In recent years, wars, political unrest, ethnic or religious conflicts and economic instability have displaced millions of people worldwide. These immigrants hold varied skills that may benefit the host countries, but the resettlement of these masses has given rise to anti-immigrant sentiments and stereotypes in the U.S. and abroad with governments taking or threatening to take harsher actions to limit immigration (^{Quintero, 2017}; ^{Sunstein, 2016}). Fears of immigrants lacking abilities, taking jobs away from citizens or corrupting American values persist and are as present today as they were in the nation’s founding (^{Merelli, 2017}; ^{Shear & Benner, 2018}). However, contrasting views supporting the benefits of immigration are also present. Evidence shows that immigration vitalizes the host country. For example, immigrants have higher rates of entrepreneurialism and acquisition of skills than natives of a host country (Lofstrom, 2014; ^{Reeves, 2016}). Moreover, immigrant children demonstrate extraordinarily strong upward educational and income mobility of any group of children (^{Betts & Lofstrom, 2000}; ^{Reeves, 2016}).

People immigrate to the United States for different reasons, to attend school, for leisure, to reunite with family members, for political reasons, to escape religious or ethnic persecution and seek asylum or in search of better jobs to support their family (^{Navarro, 2009}). Regardless of the reasons, immigrants bring with them varied skills which reflect the range of the educational opportunities and training that they received in their home countries (^{Moore, 2017}). Many were farmers, electricians, carpenters, paramedics, dentists, physicians, therapists or pharmacists in their respective countries (^{Moore, 2017}).

We examined the range of attitudes and sentiments toward immigrants, and we asked if the prejudices and discrimination varied as a function of their skills and competences. Though stereotypes of immigrants persist and are generalized (^{Caprariello, Cuddy, & Fiske, 2009}), we posited that sentiments toward immigrants vary, and that how welcoming hosts are of immigrants depends on the perceived competences and warmth of the immigrants. We further asked if personality and acculturation levels of their hosts mitigated these prejudices and discrimination.

The Stereotypic Content Model (SCM) has been widely used to explain why people hold stereotypes about others, and more importantly, are prejudiced and discriminate against others ( ^{Lee & Fiske, 2006}). According to this model, how we feel and act toward others are based on two criteria: our perceptions of others’ competence and warmth (^{Lee & Fiske, 2006}). Competence may be assessed based on an individual’s acquired skills, performance level, job status and in-come, with higher competence attributed to those with better skills and performance, and higher income levels and job status. A person’s warmth is based on similarity and cooperation, with higher warmth attributed to those with shared common attitudes and who contribute to group goals. The two dimensions are assessed in combination. For example, the homeless. who are perceived low on both warmth and competence, are likely to elicit contempt and disgust and be demeaned (^{Lee & Fiske, 2006}). The elderly, perceived to be high in warmth and low in competence, elicit feelings of warmth and pity and are likely to be helped. College students, perceived as both high in warmth and competence, evoke feelings of admiration and are welcomed.

The model is useful in assessing prejudices toward immigrants. For example, immigrants who are perceived as competing for American jobs as compared to those who do not, elicit lower warmth attributions and greater discrimination (^{Caprariello, Cuddy, & Fiske, 2009}). ^{Levine & Campbell (1972)} labelled such a competition for perceived limited resources Realistic Conflict theory. By contrast, one would expect that low-skilled immigrants would be perceived as less threatening because they are not competing for jobs (^{Fiske, 2012}). However, evidence suggests that the American public views low status migrants with much more contempt and disgust, seeking to exclude them from the country (^{Caprariello et al., 2009}). In a society that places greater value on merit than on need or equality (^{Berman, Murphy-Berman & Singh, 1985}), low competence may outweigh attributions of warmth or sympathies for those in need.

There is also evidence that fear and anxiety of an out-group, with different cultural practices and a language, may exacerbate negative attitudes toward them (^{Plant, Butz, & Tartakovsky, 2008}). Times of economic decline may heighten prejudices and evoke feelings of relative deprivation in the hosts (^{Smith & Pettigrew, 2015}). Nevertheless, prejudice may be mitigated if immigrants are perceived assimilating to the host culture. When an out group adapts and cooperates with the in group, their intent is seen as friendly and trustworthy (^{Fiske, Cuddy, & Glick, 2006}). Indeed, prejudices may be mitigated by a forged commonness in group identity (^{Gaertner & Dovidio, 2012}). By contrast, an uncooperative out group is ascribed negative traits and is more likely to be discriminated against (^{Fiske, Cuddy, & Glick, 2006}; ^{Riek, Mania, & Gaertner, 2006}).

