Sunteți pe pagina 1din 19

417607

CMCXXX10.1177/1741659011417607Pearce and CharmanCrime Media Culture

Article

A social psychological approach


to understanding moral panic

Crime Media Culture


7(3) 293311
The Author(s) 2011
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1741659011417607
cmc.sagepub.com

Julia M Pearce1 and Elizabeth Charman2

Abstract
While moral panic remains a key sociological concept, it has been criticized for its lack of
explanatory force. This article reports the results of a study designed to examine whether a social
psychological approach to moral panic can (a) theorize the content as well as process of moral
panic, and (b) understand both the cause and the impact of this response. This approach was
tested in relation to the topic of asylum seekers. The research was based on a qualitative analysis
of 120 newspaper articles, 8 focus groups with members of the host community and 25 semistructured interviews with people who have sought asylum in the United Kingdom. A theoretical
framework of social representations and social identity theory was used to explore psychological
processes that may underpin host receptivity to moral panic discourse about asylum seekers and
the impact such a moral panic may have on those labelled as folk devils. Results indicated that
social psychological processes are one of the contributory factors to host receptivity to moral
panic, and strategies adopted by folk devils to cope with stigmatized group membership were
identified. Implications of the findings for future moral panic research are discussed.

Keywords
asylum seekers, moral panic, social identity, social representations, thematic analysis

Introduction
While moral panic remains a key sociological concept, it has been subject to a number of important criticisms (Critcher, 2003, 2008). Some of these relate to the way the concept has been
applied, for example, the use of the media as a proxy for public opinion (Ungar, 2001), and failure
to adequately operationalize criteria for identifying a moral panic (McCorckle and Miethe, 1998).
However, these issues can be addressed by the use of methodological rigour and as such do not
threaten the usefulness of the concept. A more important issue is the extent to which moral panic
models can be explanatory as well as descriptive. As Goode (2000) highlights, there is no such
thing as moral panic theory. Rather, moral panic is an analytic concept to which a number of
existing theories have been applied. Key among these are Cohens (1972) original politics of
Kings College London, UK
London Metropolitan University, UK
Email: julia.pearce@kcl.ac.uk

1
2

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

294

CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 7(3)

anxiety approach based on labelling theory and deviancy amplification, Hall et al.s (1978) Marxist
account which relates moral panics to the struggle over hegemony, and Goode and Ben-Yehudas
(1994) social constructionist model which conceptualizes moral panics as collective behaviour triggered by particular interest groups.
Critcher (2003, 2008) and Thompson (1998) have identified two key areas where classic moral
panic models lack explanatory power. The first is the lack of theorization of the causes of moral
panic, specifically in relation to public receptivity to moral panic discourses. This tends to be attributed to unspecified social anxiety, presenting moral panics as a consequence of some (hypothetically universal, endlessly cyclical) feature of social life, namely panickyness (Sparks, 1995: 55).
However, as moral panics are seen as both resulting from and evidence for this, the explanation
becomes somewhat circular, and it has been suggested that this account is founded on an
untested a priori assumption that social actors experience a collectively shared insecurity (Hier,
2003). The second limitation is the focus on process rather than content, which does not allow
analysis of the construction of events as moral panics.
This article will argue that both of these limitations may be addressed by adopting a social
psychological approach to moral panic. Social psychology focuses on the interaction between the
individual and the social with a view to understanding how societies function (Moscovici, 2001).
By exploring group-level responses, a social psychological analysis has the potential not only to
help explain public receptivity to moral panic discourse but also to explore the psychological
impact of moral panic on individuals classified as folk devils, an issue that has been relatively
neglected in the moral panic literature to date. There are some notable exceptions. For example,
deYoung (1998) demonstrates that folk devils are not necessarily the marginalized, defenceless
figures of classic moral panic theorizing; and St Cyr (2003) draws attention to the importance of
measuring the impact of moral panic on folk devils. However, neither provides a theoretical
model for analysing this impact. This is an important omission in current moral panic theorizing,
as moral panics play a key role in drawing boundaries around communities and determining who
does or does not belong (Critcher, 2006).
One theoretical framework that lends itself particularly well to exploring intergroup relationships is social identity theory (SIT). SIT analyses the behaviour of people in relation to their selfconception as group members, recognizing that group behaviour is distinct from interpersonal
behaviour (Tajfel, 1981). In identifying the social psychological processes that lead to intergroup
conflict as well as elaborating on the strategies adopted to deal with the resultant challenges, SIT
has the potential to enhance current models of moral panic. However, as with existing moral
panic models, SIT prioritizes process over content; in order to address both limitations identified
in the literature it is therefore necessary to go beyond a traditional social identity analysis.
One approach increasingly used in combination with SIT is the theory of social representations
(Moloney and Walker, 2007). Social representations theory (SRT) was developed by Serge
Moscovici (2008 [1961/1976]), adapted from Durkheims concept of collective representations.
Moscovici (1963: 251) describes social representation as the elaboration of a social object by the
community for the purpose of behaving and communicating. The primary focus of SRT is therefore social knowledge, in particular the content of common-sense knowledge and the ways this
is expressed in language and communication. Consequently, SRT provides a means of understanding social knowledge that addresses the construction and transformation of this knowledge
in relation to different social contexts and across different social groups. In foregrounding the

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

Pearce and Charman

295

importance of content, a social representations approach to social identity has the potential to
address the way that events are constructed as a moral panic.
This article reports the results of a study designed to examine whether a social psychological
approach to moral panic which draws on SIT and SRT is able to (a) theorize the content as well as
process of moral panic, and (b) understand both the cause and the impact of this response (Pearce,
2010). This approach was tested in relation to the topic of asylum seekers. Since the early 1990s,
the issue of asylum has been at the forefront of UK media and government discussion (Finney,
2005; Lewis 2005). The overwhelmingly negative response to asylum seekers has led a number of
commentators to describe this reaction as a moral panic (e.g. Barclay et al., 2003; Berkeley et al.,
2006; Clarke and Garner, 2005; Finney and Robinson, 2007; Grillo, 2005; ICAR, 2004; Kushner,
2003; Robinson, 2003) and Cohen himself, in his introduction to the latest edition of Folk Devils
and Moral Panics, uses refugees and asylum seekers as an example of a contemporary moral panic
(Cohen, 2002).
The data for this study were drawn from three sources: UK national press coverage of asylum,
focus groups with members of the host community, and individual interviews with people who
have sought asylum in the UK. National daily newspapers were selected as they are the most
widely read print media, they set the tone for public debate and they shape the selection of stories
for television news coverage (Lewis, 2005). Focus groups allowed access to discussion between
group members and exploration of the collective sense-making of the host community. Individual
interviews enabled a more in-depth exploration of folk devil experiences and were more appropriate for these interviewees given that the topic was likely to be of personal sensitivity and concern experiences that could provoke anxiety (Gaskell, 2000).

