New publications from spsTREND members!
A new open-access article by Simona Guglielmi and Zeynep Mentesoglu Tardivo has been published in the European Journal of Political Research.
The article, “Political socialisation before and after migration: How origin-country political culture shapes immigrant voting in Europe”, examines how immigrants’ pre-migration political experiences continue to shape electoral participation after migration.
Introduction
Research on immigrant voting often focuses on residence-country institutions, integration policies, citizenship access, and socioeconomic resources. While these factors are crucial, this article shifts attention to the enduring role of pre-migration political socialisation. It starts from the idea that immigrants do not arrive in the country of residence as political “blank slates”; rather, they bring with them political attitudes, norms, and habits shaped by the political culture of their country of origin.
This perspective is particularly important in light of the diversity of migration flows within and to Europe, as migrants arrive with experiences of very different political systems, including established democracies, post-communist states, authoritarian regimes, and countries affected by political instability or conflict. These different political histories may shape how migrants understand democratic institutions, whether they trust political actors, and how likely they are to participate electorally after migration.
Against this background, the article asks to what extent pre-migration political socialisation and origin-country political culture continue to affect electoral participation, even after prolonged exposure to democratic institutions in the country of residence. To answer this question, the study focuses on three key dimensions: the political culture of the country of origin, the timing of arrival, and length of residence. For first-generation immigrants, origin-country political culture refers to their own country of birth; for second-generation immigrants, it is captured through their parents’ countries of birth.
By bringing these dimensions together, the article challenges a purely residence-country-based explanation of immigrant political incorporation. It argues that electoral participation is shaped not only by opportunities and institutions in the country of residence, but also by political experiences and socialisation processes that precede migration or are transmitted across generations.
Theoretical framework and hypotheses
Grounded in theories of political resocialisation, the article brings together three key perspectives: resilience, exposure, and transferability. These perspectives identify distinct, but not mutually exclusive, mechanisms through which political learning and adaptation take place after migration. The resilience perspective emphasises the lasting influence of political attitudes and habits formed during the “impressionable years”, especially adolescence and early adulthood, when political predispositions are particularly likely to take shape and persist over time (Dinas, 2010). The exposure perspective, by contrast, highlights how migrants may gradually adapt to the political environment of the country of residence through longer residence and sustained contact with democratic institutions (White et al., 2008; Voicu and Comşa, 2014). The transferability perspective offers a middle ground, suggesting that political experiences, attitudes, and skills acquired before migration may be carried across borders and reinterpreted in the new political context (Black et al., 1987). The article also considers intergenerational transmission, as second-generation immigrants may be shaped both by residence-country institutions and by political values transmitted within migrant families (Neundorf and Smets, 2017; Borkowska and Luthra, 2024).Together, these perspectives allow the article to examine how political socialisation before and after migration interact in shaping immigrant electoral participation.
Building on this framework, the article develops a set of hypotheses to examine how pre-migration political culture, timing of arrival, length of residence, and their interaction shape immigrant electoral participation.
- Pre-Migration Political Culture Hypothesis: Pre-migration political culture is expected to have an effect on immigrants’ electoral participation in the residence country, but this effect is anticipated to vary across generations. (all migrants)
- Formative Years Hypothesis: Spending one’s formative years (ages 0–13) in the country of residence is expected to increase the likelihood of electoral participation.(specific to foreign-born immigrants, first gen & 1.5 gen)
- Length of Stay Hypothesis: The duration of residence in the residence country is expected to influence electoral participation, with longer stays increasing the likelihood of voting. (specific to foreign-born immigrants, first gen & 1.5 gen)
- Political Culture × Length of Stay Hypothesis: The impact of length of stay on electoral participation is expected to be stronger for immigrants from democratic countries. (specific to foreign-born immigrants, first gen & 1.5 gen)
- Political Culture × Formative Years Hypothesis: Immigrants from non-democratic countries who spent their formative years (ages 0–13) in the residence country are expected to demonstrate higher levels of electoral participation. (specific to foreign-born immigrants, first gen & 1.5 gen)
Data and methods
To test the hypotheses, the analysis draws on European Social Survey (ESS) data (Rounds 5–11), covering 23 EU member states. It focuses on citizens of foreign origin, including 14,216 first-generation, 3,620 1.5-generation (arriving before age 13), and 5,359 second-generation immigrants. The age 13 threshold is used to capture whether migrants spent their formative years in the country of residence, a key period for political learning and socialisation. To measure origin-country political culture, the article combines ESS data with the V-Dem Liberal Democracy Index. For first-generation immigrants, this measure is based on their own country of birth; for second-generation immigrants, it is based on their parents’ countries of birth. Logistic regression models then examine how origin-country political culture, timing of arrival, and length of residence shape electoral participation, while controlling for established predictors such as gender, age, education, income, and political interest.
