charlescrabtree.org/a paper, animated

The Rival Penalty

When people judge who gets to immigrate, geopolitics beats race and culture: a conjoint experiment in twenty-two democracies, replayed choice by choice.

wimmer · bonikowski · crabtree · fu · golder · tsutsui — american political science review 119(2), 2025

01 · the task

Pick one applicant. Repeat. 46,549 people did.

Respondents in 22 democracies saw pairs of applicants for permanent residency with randomized attributes — age, gender, occupation, language, years in the country, and a country of origin chosen to vary two things at once: geopolitical rivalry and racial-cultural similarity. In Western countries that meant Russia vs. Ukraine (similar) and China vs. Japan (dissimilar). Watch the task run; the only systematic difference in these simulated choices is the paper's 7.6 pp rival penalty.

applicant a
origin
age
gender
occupation
language
residence
applicant b
origin
age
gender
occupation
language
residence
choices simulated: 0 rival-origin applicant chosen: (paper: 7.6 pp below non-rivals)
02 · the result

Rivalry moves choices six times more than race

In marginal means — the probability an applicant with a given attribute is chosen — immigrants from rival countries land 7.6 pp below non-rivals. And the racial-similarity prediction runs backwards: applicants perceived as racially and culturally similar do slightly worse (−1.2 pp) than dissimilar ones. Rivalry's pull is smaller than language fluency or unemployment, but larger than gender or years of residence.

origin: non-rival 0.538
origin: rival 0.462
origin: different race/culture 0.506
origin: similar race/culture 0.494
0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60

marginal means, pooled across 22 countries · confidence intervals too small to draw at n = 46,549 · the 0.50 line is indifference

03 · the twist

Japanese applicants beat Russian ones — in the West

The classic expectation is homophily: people prefer immigrants who look and live like themselves. But antipathy toward rivals and sympathy for non-rivals is strong enough to flip it — Western respondents preferred racially and culturally dissimilar non-rivals (Japanese applicants) over similar rivals (Russian applicants). The aversion was strongest exactly where rivalry burned hottest: toward Russia in the West, toward China in Japan and Korea.

04 · the natural experiment

Then the war began, mid-fieldwork

The surveys were in the field when Russia invaded Ukraine. As the rivalry escalated into open war, anti-rival and pro-ally bias sharpened in real time: the probability of granting a Ukrainian applicant permanent residency climbed toward 0.6 within a week — an alliance effect that mirrors the rivalry penalty, and evidence that the mechanism really is geopolitics.

0.55 0.60 0.50 feb 24 2022 · the invasion ukrainian applicants ≈ 0.6 fieldwork before the week after
05 · what it means

Immigrant hierarchies follow the world's alliances

Who gets welcomed isn't only about race, religion, or skills — it tracks the host country's friends and enemies. As alliances shift, so do the boundaries of welcome: a finding with uncomfortable implications for every diaspora living downstream of a rivalry.

Wimmer, Andreas, Bart Bonikowski, Charles Crabtree, Zheng Fu, Matt Golder, and Kiyoteru Tsutsui. “Geo-Political Rivalry and Anti-Immigrant Sentiment: A Conjoint Experiment in 22 Countries.” American Political Science Review 119(2): 1018–1035, 2025.

read the paper →

marginal means and the 7.6 pp / 1.2 pp estimates are the paper's (figure 1); the simulated choices in scene 01 encode only the rival penalty · the war chart is a stylized rendering of the escalation analysis (figure 5), where ally acceptance approaches 0.6 within a week