Methodology
Media Sample

The period of analysis was from 1 January to 31 December 2006. The sample was drawn from the
four top-selling UK national daily tabloids and four top-selling UK national daily broadsheet newspapers. Publications included for analysis (highest circulation first) were the Sun, Daily Mirror,
Daily Express, Daily Mail, The Times, Daily Telegraph, Guardian and Independent. Publications
with the highest circulation figures were used as the public are most likely to have been exposed
to this content. Both tabloid and broadsheet publications were included to maximize the range of
editorial positions and potential audiences. The sample included articles, editorials and readers
letters which referred to asylum seekers or the asylum issue in the UK.
Prior to this study, a content analysis of 415 articles (a random sample of 25% of coverage
of asylum during the sampling period) was conducted and established that there was empirical
evidence that the response to asylum seekers could be considered a moral panic. For the social
representations analysis it was necessary to reduce this sample to allow a more detailed qualitative exploration of the content of articles. A corpus construction approach was adopted to
maximize the spread of representations that were accessed (as recommended by Gaskell and
Bauer, 2000). To this end, ten articles were purposively selected from each month to ensure the
sample included those that had been coded both positively and negatively in the quantitative
content analysis and were drawn from all publications. This produced a sample of 120 articles
for analysis.

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

296

CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 7(3)

Focus Groups
Focus groups were conducted between March and August 2008 with members of the host community (inclusion based on self-selection as British). Focus groups were recruited on a purposive
basis to maximize variation in participants occupations, educational levels and experience of
diversity. The sample consisted of eight focus groups of three to six participants with a total of 36
participants (16 males, 20 females). Focus groups were conducted with naturally occurring groups
(e.g. neighbours, colleagues, families) as this enhanced the likelihood that participants would
share values and concerns (Bauer and Gaskell, 1999) and their discussion would reflect realworld interactions (Warr, 2005). They were conducted in a number of locations in the UK, selected
to vary in terms of size, region, rural/urban and ethnic diversity. This sampling procedure was also
designed to maximize variation with a view to reaching meaning saturation.
The discussion guide was constructed to cover participants understandings of what is meant
by the term asylum seeker, public opinion of asylum seekers, perceptions of media coverage of
asylum, and whether asylum seekers could become British. The majority of focus groups lasted
approximately one hour and were all digitally recorded and fully transcribed.

Individual Interviews
Interviews were conducted between September 2007 and March 2008, with individuals who have
sought asylum in the UK. Asylum seeker covers a heterogeneous population, with individuals
coming from diverse national and ethnic backgrounds with different socio-economic and cultural
experiences, so inclusion was based on self-selection and a purposive sampling method was used
to maximize variety. The sample consisted of 25 semi-structured interviews with asylum seekers
and former asylum seekers from 14 different countries, 16 males and 9 females, ranging in age
from 19 to 54 years, and from a variety of different socio-economic backgrounds.
The interview guide focused on participants exposure to and understanding of UK media coverage of asylum seekers, their perceptions of the host populations views, the impact the label
asylum seeker had on them as individuals and the extent to which they identified with this group
membership and considered group boundaries to be permeable. The majority of the interviews
lasted 6090 minutes and all were digitally recorded and transcribed.

The Analysis
Social representations were explored using thematic analysis (as described by Braun and Clarke,
2006), one of the most clearly specified methods of qualitative data analysis. Thematic analysis
allows the comparison of social units while remaining sensitive to the specific contents of individual cases, as it does not attempt to reduce the text to numerical data (Flick, 2009). Furthermore,
while the analysis of qualitative material is necessarily a subjective process, thematic analysis is a
rigorous procedure which provides a formalized approach to analysis that goes beyond intuition
(Attride-Stirling, 2001). A coding frame was developed using an inductive process in which no
initial assumptions were made regarding the relationship between codes, but as the analysis
developed connections were established and used to identify social representations. Each data set
was analysed separately and then synthesized in order to examine commonalities and differences
between and within the different components of representations.

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

Pearce and Charman

297

The social identity analysis was designed to (a) identify the extent to which public receptivity to
moral panic discourse could be explained by social identity processes, and (b) examine the impact
of stigmatized group membership on individuals seeking asylum in the UK. This required the
re-analysis of focus group and interview data, which indicated the use of qualitative methods. A
thematic analysis was conducted using two theoretically driven coding frames to test the following predictions of SIT.
According to SIT, social identity is based on social categorization, whereby others are classified
according to whether they belong to the same category (in-group) or a different category (outgroup) as oneself. The need for positive identity combined with this categorization process leads
to social comparisons that enhance positive and distinctive in-group images, while also giving rise
to negative and homogenized out-group images (Turner, 1999). SIT predicts that high status
groups will be prejudiced against lower status groups when group boundaries are perceived as
permeable and status differences are perceived as legitimate (Reynolds and Turner, 2001). To
explore the extent to which host group receptivity to moral panic discourse can be explained by
SIT, a coding frame was developed to examine evidence for social categorization and comparison
processes and to test the hypothesis that the host community will be more receptive to moral
panic discourse when group boundaries are perceived as permeable and status differences are
perceived as legitimate.
SIT also provides specific predictions regarding strategies that minority group members may
adopt in order to challenge stigmatized social identity. If boundaries are considered permeable
(i.e. there is a social mobility belief structure), individual exit strategies will be followed, whereas
if an individuals fate is perceived to be tied to group membership (i.e. there is a social change
belief structure), collective action is more likely (Tajfel, 1978). Social mobility is likely to lead to
individual assimilation, whereby individuals disassociate themselves with the subordinate group
and show preference for the out-group. In contrast, a social change belief structure is likely to lead
to collective action in the form of social creativity (when status differences are considered legitimate and/or stable) or social competition (when status differences are considered to be illegitimate and/or insecure). Social creativity involves redefining the comparative situation. Social
competition involves attempts to improve the opportunities and status of the group while retaining a distinct group identity. In order to examine the response of folk devils to stigmatized identity, a second coding frame was therefore developed to examine social categorization and
comparison processes and whether there was evidence to suggest that coping strategies predicted by SIT had been adopted.

