Correspondence address: Margareta Gregurović, Institut za migracije i narodnosti, T rg Stjepana Radića 
3, HR-10000 Zagreb, e-mail: margareta.gregurovic@imin.hr; Marko Mrakovčić, Sveučilište u Rijeci, 
Pravni fakultet, Hahlić 6, HR-51000 Rijeka, e-mail: marko.mrakovcic@uniri.hr. 
Law Students and Social Distance towards  
Migrants and Some Other Relevant Groups  
in Croatia
Increased migration and the effects of the 2015/16 European migration/refugee crisis are 
reflected in changes in the attitudes towards migrants and members of certain religions. Law 
students, who are thought to come into contact with the issue of migration in their work, are 
of greater concern. This paper presents the results of a survey conducted in 2019 among 1
st 
and 4
th
 year law students at four law schools in Croatia. The study aims to determine how 
close a relationship (on Bogardus’ social distance scale) law students would achieve with the 
various types of migrants, Roma, and members of different religions. The results show that law 
students are likely to have the closest relationship with immigrants from North America and 
Western European countries and express the greatest average distance towards asylum seekers. 
They associate the greatest social closeness with Catholics. The analyses of the effects of 
sociodemographic characteristics, contextual indicators, and value orientations and attitudes 
on social distance imply that nationalism has the strongest effect on all groups. 
 
Keywords: migrants, religious groups, social distance, law students, Croatia.  
Študenti prava in socialna distanca do migrantov  
in nekaterih drugih skupin na Hrvaškem  
Povečan obseg migracij in vpliv evropske migracijske/begunske krize v obdobju 2015–2016 
se odražata v spremembah odnosa do migrantov in pripadnikov nekaterih verskih skupin. 
Zaskrbljenost vzbujajo predvsem študenti prava, ki se bodo z migracijami srečevali pri svojem 
delu. V prispevku so predstavljeni rezultati raziskave, izvedene leta 2019 med študenti 1. in 4. 
letnika prava na štirih pravnih fakultetah na Hrvaškem. Namen raziskave je ugotoviti, kako tesen 
odnos (po Bogardusovi lestvici socialne distance) bi študenti prava vzpostavili s posameznimi 
vrstami migrantov, Romi in pripadniki različnih verskih skupin. Rezultati kažejo, da bi študenti 
najtesnejši odnos vzpostavili s priseljenci iz Severne Amerike in zahodnoevropskih držav, največjo 
povprečno distanco pa izražajo do prosilcev za azil. Največjo socialno bližino izkazujejo do 
katoličanov. Analize vpliva družbeno-demografskih značilnosti, kontekstualnih kazalnikov 
ter vrednostnih usmeritev in stališč na socialno distanco nakazujejo, da ima pri vseh skupinah 
najmočnejši vpliv nacionalizem.
Ključne besede: migranti, verske skupine, socialna distanca, študenti prava, Hrvaška. 
Margareta Gregurović, Marko Mrakovčić
TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES
RAZPRAVE IN GRADIVO REVIJA ZA NARODNOSTNA VPRAŠANJA
89 / 2022, p. 49–72
ISSN 0354-0286 Print/ISSN 1854-5181 Online             © Inštitut za narodnostna vprašanja (Ljubljana), http://www.inv.si
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72