The model may prove useful in testing prejudices and discrimination that favor or disfavor an immigrant based on their perceived competence levels and warmth (^{Cuddy, Glick, & Fiske, 2007}), but personality factors, attitudes and acculturation levels may also provide a better understanding of prejudices toward immigrants. ^{Ekehammar and Akrami, (2003)} proposed that attitudes toward various out groups stem from one or more personality basic traits. Their findings show that Openness to Experience and Agree-ableness were highly significant and negatively correlated with generalized prejudice. Moreover, ^{Hodson, Hogg, and MacInnis (2009)} found that Openness to experience negatively predicted prejudice even when statistically controlling for other Big Five factors. In this study, the Right Wing Authoritarianism scale (RWA) and the Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) were negatively correlated with Openness whereas SDO was negatively correlated with Agree-ableness (^{Hodson, Hogg, & MacInnis, 2009}). These findings suggest that people who score high on openness to experience and agreeableness may be more welcoming and accepting of immigrants compared to those who score low on both personality traits.

Attitudes are the most direct way of measuring prejudice toward others, and indeed sentiments toward immigrants have been openly expressed in opinion polls, public debates and policy forums, and range from outright hostility and fear to sympathy and support (^{Navarro, 2009}; ^{Suarez-Orozco, C. & Suarez Orozco, M., 2002}). Immigrants have been depicted as incompatible with American culture, cunning opportunists who manipulate the system, and culturally inferior and prone to crime. Positive attributes describe immigrants as hardworking and dedicated, loyal and willing to make familial sacrifices, and ambitious and entrepreneurial (^{Suarez-Orozco, C. & Suarez Orozco, M., 2002}).

Pre-existing stereotypes and prejudices based on others’ race, gender, nationality, religion, profession, socioeconomic status, and similar social categories may be an important source of error in our judgments of others (^{Cuddy, Glick, & Beninger, 2011}), and thus, important to take into account. For example, ^{Plant et al. (2008)} found that participants with more reported anger and anxiety toward out groups avoided interethnic interactions and blamed the out group if the interactions were negative. Specifically, anger in White participants was linked with avoidance of Hispanics, while anxiety in Hispanics was associated with avoidance of Whites (^{Plant et al., 2008}). By contrast, if Hispanics and Whites had more positive expectations about interacting with each other, behavioral avoidance of the out group was lower. (^{Plant et al., 2008}). Thus, individuals may respond with greater affect and make more extreme decisions about who to trust, doubt, defend, avoid or associate with based on existing stereotypes and prejudices (^{Cuddy, Glick, & Beninger, 2011}). Thus, pre-existing attitudes toward others may influence how we feel and behave toward them.

Another study by ^{Binder, Polinard, and Wrinkle (1997)} measured Mexican-American and Anglo attitudes toward immigration reform. The study, conducted in the Rio Grande Valley, and bordering Mexico, involved a large Latino population. This study found that Latino attitudes toward immigration policies can be characterized as presenting “two competing views, which involves the cultural perspective and the socio-economic status (SES) perspective”. The former suggests that Latinos, because of their cultural affinity with nations south of the U.S. border, are more likely than Anglos to oppose restrictions imposed by immigration policies. The latter, on the other hand, suggests that differences between Latino and Anglo immigration attitudes are less a function of national origin than how integrated Latinos are into American society. Thus, the more integrated the Latino populations are into American society, the more the Latino attitudes will resemble Anglo attitudes toward immigration (^{Binder, Polinard, & Wrinkle, 1997}). By contrast, the more Mexican a respondent identified him or herself to be, the less restrictive was their stance toward immigration policies. These findings suggest that the more acculturated a Hispanic is, the less welcoming they will be towards an immigrant.

Our key research question then asked whether individuals’ sentiments and behaviors toward an immigrant would vary as a function of their perceived competence and warmth. We reasoned that prejudices and discrimination would vary, and that individuals would be more welcoming of immigrants who were perceived as warm and competent. Thus, for the first hypothesis we predict that more positive feelings and actions will be expressed toward immigrants who are perceived to be warmer and more competent.

Auxiliary research questions about how prejudice is expressed toward immigrants also concerned personal factors and pre-existing prejudices. Specifically, we reasoned that individuals who were higher in Openness to experience and Agreeableness would be more welcoming of immigrants. Thus, for our second hypothesis, we predict that more positive feelings and actions will be expressed toward immigrants by those who were more open to experience and agreeable. Moreover, attitudes and behaviors had to be assessed controlling for pre-existing prejudices. For our third hypothesis we expected that individuals with more positive attitudes toward immigrants would be more welcoming of immigrants.

We also reasoned that those who were less acculturated would be more welcoming of immigrants. Thus, we predicted for our fourth hypothesis that within the Hispanic sample, the less acculturated Hispanics will express more positive feelings and behaviors toward immigrants.