Social Representations Analysis


Six core representations were identified: asylum seekers as bad people versus good people,
threatening versus threatened and legitimate versus illegitimate. This is consistent with
Moscovicis (2001) prediction that, given their genesis in communication, it is likely that every positive representation will have a negative counterpart. These particular features were identified as
core elements because they provide the overarching meaning of each representation by linking a
set of peripheral elements (Abric, 1996). For example, criminal, spongers, ungrateful and
cowardly are all ways of representing asylum seekers as bad people. Bad people therefore links
these elements and gives meaning to this representation by indicating how each peripheral

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

298

CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 7(3)

element is used to represent asylum seekers as sharing negative traits. The central core constitutes
the most stable element of each representation, fulfilling the need for constancy. Peripheral elements are more flexible, adapting to particular contexts to protect the core (Abric, 1996). Figure 1
shows the pattern of representations across each data set.
All representations appeared in all data sources, although peripheral elements differed according to source and there was variation in the extent to which focus group participants and individual interviewees demonstrated awareness or assimilation of these representations.
Representations in the media sample and focus groups were remarkably similar and predominantly negative: only two of the broadsheets provided any counter moral panic discourse in the
media, and there was surprisingly little variation in moral panic content in focus groups, despite
sampling to maximize variation in representations.
The following discussion focuses on the negative representations to examine the content of
moral panic discourse. Although each core representation is considered in turn, this is not to suggest that they form distinct entities. Social representations exist within complex networks of representations and interact with each other to provide a frame of reference for understanding any
given social object. Consequently, social representations will overlap, with some peripheral elements performing multiple functions. For example, criminal is used not only to position asylum
seekers as bad people, but also to highlight their illegitimacy and discuss the threat they pose to
the host community.

Asylum Seekers as Bad People


This representation positions asylum seekers as inherently bad in terms of personal characteristics. This includes direct references to asylum seekers being bad people, for example, it seems like
were getting all the bad the other countries dont want, were getting all the rubbish (Gino,1
Rickmansworth), as well as the attribution of negative characteristics, for example, they should
learn English if they want to sponge off us, at least have the decency of speaking the same
language (Luke, Basildon).
The representation of asylum seekers as undesirable immigrants and criminal featured predominantly in the media sample. Media coverage focused on the need for more deportations and
asylum seekers were differentiated from immigrants who bring positive benefits to the UK. For
example, in the case of a deportation of an American citizen, it was reported: If she had come
here claiming political asylum leeched off the state with a huge family, this government would
welcome her with open arms (Duncan, Daily Mirror, 2006).
Focus group participants frequently compared asylum seekers unfavourably to established ethnic communities and economic migrants perceived to contribute more to the UK. For example,
participants in Birmingham referred to the Jamaican community as nice people who have earned
the money, theyve put it into the system in contrast to asylum seekers who are spoiling it.
Individual interviewees indicated awareness of this representation, feeling that neither the public
nor the media want asylum seekers in the UK. For example: When they [the media] are talking
about asylum, they try to pushing asylum in right to deport (Raman).
Asylum seekers were represented as criminal by being directly associated with criminal acts,
through references to asylum seekers and criminals and by association with illegal immigrants.
Crime dominated media coverage of asylum seekers, focusing primarily on violent crime, making

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

Pearce and Charman

Figure 1. Social representations of asylum seekers across each data set.

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

299

300

CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 7(3)

this a particularly powerful representation. For example: Killers and rapists flooded on to our
streets because ministers lost control of the asylum system years ago (Pascoe-Watson, Sun, 2006).
The representation of asylum seekers as spongers also featured prominently in tabloid coverage and focus groups. Even the more sympathetic focus group participants who used less inflammatory language tended to represent asylum seekers as people who have chosen to come to the
UK specifically to utilize the benefits system. For example: I think the NHS and the fact that it is
free is a huge draw, and the council housing, things like that (Sarah, Doncaster).

Asylum Seekers as Threatening


Perceived negative traits clearly inform and interact with some representations of threat. However,
what distinguishes threatening is that this representation focuses on asylum seekers relationship
with and perceived negative impact on the host community, rather than on their personal traits.
Four types of threat were identified: economic threat, physical threat, cultural threat and
uncontrollable threat.
First, the representation of asylum seekers as an economic threat commonly appeared in
media coverage, which focused on burden on resources, costs to the UK taxpayer and perceived
unfairness in the allocation of resources. For example, the Daily Express argued that unbearable
pressure is placed on our public services by asylum seekers arriving in the UK via France (Fagge,
2006). Very similar representations appeared in focus groups. In addition, focus group participants frequently represented asylum seekers as an economic threat in relation to taking our jobs.
For example:
I suppose really the issues I see are how limited our resources are in the country anyway and I
would imagine thats what peoples issues are with it, the fact that they may be taking our jobs,
may be taking our houses, they may be taking resources away from National Health. (Gary,
Basildon)
Individual interviewees recognized the representation of asylum seekers as placing a burden on
resources, but emphasized that asylum seekers do not choose to receive benefits and suggested
they would much rather work. For example:
They always say they are a burden on our system and honestly we might be a burden on a
system but we didnt choose this we may be a burden on the society but at least give us a
work permit in order to pay tax and dont be a burden on society. (Ali)
Second, the representation of asylum seekers as a physical threat focused on the association
with terrorism and violent crime. The idea that terrorists are using the asylum system to enter the
UK was a recurrent theme in media coverage. For example: Terrorists able to commit mass
slaughter are using our lax asylum and immigration system to plot outrages, the Home Secretary
warned yesterday (Whitehead, Daily Express, 2006a).
Representations of asylum seekers as a physical threat in focus groups also centred on perceived links to terrorism and violent crime, in particular gang violence and the threat this poses to
UK citizens. For example:

