, research questions, methodology (data collection, research design, variables), statistical analyses, findings, and conclusions. It evaluates the clarity and effectiveness of each section, identifying strengths and weaknesses. The review also assesses the study's limitations, validity (internal and external), and recommendations for further research. Furthermore, it proposes a follow-up study with specific research questions and data collection methods, including the use of qualitative data collection techniques to explore the nuances of public opinion. Overall, the review provides a detailed critique of the student's analysis and offers insights into the study's implications.

Your name here
Article Review
Student’s Name
University

Your name here
I. ABSTRACT
1) Hager, A., & Veit, S. (2019.). Attitudes toward asylum seekers evidence from Germany.
Public Opinion Quarterly, 1-11.
2) Indicate the following according to the abstract:
a. Purpose: to explain the variation in public opinion towards asylum seekers
b. Major concepts, variables: deservingness, economic and religious threat theories,
economic and political refugees
c. Source of data: data was collected from a representative sample of German citizens
d. Major findings: deservingness attributions, religious threat, economic threat and
gender shape the attitudes that people have towards asylum seekers.
e. Conclusion(s): attitudes towards asylum seekers are there but economic threat is
activated by refugee’s deserving doubt (Hager & Veit, 2019, p.1).
II. PURPOSE and LITERATURE REVIEW (8 points)
3) What is the purpose of the study? Is it clearly stated? If not, how would you state it?
The study sought to understand the theories to explain variation in public opinion. This is has not
been stated well since it seems to be different from the topic of the article. This means that the
main topic is not complete (Hager & Veit, 2019, p.2).
4) How does the paper make the case for the necessity for the study?
The authors have used the background information on the topic to make the case for the study
(Hager & Veit, 2019, p.2-3). It provides the context to the information discussed in the study and
at the same time supports the thesis (Alfaki & Siddie, 2013). The background information offers
an overview on the theories of deservingness, economic and religious threat.

Your name here
5) What are the hypotheses or research questions? Are they clearly stated? If not, how
would you state them?
The hypothesis of the study have been clearly stated
Germans favor people seeking asylum that seem deserving (Hager & Veit, 2019, p.3).
Germans are likely to support asylum seekers that have no economic implications (Hager & Veit,
2019, p.3).
Germans favor asylum seekers that have no religious issues related to them (Hager & Veit, 2019,
p.3).
German citizens may favor female asylum seekers (Hager & Veit, 2019, p.3).
6) Does the paper include the following? If yes, indicate what they are.
a. How major concepts are defined and/or measured in the literature: no
b. Contrasting views or contradictory findings in the literature about phenomena at hand: no
c. Gaps in in the literature: No
III. METHODS (16 points)
7) What was the data collection method and data collection instrument(s)?
The data was collected through the use of survey questionnaires with descriptive questions and
an evaluation of a fictitious asylum seeker (Hager & Veit, 2019.p.4). Surveys are the best since
they allow the researcher to reach out to many people and at the same time allows generating of
quantitative questions (Nayak & Narayan, 2019). This is why the data was easy to analyze
quantitatively.
8) We covered four different types of research design in Lectures 3 and 4. Indicate design
of this study and whether researcher is seeking causal inference.

Your name here
The study employed an experimental research design where the participants were controlled to
make one group differ from the other so that the differences in the data collected can be used to
make generalizations (Hager & Veit, 2019, p.4). The treatment effect was based on the request
for the respondents to give their opinion on a fictitious asylum seeker. Fischer, Boone, &
Neumann (2014) suggest that the use of the experiemental design is to assig treatment conditions
to the subjects to determine causation, control and variability. This design thus offers the best
outcome since it allows the researcher to compare the data colleted from the control and the
experimental group.

Your name here
9) Identify the dependent and independent variables1
Variables Level of measurement Value range
Dependent Attitude
Independent Asylum seekers Nominal 1-5
10) How was the dependent variable operationalized?
There was no operational definition of the variables.
11) What is the major independent variable? How was it operationalized?
There was no operational definition of the variables.
12) What is the population of inference? Was it clearly described?
The population of inference is Germany as a whole country where the attitudes of the population
towards asylum seekers are being measured (Hager & Veit, 2019, p. 2).
13) What is the unit of analysis?
The unit of analysis is the whole country since the study was measuring the attitudes that people
have toward asylum seekers in Germany (Hager & Veit, 2019, p. 2).
14) a) Was a sample drawn? If yes, what was the sampling method?
The sampling method was based on convenient sampling where 3,004 German residents were
recruited by the German weekly newspaper Die Zeit, the Berlin Social Science Center (WZB),
and the Institute for Applied Social Sciences (infas). From the initial number 2,738 agreed to
participate in future surveys and were thus conducted and asked to take part in the study. From
the 2,093 who provided their contacts, 1,053 participants were reached to take part in the study.
Bornstein, Jager, & Putnick (2017) suggest that convenuent sampling allows the researcher to
1 List five independent variables unless there are fewer than five

Your name here
take the sample from a group that is easy to contact. This means that the researchr relies on the
sample population that is available and reachable (Hager & Veit, 2019, p. 4).
b) Does the paper speak to its representativeness, and adequacy in terms of its size?
The paper does not speak of its representativeness since it was based on convenient sampling
that relied on participant information that had been collected before. Thus the sample could not
be generalized to the whole population due to the nature of the participants in the study.
IV. ANALYSES (5 points)
15) Cite one descriptive statistic for each below
a) Statistic describing the sample: 3,004 respondents were recruited face to face, 2,728
agreed their contact details to be stored and contacted for survey, 1,503 respondents
out of 2,093 were reached for survey ((Hager & Veit, 2019, p.4).
b) Statistic describing the dependent variable:
c) Statistic describing the major independent variable:
16) What is one independent variables with a significant relationship to the dependent
variable? Cite the statistic (e.g. F, t etc.)
From the paper that shows the significant relationship the study reported that 11% of the
respondents supported the accommodation of people who are fleeing but opposed offering them
asylum (Hager & Veit, 2019, p. 5). This shows that most of the people support offering asylum
to the people fleeing their country.
FINDINGS and CONCLUSIONS (16 points)
17) Did the researcher(s) answer or test each research question or hypothesis they listed?
What were the finding(s) for each?
The hypotheses were tested differently

