Multiple Western countries face widespread and systematic misperceptions of immigration, particularly with respect to underestimating migrants' economic contributions and overestimating asylum-related burdens. These misperceptions are strongly linked to negative attitudes, raising important questions about the psychological and informational drivers behind them.


This study investigates the role of media diet (i.e., the sources, formats, and frequency of media consumption) in shaping immigration misperceptions and attitudes. We exploit granular media consumption data among a nationally representative sample of 1200 adults to test three pre-registered hypotheses: (1) whether certain media sources (e.g., television, online news, social media) are associated with greater misperceptions of immigration; (2) whether some formats have protective effects, reducing misperceptions; and (3) whether shifts in media diet since the COVID-19 pandemic are linked to more negative immigration attitudes.


Using regression modelling and structural equation modelling, we examine the pathways between media diet, misperceptions, and attitudes, controlling for demographic and attitudinal covariates such as education and financial stress. This approach allows us to test whether media diet mediates the relationship between socio-economic factors and immigration attitudes, and whether misperceptions serve as a key mechanism in this process.


The findings clarify how media exposure interacts with cognitive biases and social identity processes to shape public opinion. They also offer practical insights for policymakers and communicators seeking to counter misinformation and foster more informed, inclusive public discourse. By linking psychological theory with real-world data, this study advances understanding of how media environments influence social attitudes in a rapidly changing information landscape.