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

Pearce and Charman

301

The knife people are Somalians. They wont fight because they cant, so theyll stab you and
thats where it comes from and you go out to Rayners Lane and that, youll see them all over
the place and theyll knife you. (Paul, Rickmansworth)
A small minority of individual interviewees had assimilated the representation of asylum seekers
as a physical threat. For example, Bikila attributed public hostility towards asylum seekers to crimes
increasing and in some areas there are gangsters on the road, with a knife killing each other.
However, this representation was far more frequently recognized but contested. For example: Even
if Im an asylum seeker in this country I did not come here to violate nobody you know. I come to
treat people the right way possible (Amadou).
Third, in the media sample, the representation of asylum seekers as a cultural threat mostly
focused on concerns regarding lack of integration and national identity threat. For example: As
millions stream into the country, the very concepts of nationhood and citizenship have been
destroyed (Fagge, Daily Express, 2006).
However, this representation featured much more prominently in focus groups, where cultural
threat was also strongly associated with religious difference. For example:
Well I think the biggest thing is religion, because that starts all issues people come across
here and build their own churches and create their own little world and I think they have to
remember that they are on British soil They should accept, if theyre accepted to come into
the country with the benefits that were giving them they should accept our culture. (Michaela,
Nottingham)
Fourth, the representation of asylum seekers as an uncontrollable threat involved two elements: overwhelming threat (in relation to numbers arriving) and invisible threat (in terms of
sneaking in and then disappearing). The media drew upon metaphors like floods, tides and
armies to describe asylum seekers entering the UK, and the backlog of applications was routinely
described as a mountain. Asylum seekers were also frequently described as sneaking in to the
UK undetected. For example: Many of the refugees are thought to have slipped through customs
in Dover and vanished Critics have repeatedly warned that Labours immigration chaos has left
Britain with a porous border and a magnet for illegals across the world (Sparks, Daily Express,
2006).
Focus groups produced very similar representations to the media sample and also focused on
the overwhelming and invisible threat posed by asylum seekers. For example: A lot of them come
over and disappear so who knows where they are? (Mike, Doncaster).
As with the media, the sense of threat attached to the idea of asylum seekers disappearing
was linked to the assumption that only unfounded claims will be rejected. For example:
If youve been rejected then theres obviously a reason and therefore you should go through
other means and not sort of stay around here flying under the wire and thats what I object
to, because you dont know what theyre doing they could be doing anything (Jeanne,
London).

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

302

CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 7(3)

Asylum Seekers as Illegitimate


As with threatening, this representation overlaps with and amplifies the representation of asylum
seekers as bad people. For example, representing asylum seekers as spongers and criminal
clearly positions them as illegitimate. However, asylum seekers are also represented as illegitimate in terms of being economic migrants coming to the UK to flee poverty and find work, and
this does not necessarily position them as bad people. In fact, some focus group participants
expressed empathy for individuals in this position.
The representation of asylum seekers as illegitimate featured frequently in the media sample,
particularly in the tabloid press. There was also a tendency to draw comparisons between genuine refugees and failed asylum seekers. For example:
Shadow immigration minister Damian Green, who unearthed the figures, said: No wonder
there are more than 250,000 failed asylum seekers in this country. This failure slows down the
system even further, which not only costs the taxpayer money but is also unfair on the genuine
refugee. (Whitehead, Daily Express, 2006b)
This was also one of the most common representations in focus groups, who contrasted asylum seekers with refugees rather than recognizing them as refugees at an earlier stage in the
application process. For example: An asylum seeker is someone who puts themselves up whereas
a refugee is someone who like you know had to be helped out, which is a bit different (Gary,
Basildon).
Focus group participants tended to support the principle of asylum, but nevertheless perceived
the majority of asylum seekers as not genuine. For example: I havent got a problem with anybody coming to this country who is genuinely seeking asylum but I think its very important that
process is managed, because I think theres a general feeling that its abused (Lisa, Nottingham).

The Spread and Transformation of Moral Panic Discourse


As noted, the negative representations identified in this analysis were remarkably similar in content and were easily reproduced, even by those who had not assimilated them. It is likely these
representations originated in the media, as they were reproduced in focus groups by participants
with no direct experience of asylum seekers or alternative sources of information. Furthermore,
tabloid terminology such as illegal asylum seekers and spongers was reproduced, regardless of
whether participants reportedly read these publications. The media was also directly cited to support negative arguments and misleading media reporting was reproduced. For example, consistent with previous research (see Pearce and Stockdale, 2009), inaccurate media reports that France
plays host to few asylum seekers were often drawn upon to support the argument that all or
most asylum seekers come to the UK.
Negative media representations that converged with existing opinion or experience were particularly powerful. For example, focus group participants living in social housing who were concerned about asylum seekers being housed in similar properties were particularly receptive to
tabloid media representations of asylum seekers as spongers. Although it was not possible to
establish whether it was through media influence or the selection of newspapers which supported
their existing views, there was evidence to support a link between media consumption and host