Findings
The findings show that origin-country political culture continues to shape immigrant electoral participation, even after controlling for characteristics such as age, education, income, and political interest. Contrary to the common expectation that migrants from democratic origins would be more likely to vote, the analysis finds that first-generation immigrants from authoritarian regimes show higher electoral participation than their peers from democratic origins once compositional differences are controlled for.
The authors interpret this as evidence of a possible reactive mobilisation mechanism: migration to democratic countries may open political opportunities that were previously unavailable, encouraging some migrants from authoritarian contexts to engage more actively. Drawing on Aksoy et al.’s (2025) “reference-point” or benchmarking argument, migrants from authoritarian contexts may evaluate democratic institutions in the country of residence against the more restrictive institutions of their country of origin.
At the same time, the influence of origin-country political culture weakens across generations. It is most pronounced among first-generation immigrants and becomes less evident among 1.5- and second-generation immigrants. This pattern suggests that political socialisation in the country of residence becomes increasingly important over time and across generations. Among the second generation, who were born and socialised in the country of residence, the political culture of their parents’ countries of origin appears to have a weaker influence on electoral participation.
The results also highlight the importance of both the timing of migration and the duration of exposure to the country of residence. Immigrants who arrived before the age of 13 are more likely to vote than those who migrated later. This supports the argument that spending one’s formative years in the country of residence facilitates political incorporation by increasing exposure to its schools, political institutions, civic norms, and social networks. Similarly, a longer period of residence is associated with a higher likelihood of electoral participation, suggesting that accumulated exposure to the political environment of the country of residence supports political learning and adaptation.
However, these effects are not uniform. Migrants from democratic origins benefit more strongly from early arrival and prolonged residence, while those from authoritarian origins experience smaller gains from these same integration pathways.
Figure 1 shows that greater exposure to the country of residence is associated with higher electoral participation, but that the strength of this association differs according to the political context in which migrants were initially socialised.
A similar pattern emerges in relation to formative years. Arriving during childhood is positively associated with electoral participation, but the size of this advantage varies according to origin-country political culture. Migrants from democratic origins show stronger gains from having spent their formative years in the country of residence, while those from authoritarian origins experience smaller gains from the same pathway of early exposure.
For brevity, the figures illustrate selected findings. The full regression results, including coefficients, standard errors, and robustness analyses, are available in the published article and its supplementary materials.
Overall, the results show that immigrant political incorporation is not a linear process but reflects the interaction between political experiences before migration and democratic exposure after migration.
Conclusion
The findings speak to different strands of political resocialisation theory. In line with the resilience perspective, the article shows that immigrants do not arrive as politically neutral actors, but carry political orientations shaped by the regime context in which they were first socialised. At the same time, the findings support the exposure argument: early arrival and longer residence in democratic countries are associated with higher electoral participation.
A central contribution of the article is that it challenges linear models of immigrant political incorporation. Political participation does not simply increase automatically with time spent in the country of residence. Instead, it is shaped by the interaction between origin-country political culture, timing of migration, length of residence, and intergenerational transmission. The study also shows that experiences under authoritarian regimes do not necessarily suppress political engagement.
These findings also underline the importance of a generational perspective in the study of immigrant political incorporation. Origin-country political culture matters most strongly for first-generation immigrants, while its influence becomes less pronounced among 1.5- and second-generation immigrants. For the second generation, political socialisation in the country of residence appears to become more important than the political culture of parental origin. Overall, the article calls for a more nuanced understanding of immigrant political incorporation, one that accounts for both pre-migration and post-migration socialisation processes across life courses, political contexts, and generations.
Bibliography
Aksoy, C.G., Eichengreen, B., Litina, A., Özgüzel, C. and Yu, C. (2025). ‘Corruption exposure, political trust, and immigrants’. Journal of Development Economics, 174, 103440.
Black, J.H., Niemi, R.G. and Powell, G.B. Jr (1987). ‘Age, resistance, and political learning in a new environment: the case of Canadian immigrants’. Comparative Politics, 20, 73–84.
Borkowska, M. and Luthra, R. (2024). ‘Socialization disrupted: the intergenerational transmission of political engagement in immigrant families’. International Migration Review, 58(1), 238–265.
Dinas, E. (2010). The Impressionable Years: The Formative Role of Family, Vote and Political Events during Early Adulthood. (Doctoral dissertation), European University Institute, Florence.
Voicu, B. and Comşa, M. (2014). ‘Immigrants’ participation in voting: exposure, resilience, and transferability’. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(10), 1572–1592.
White, S., Nevitte, N., Blais, A., Gidengil, E. and Fournier, P. (2008). ‘The political resocialization of immigrants: resistance or lifelong learning?’ Political Research Quarterly, 61(2), 268–281.
Photo by Fer Troulik on Unsplash