Your name here
Asylum seekers who seem deserving receive higher support as compared to others with 42% of
the population showing support for asylum seekers (Hager & Veit, 2019, p. 6).
There is a strong interaction effect of education of the asylum seeker to the attitudes of the
people.
There is no relationship between the levels of gender or level education on the attitude that
asylum seekers receive.
There is no significant link between gender and the level attitude discrimination between men
and women.
18) What are the major conclusions the researcher reaches based on the finding s/he
presents?
The study concluded that the predictive power of the threats to asylum seekers is depends on
deservingness attributions. This makes people with religious and economic characteristics to
experience more attitudes as compared with political asylum seekers (Hager & Veit, 2019, p. 9).
However, the support for political asylum seekers is based moral connotation which justifies the
different positions that the respondents used to answer the question. Further, the study was based
on experimental manipulation and not theories of public opinion formation which could have
made the information different.
19) a) Did the researcher speak to the limitations of the study? What are they?
The researcher gave the limitations of the study. One of the limitations is the fact that there is a
moral connotation on questions asked about attitudes towards political refugees and thus there
can be social desirability bias in the responses (Hager & Veit, 2019, p. 11).

Your name here
The second bias is the fact that the asylum question has legal concerns and thus the responses
can be different with some respondents who understand the legal background of the question
(Hager & Veit, 2019, p. 11)
The third limitation is the fact that the study was based on the experimental manipulation for
testing the theories of public opinion which dictates the treatment methods used on the
respondents since each of the treatment was supposed to induce a certain type of response which
can create bias in the responses (Hager & Veit, 2019, p. 11).
b) Are there limitations to the study that the researcher(s) did not acknowledge? If yes,
what are they?
One of the limitations that the researchers did not acknowledge is the use of multiple related
primes which could have provided robust measures of key theoretical constructs of interest.
Further, there are different variables that are in play in relation to public opinion which were not
explored by the researcher. This means that the study needed to consider the mechanisms that
give rise to such variables so that they can be included in the study.
20) What are threats to internal and external validity?
There is low internal validity in this study based on the nature of the sample participants used
and even the limitations of the study itself. This is based on the fact that there was no random
picking of the participants for the study but rather the researchers only used the ones who were
willing to engage in the survey. This shows that there was the challenge of internal validity
which affected the study. Further, the fact that the study has identified that one limitation of the
study is the fact that there are other factors beyond the ones that have been studied in shaping
attitude, then it means that these factors can be attributed pot confounding elements which can
change the outcome of the variables being measured.

Your name here
External validity of a study is based on how the outcome of a study can be generalized to other
settings (Patino & Ferreira, 2018). The external validity of this study has been increased by the
inclusion of a large sample frame which can adequately be used to reflect the whole study.
However, selection bias can affect the external validity of the study based on the fact that the
participants were conveniently sampled which can limit their ability to reflect the views of the
general population.
21) Did the paper offer recommendations for further research? If yes, what are they?
The following are recommendations for further research which were based on the limitations of
the study (Hager & Veit, 2019, p. 11).
The need to use multiple related primes to have better theoretical constructs measures (Hager &
Veit, 2019, p. 11).
Scholars also need to predict the point where the public opinion can shift so that this can be
included in the study to ensure that this does not affect the outcome (Hager & Veit, 2019, p. 12).
22) Think about a follow up study. State a purpose and research questions. Describe what
data would be needed for this study and how would collect such data.
A follow up study for this research will be done in a similar way but will include the
recommendations that have been included in question 21. The purpose of the study will be to
determine situations that create different public opinion views on asylum seekers. The data that
will be collected will be qualitative in nature so that the researchers can used interview to
investigate the opinions and views of respondents on the topic. Unlike the survey where closed
questions are asked. The qualitative method allows open-ended questions which makes it easy to
explore other factors that are beyond the three constructs of deservingness, economic and
religious threats.

Your name here

Your name here
References
Alfaki, I. M., & Siddie, A. G. (2013). The Role of Background Knowledge in Enhancing
Reading Comprehension. World Journal of English Language, 3(4), 42-64.
Bornstein, M. H., Jager, J., & Putnick, D. L. (2017). Sampling in Developmental Science:
Situations, Shortcomings, Solutions, and Standards. Developmental Review, 33(4), 357–
370.
Fischer, H. E., Boone, W. J., & Neumann, K. (2014). Quantitative Research Designs and
Approaches. In S. K. N. G. Lederman, Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp.
18-37). Routledge: Taylor and Francis.
Hager, A., & Veit, S. (2019.). Attitudes toward asylum seekers evidence from Germany. Public
Opinion Quarterly, 1-11.
Nayak, M. S., & Narayan, K. (2019). Strengths and Weakness of Online Surveys. Journal Of
Humanities And Social Science, 5(5), 31-38.
Patino, C. M., & Ferreira, J. C. (2018). Internal and external validity: can you apply research
study results to your patients? Internal and external validity: can you apply research
study results to your patients?. Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia, 44(3).