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

Pearce and Charman

303

representations of asylum seekers. For example, individuals who read the Guardian or the
Independent were aware of negative representations but had not assimilated them. This demonstrates the role of the media in facilitating and proliferating moral panic discourse and indicates
the power and spread of negative representations.
This analysis also demonstrated that core representations are resistant to change. For example,
following a Press Complaints Commission (2003) guidance note regarding the use of inaccurate
terminology, the media moved away from referring to illegal asylum seekers, replacing this terminology with failed asylum seekers. Although this is an ostensibly less negative term, through
repeatedly associating asylum seeker with failed applications, media coverage continues to represent asylum seekers as illegitimate and the core representation therefore remains unchanged.
Focus group participants also demonstrated this tendency through assimilating contrary information without altering their core representations. For example, when discovering that asylum seekers were unable to work, one participant moved from representing them as spongers to
interpreting this as an explanation for why they were criminals. In this way the new information
was assimilated without threatening the core representation of asylum seekers as bad people.
Although core elements are resistant to change, social representations have their genesis in
communication and are therefore subject to transformation. This can be seen in the development
of representations in the process of communication for example, the way that economic threat
was expanded to include taking our jobs when it entered the public domain and also in the
transformation of representations across time and in association with other representations. For
example, the representation of asylum seeker has been both informed and transformed by representations of terrorist and Muslim.

Social Identity Analysis Focus Groups


Social Categorization and Comparison

There was good evidence from focus groups to support both in-group and out-group social categorization and social comparison processes. This is important in establishing the role that intergroup dynamics play in underpinning receptivity to moral panic discourse. In every focus group,
asylum seekers were categorized as a distinct group from the host community, with group boundaries drawn on the basis of cultural differences. Language and religion were the most common
distinguishing factors identified. For example:
I think the major thing is the language. They dont learn the language. Im quite happy for
someone to come over here, willing to learn the language, live by our rules, yeah if they want
to worship someone else, fine, I am not religious at all so I couldnt give a monkeys who you
worship, but this country is a Christian country, it has been for nearly a thousand years and
maybe even earlier, certainly for a thousand years and then for these communities to try and
turn it into a Muslim state, Ill pick on Muslims because theyre the flavour of the month [others
laugh] but they seem to be the biggest offenders of trying to push their law and their religion
onto other cultures where they have no tolerance of any other culture or religion at all and
thats whats causing the biggest problem is the religion thats my biggest gripe and the
language, not learning English. (Luke, Basildon)

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

304

CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 7(3)

Such social comparison processes involved the selective accentuation of intergroup differences
that favoured the in-group. For example, the host community were characterized as hard-working
people with good standards in relation to politeness and cleanliness in contrast with untidy, lazy
asylum seekers: They set up their own culture and they do things necessarily which we would find
unacceptable, you know leave trash, make a mess of the countryside, dont respect our laws
(Michaela, Nottingham).
There was also evidence for the reproduction of negative stereotypes such as spongers and
illegal asylum seekers, and most focus group participants treated asylum seekers as a homogenous group, talking about what they do, rather than differentiating them as individuals. For
example: If theyre going to come into this country they must actually act like we do and keeping
places tidy and live like we do instead of like they want to live in their own country (Dennis,
Birmingham).

Social Belief Structures


The majority of focus group participants described group boundaries as impermeable, arguing
that it was not possible for asylum seekers to become British. For example, Maria (London) commented you cant become British you just are. Cultural differences were described as a primary
barrier to becoming British and consequently focus group participants tended to associate
Britishness with being born and raised in the UK. For example: I dont think the first generation
could [become British]. I think youve got to look at the second or third generation (Ken,
Rickmansworth).
Interestingly, these findings indicate that, contrary to the expectations of SIT, the perception of
permeable group boundaries did not predict negative responses to asylum seekers. Furthermore,
rather than fuelling identity threat, permeable boundaries were considered desirable. Focus group
participants seemed less concerned about social mobility than the idea that asylum seekers were
living in the UK as a separate group that does not wish to be assimilated, and this view was also
expressed by those who were generally more positive about asylum seekers. For example:
I think because that goes back to the kind of like willingness of the asylum seeker actually
wanting to integrate or the opposite which actually causes the problems where they actually
would appear if there are massive, particular areas, who dont want to integrate, so why do
you actually come here in the first place? (David, Nottingham)
Unsurprisingly, given the amount of hostility expressed towards asylum seekers, there was an
overwhelming impression that status differences were for the main part considered to be legitimate, with only one focus group participant offering a dissenting voice. The majority view was
that asylum seekers were unfairly advantaged in relation to the host community and that their
treatment should be more in accordance with that of a lower status group. For example:
Theyre coming over here to better conditions so horrible as it may sound, putting two kids into
a two bedroom flat so the adults got a room, that two kids have got another, thats not
destroying their human rights, thats giving them more of a life than what they had at home
straight away the governments funding them so this is where the problems kick in. So straight

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

Pearce and Charman

305

away I think theyre entitled to about thirty pound a week, whatever, the same as a British
person who has been here, theyre entitled to like an equal amount. (Sharon, London)
Those who indicated most hostility towards asylum seekers also tended to highlight the legitimacy of status differences and expressed concerns that not enough distinction was made between
the groups in terms of relative privileges. This is consistent with the predictions of SIT.

Social Identity Analysis Individual Interviews


Social Categorization and Comparison

There was variation in the extent to which individual interviewees identified as asylum seekers
and their reasons for doing so. Some did so because of shared experiences and the support provided by other asylum seekers. For example: If something bad happening for asylum seeker
they have a good contact between them. If anyone need help, they helping (Raman).
Others felt they had no choice but to identify as asylum seekers due to restrictions imposed
upon individuals who seek asylum in the UK. Not being allowed to work or study was described
as having a detrimental impact, not only financially but also in terms of the lack of opportunity for
alternative identifications. For example:
I just want to get a work permit to start work and to show that I can be a beneficial member
of society. I can be like other people be. I can show that Im not a criminal, Im not asylum
seeker, Im not a sponger, I am just, I am a person Unfortunately I cannot live in my country,
I want to live here, but we never have given a chance to show ourself. There is no any way even
to show, to express ourself, so how people know whats inside you. (Ali)
Interviewees were also aware of being identified by others as asylum seekers regardless of
how they identified themselves. For example:
You come to realize that you are this label, so one must be really, really strong to keep saying to
oneself that well I am not this label, this is a temporary thing but when you keep getting bombarded by the way you are treated on the basis of this label yeah you identify and I did identify
with that label and I did find it very dispowering, I found it really, really dispowering. (Babir)
Those who did not identify as asylum seekers tended to see it as a label that is applied to a
disparate group of people, who at best have nothing in common and at worst come from opposing sides of conflicts. They felt no different from anyone else and considered themselves as individuals. For example: Its just a name. So an individual, the way you were brought up and the way
you are is you but asylum is just a name (Mary).
All interviewees had at some point experienced host responses in terms consistent with being
categorized as an out-group. For example:
British people, unfortunately, not all of them but mostly the majority, once they define you with
that label they always see you with that label and there is always a barrier between you and
them because you are an asylum seeker. (Amin)

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

306

CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 7(3)

All interviewees also felt the UK media failed to differentiate between individuals categorized
as asylum seekers and the majority of media coverage, particularly the tabloid press, was hostile,
drawing on negative stereotypes of asylum seekers as criminals and spongers. Further, that the
media generalized negative behaviour of individuals to all group members. For example:
If I take one example, I think it was last year here in Sheffield area, Im not sure asylum seeker
what he did wrong he came to the court and hes been charged after few days when they
published in the newspaper and people they read it, and after few days another English man
he write this article it said kick asylum seeker out. Why you kick asylum seeker? We are
agree asylum seeker, some of asylum seeker, they did something wrong, but if we check the
prison its not just asylum seeker there. There are also many English people there and when the
English people they did something wrong the English they say kick English out? (Nozer)
As a consequence of negative media stereotyping, some felt asylum seeker had become a
stigmatized social identity. For example, Ali suggested asylum seeker is now a figure of hate.
However, these interviews also revealed the complexity of categorization processes and that different social identities may overlap. For example, several interviewees felt the media and the host
community conflate asylum seeker with being Muslim: Religion and asylum seeker in this country are the same people, thats the way people judge people. They think ok they come here and
seek asylum and they are Muslims. They do that in the papers all the time (Amadou).
These interviews also suggest that other social categorizations may have equal or more influence on interactions between asylum seekers and the host community. For example, being identified as Muslim and Middle Eastern was described by many interviewees as being more problematic
than simply being identified as an asylum seeker. When asked whether he would be more concerned about people knowing where he was from or knowing he was an asylum seeker Ali
responded: First of all Im more concerned about both to be honest, but Im more concerned
to say, Im more avoid to say Im Iraqi rather than asylum seeker (Ali).
Other interviewees indicated that skin colour was a key issue. For example:
Im from Turkey and there are more hostile attitudes against African and Asian and Arabs asylum seekers I can say, because I read a lot of news about asylum seekers who has AIDS or some
other illness which they blame them the opinion against Asian, Arab and then African,
especially African people is more hostile the colour is a very important issue as well. If your
skin colour is whiter than others you feel more secure and then you despise other. (Adil)
There was therefore evidence from all interviews to indicate that host and media responses
were experienced in terms consistent with social categorization and comparison processes predicted by SIT. However, their social identity as asylum seekers was not the only or necessarily the
most important factor in interviewees interactions with members of the host community.

Coping With Stigmatized Identity


There was evidence that individuals who are categorized as asylum seekers adopt a variety of
strategies for coping with stigmatized group membership, at both an individual and group level.

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

Pearce and Charman

307

For some interviewees, successful integration with the host community led to the perception of
permeable barriers and the adoption of social mobility strategies. For example:
Its different between me and somebody else whos sitting there and not trying to study anything, to not get involved with the news or the community, dont socialise with other people
when you socialise with the community you are in and you more involved with these people
that we are living with you forget about what you are actually and you forget that you are
asylum seekers because you are more involved with other people than asylum seekers. (Hawraz)
For others, disidentification was not due to successful integration, but because they had assimilated negative representations of asylum seekers but did not feel that these characteristics
applied to themselves. For these individuals a social mobility strategy was only partially successful
as there was tension between this lack of identification and the recognition that they may be
identified in this way by others. For example:
I dont care what they say about asylum seekers because I know that Im different and I dont
want, I dont even like to be an asylum seeker, but situation brings you here, makes you
become an asylum seeker, you dont have a choice I dont tell people Im an asylum seeker,
I dont know why I just feel very, very different, like if you tell someone youre an asylum seeker
they treat you different, you cannot socialise very well with them. (Ndulu)
Group-level strategies largely focused on contesting negative representations with a view to
re-evaluating what it means to be an asylum seeker, through representing asylum seekers as
law-abiding and as people who make a large economic and cultural contribution to the UK. For
example: We are a ready workforce to contribute to the economy. A lot of them are doctors,
engineers you know (Amin).
There was also evidence to suggest that some participants adopted social change strategies,
for example by drawing attention to the ways in which asylum seekers are different, but equal:
I think we shouldnt insist on being integrated you know, because I have my kind of food, you
have your kind of food, you might happen to like mine and I might happen to like yours which
is great when it happens, but apart from that we are just different, by definition or by background or by whatever so it is just mutual respect and peaceful co-existence really with other
groups. (Lilith)
These interviews demonstrated limits to social change strategies available to a group which is
inherently heterogeneous. For example, there was no evidence for the use of social creativity
strategies in which a new dimension for comparison was adopted as this would involve highlighting shared group features.

Discussion and Conclusion


This article presented the results of a study designed to examine whether a social psychological
approach to moral panic could be used to (a) theorize the content as well as process of moral
panic, and (b) understand the cause and impact of this response.

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

308

CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 7(3)

SRT was used to examine the content of moral panic discourse. It proved particularly useful in
identifying commonalities and differences in the way representations were used by the media,
host community, and individuals who have sought refuge in the UK. It also mapped the spread
and transformation of social representations, demonstrating the widespread dispersal of moral
panic discourses about asylum seekers, and the way these develop as they enter the public
domain. SRT enabled examination of stable core elements of representations and more contextdependent peripheral elements, resulting in a more nuanced analysis than would be provided by
a content analysis which just identified key themes.
Mapping the social representations of asylum seekers also established the representational
context in which folk devils negotiate their identities. This highlighted factors that delimit possibilities for identity construction, as well as the role played by moral panic discourses in maintaining
particular patterns of social relations. SIT was integrated into this analysis to examine intergroup
processes that may help explain the cause and impact of moral panic. Focus group results supported SIT predictions regarding the importance of intergroup dynamics in public receptivity to
moral panic discourse, but concern and hostility were not solely attributable to categorization and
comparison processes.
Material as well as psychological factors contributed to experience of threat, with concerns
about economic impact and perceived unfair distribution of resources featuring frequently in
focus group discussions. However, although competition for resources contributed to hostility
particularly among participants who were on benefits or working in industries affected by foreign
labour there was no evidence for direct negative economic experiences with asylum seekers.
Furthermore, concern about the perceived negative impact of asylum seekers on British identity
and culture played a key role in hostility, further underlining the importance of identity concerns
in a moral panic response.
This study also revealed some challenges in applying SIT to moral panics. Firstly, a moral panic
analysis focuses on a relationship between two groups: those who are doing the panicking and
the folk devils. However, SIT recognizes that individuals have multiple identities and there is no
set form of social categorization in which intergroup relations are invariable across all contexts
(Reicher, 2004). Furthermore, categories are socially not individually determined, so may be
imposed as well as chosen. For example, asylum seeker is a complex identity, conferred by others
to a heterogeneous group with no obvious shared features. It is also, at least technically, a temporary identity.
As this label is applied to individuals who are, for the most part, ethnically and culturally different from the host community, it is also very difficult to separate out the impact of their status as
folk devils from other racial and religious identities. For example, when asked about their experiences as asylum seekers, it was common for individual interviewees to respond with answers
about their experiences as Kurds, Muslims or Black Africans. Similarly, focus group participants
used asylum seeker to refer to a variety of social identity groups, including economic migrants
from EU Accession States, as well as well-established ethnic communities in the UK.
Therefore, the idea that we can deal with the implications of moral panic on the basis of one
single label is likely to be an oversimplification, and there is more work to be done to establish
the impact of moral panic on folk devils in situations where a number of different stigmatized
identities are involved. Despite this, it was clear that interviewees felt that asylum seeker was a
particularly negative label and consequently many sought to hide or reject this identity. However,

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

Pearce and Charman

309

they were also aware that they were likely to be identified as asylum seekers and associated
with the negative stereotypes this entails, regardless of their self-definition. This clearly had a
negative impact in terms of their self-esteem and their ability to form relationships, particularly
with members of the host community.
Secondly, despite the fact that focus group responses were consistent with intergroup processes predicted by SIT, this approach could not predict the circumstances in which participants
were more or less hostile towards asylum seekers. Furthermore, while intergroup boundaries were
considered initially impermeable, focus group participants were keen that successful asylum applicants should be assimilated into the host community, adopting their values and cultural practices
to become part of the in-group. This suggests that in practice there may not be a straightforward
dichotomy in social belief structures. Similarly, individual interviewees did not treat intergroup
boundaries as strictly permeable or impermeable, but described them as permeable in some contexts but not others. Further research is therefore required to explore the complexities of these
boundaries and assess the reasons for lack of predictive validity with regard to this aspect of
intergroup relations.
While it is important to recognize the limitations with this approach and that, as with previous
models, it will not be able to provide a universal explanation for moral panic, this analysis nevertheless demonstrates the potential for social psychological theory to extend the explanatory value
of moral panic. The use of a social psychological perspective provides an opportunity to investigate the psychological impact of asymmetric power relations on those without access to cultural
capital, enhancing the critical edge of moral panic and increasing the likelihood that moral panic
research can achieve Cohens (2002) aim of exposing social injustice.

Note
1. To preserve the anonymity of participants, all names have been changed. Selected quotations are used for
illustrative purposes.

References
Abric, J.C. (1996) Specific processes of social representations. Papers on Social Representations 5(1): 7780.
Attride-Stirling, J. (2001) Thematic networks: An analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research
1(3): 385405.
Barclay, A., Bowes, A., Ferguson, I., Sim, D., Valenti, M., Fard, S. and MacIntosh, S. (2003) Asylum Seekers
in Scotland. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive Social Research. Available at: www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/
social/asis-00.asp (accessed 23 May 2011).
Bauer, M.W. and Gaskell, G. (1999) Towards a paradigm for research on social representations. Journal for
the Theory of Social Behaviour 29(2): 163186.
Berkeley, R., Khan, D. and Ambikaipaker, M. (2006) Whats New About New Immigrants in Twenty-First Century Britain? York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Available at: www.runnymeadetrust.org/publications/
pdfs/what is new about new immigrants.pdf (accessed 23 May 2007).
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3:
77101.
Clarke, S. and Garner, S. (2005) Identity, Home and Asylum: A Psycho-Social Perspective. A working paper.
Available at: www.open.ac.uk/socialsciences/identities/pdf/identity_home_asylum.pdf (accessed 23 May
2011).
Cohen, S. (1972) Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of Mods and Rockers. London: Granada Publishing
Ltd.

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

310

CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 7(3)

Cohen, S. (2002) Moral panics as cultural politics: Introduction to Third Edition. In: Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of Mods and Rockers (3rd ed.). London: Routledge, viixxxvii.
Critcher, C. (2003) Moral Panics and the Media. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Critcher, C. (2006) Introduction: More questions than answers. In: Critcher, C. (Ed.) Critical Readings: Moral
Panics and the Media. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press, 14.
Critcher, C. (2008) Moral panic analysis: Past, present and future. Sociology Compass 2(4): 11271144.
deYoung, M. (1998) Another look at moral panics: The case of satanic day care centers. Deviant Behavior
19: 122.
Duncan, J.H. (2006) Letters: To the point. Daily Mirror, 23 January.
Fagge, N. (2006) Migrant riot. Daily Express, 4 March.
Finney, N. (2005) Key Issues Navigation Guide: Public Opinion on Asylum and Refugee Issues. London: ICAR.
Available at: www.icar.org.uk (accessed 23 May 2011).
Finney, N. and Robinson, V. (2007) Local press re-presentation and contestation of national discourses on asylum seeker dispersal. CSSR Working Paper. Available at: www.ccsr.ac.uk/publications/working/2007-01.
pdf (accessed 5 June 2007).
Flick, U. (2009) An Introduction to Qualitative Research (4th ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Gaskell, G. (2000) Individual and group interviewing. In: Bauer, M.W. and Gaskell, G. (Eds.) Qualitative
Researching with Text, Image and Sound. London: Sage Publications Ltd, 3856.
Gaskell, G. and Bauer, M.W. (2000) Towards public accountability: Beyond sampling, reliability and validity.
In: Bauer, M.W. and Gaskell, G. (Eds.) Qualitative Researching with Text, Image and Sound. London: Sage
Publications Ltd, 336350.
Goode, E. (2000) No need to panic? A bumper crop of books on moral panics. Sociological Forum 15(3):
543552.
Goode, E. and Ben-Yehuda, N. (1994) Moral Panics: The Social Construction of Deviance. Oxford: Blackwell
Publishers Ltd.
Grillo, R. (2005) Saltdean cant cope: Protests against asylum-seekers in an English seaside suburb. Ethnic
and Racial Studies 28(2): 235260.
Hall, S., Critcher, C., Jefferson, T., Clarke, J. and Roberts, B. (1978) Policing the Crisis: Mugging, the State,
and Law and Order. London: Macmillan.
Hier, S.P. (2003) Risk and panic in late modernity: Implications of the converging sites of social anxiety. British
Journal of Sociology 54(1): 320.
ICAR (2004) Media Image, Community Impact: Assessing the Impact of Media and Political Images of Refugees and Asylum Seekers on Community Relations in London. Report of a pilot research study commissioned by the Mayor of London. London: ICAR, Kings College.
Kushner, T. (2003) Meaning nothing but good: Ethics, history and asylum-seeker phobia in Britain. Patterns
of Prejudice 37(3): 257276.
Lewis, M. (2005) Asylum: Understanding Public Attitudes. London: Institute for Public Policy Research.
McCorckle, R.C. and Miethe, T.D. (1998) The political and organisational response to gangs: An examination
of a moral panic in Nevada. Justice Quarterly 15(1): 4164.
Moloney, G. and Walker, I. (2007) Introduction. In: Moloney, G. and Walker, I. (Eds.) Social Representations
and Identity: Content, Process and Power. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 18.
Moscovici, S. (1963) Attitudes and opinions. Annual Review of Psychology 14: 231260.
Moscovici, S. (2001) Why a theory of social representations? In: Deaux, K. and Philogene, G. (Eds.) Representations of the Social: Bridging Theoretical Traditions. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 835.
Moscovici, S. (2008 [1961/1976]) Psychoanalysis: Its Image and Its Public. David Macey (Trans.). Cambridge:
Polity Press.
Pascoe-Watson, G. (2006) Sheer incompetence Labours Mayday meltown. Sun, 1 May, p.2.
Pearce, J.M. (2010) Asylum seekers in the UK: A social psychological understanding of a moral panic. Unpublished doctoral thesis, London Metropolitan University, London.
Pearce, J.M. and Stockdale, J.E. (2009) UK responses to the asylum issue: A comparison of lay and expert
views. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology 19(2): 142155.

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

Pearce and Charman

311

Press Complaints Commission (2003) Guidance Notes on Refugees and Asylum Seekers. Available at: http://
www.pcc.org.uk/advice/editorials-detail.html?article=OTE= (accessed 23 May 2011).
Reicher, S. (2004) The context of social identity: Domination, resistance and change. Political Psychology
25(6): 921945.
Reynolds, K.J. and Turner, J.C. (2001) Prejudice as a group process: The role of social identity. In: Augoustinos, M.
and Reynolds, KJ. (Eds.) Understanding Prejudice, Racism and Social Conflict. London: Sage Publications
Ltd, 159178.
Robinson, V. (2003) Redefining the problem and challenging the assumptions. In: Robinson, V., Andersson, R.
and Musterd, S. (Eds.) Spreading the Burden? A Review of Policies to Disperse Asylum Seekers and
Refugees. Bristol: Policy Press, 159178.
St Cyr, J. (2003) The folk devil reacts: Gangs and moral panics. Criminal Justice Review 28(1): 2646.
Sparks, R. (1995) Entertaining the crisis: Television and moral enterprise. In: Kidd-Hewitt, D. and Osborne, R.
(Eds.) Crime and Media: The Postmodern Spectacle. London: Pluto Press, 4966.
Sparks, I. (2006) Jailed: Gang that smuggled 1,000 migrants into UK. Daily Express, 21 January.
Tajfel, H. (1978) The Social Psychology of Minorities. Report No. 38 for Minority Rights Group.
Tajfel, H. (1981) Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Thompson, K. (1998) Moral Panics. London: Routledge.
Turner, J.C. (1999) Some current issues in research on social identity and self-categorisation theories. In:
Ellemers, N., Spears, R. and Doosje, B. (Eds.) Social Identity: Context, Commitment, Content. Oxford:
Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 634.
Ungar, S. (2001) Moral panic versus the risk society: the implications of the changing sites of social anxiety.
British Journal of Sociology 52(2): 271291.
Warr, D.J. (2005) It was fun but we dont usually talk about these things: Analyzing sociable interaction in
focus groups. Qualitative Inquiry 11(2): 200225.
Whitehead, T. (2006a) Reid: Terrorists here have means of mass destruction. Daily Express, 10 August.
Whitehead, T. (2006b) New loophole for missing migrants. Daily Express, 2 October.

Downloaded from cmc.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on February 11, 2015

S-ar putea să vă placă și