89 / 2022 TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Law Students and Social Distance towards Migrants and Some ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72    
1. Introduction
In recent years, two situations have led to two concepts grounded in sociolo-
gy becoming ubiquitous elements of political and public discourse and debate 
throughout Europe.
The first one relates to the issue of migration, which became an unavoidable 
topic in the EU and many of its member states during and after the migration/
refugee crisis. The latter is a geopolitical term frequently used by the media and 
the political and general public to describe the arrival of large numbers of refugees 
to the EU in 2015 and 2016 (Rogelj 2017). According to Eurostat (2022), the 
number of immigrants who applied for asylum in the EU for the first time in 
2015 (1,216,860) and 2016 (1,166,815) more than doubled compared to the 
pre-crisis period in 2014 (530,560). This influx of migrants posed major chal -
lenges to the Union’s common asylum policy and pointed to the need for its 
reform. Accordingly, the European Commission presented the first package of 
proposals for the reform of the common asylum system in May 2016 and the 
second one in July, both aimed at a better and fairer distribution of applications 
among member states (Bježančević 2019). However, these ideas and the Brus-
sels policy were not endorsed by all political options in all member states. Rather, 
citing the climate of the Brexit referendum, the migration/refugee crisis issue 
revealed the weaknesses of the European project and became a fertile ground 
for the Eurosceptics and the sovereigntists. By rejecting the EU’s proposed mi-
grant quotas, they sought to change the European political scene (cf. Petrović et 
al. 2021; Lončar 2020). The Visegrad Group (Czechia, Hungary, Poland, and 
Slovakia) – which calls itself the “protectors of Europe from foreign invaders” – 
opposed Germany’s policy of “welcoming” migrants and the “Brussels” reform 
of the common asylum system (Strnad 2022, 73). By placing the migration issue 
at the centre of the EU political arena, a sharp cleavage emerged in public and 
political discourse between the Visegrad vision of a nationalist Europe and the 
Brussels vision of an open, multicultural, and cosmopolitan Europe. The po -
liticization of the migration issue crystallized anti-migrant attitudes and fuelled 
cultural insecurities among some people. This allowed the Visegrad Group to  
counter the Brussels idea of greater European integration with its notion of  
defending national sovereignty (Strnad 2022, 73).
Regarding Croatia’s experience with the migration/refugee crisis, it should 
be noted that an estimated 650,000 migrants transited through Croatia on what 
is known as the Balkan route during the aforementioned period, but only a small 
number of migrants applied for asylum in Croatia.
1 
Moreover, it is important 
to emphasize that in the mentioned period, Croatian citizens were confronted 
for the first time with the phenomenon of mass migration of people from a sig-
nificantly different socio-cultural background. Although the influx of migrants 
started at the time of the highly polarized 2015 parliamentary election campaign 

51
 RAZPRAVE IN GRADIVO REVIJA ZA NARODNOSTNA VPRAŠANJA 89 / 2022
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Študenti prava in socialna distanca do migrantov in nekaterih ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72
dominated by ideological issues and significant polarization between the left 
and the right, the issue of migration did not significantly influence the dominant 
political discourse of this election campaign (Henjak 2018). Moreover, state ac-
tors and the media portrayed migrants as having similar experiences to Croa-
tian citizens during the Homeland War in the 1990s and therefore sympathized 
therewith while also assuring that the ultimate goal of migrants was to reach the 
developed countries of Western Europe and not to stay in Croatia (Henjak 2018, 
3–4). In the campaign for the 2016 early parliamentary election, the issue of the 
migration/refugee crisis had relatively little significance. However, considering 
the extent and duration of migrations on the Balkan route and the reactions of 
some politicians and political options thereto, it appeared that this situation and 
the reactions to it negatively affected citizens’ attitudes both in the mentioned 
period and in the following years (Henjak 2018; Vuksan-Ćusa 2018; Ajduković 
et al. 2019).
The second situation relates to the use of the term “social distance” in the 
context of discussions on the containment of the COVID-19 pandemic. Al-
though the term has become more popular than ever, in most public discussions 
it is used diametrically opposite to its use in sociology and other social sciences. 
In their media appearances, numerous actors used this term when referring to 
the maintenance of physical distance between people in everyday face-to-face 
social interactions. Experts, media commentators and policymakers incorrectly 
used the term social distance instead of simple and precise terms such as “physi-
cal distance” or “separation” when discussing the measures needed to contain 
the spread of infections (Rukavina 2020). Another problem related to the use 
of the aforementioned term in the general public and the professional commu-
nity is that the concept of distance is sometimes equated with the concept of 
closeness. This is in contrast to Simmel’s original conceptualization (as well as 
Bogardus’ operationalization of the concept, 1925b; 1933) of the term in the 
context of reflection on the nature of social relations because he believed that 
“the unity of nearness and remoteness” i.e., closeness and distance, is integral to 
any relationship between people (Simmel 2001, 152). Another problem is the 
ad hoc revisions (changes or additions) of the categories, either of the original or 
the revised versions of Bogardus’ social distance scale. Numerous studies con-
ducted in Croatia in an attempt to revise the categories of this scale usually did 
so by changing or adding individual categories without providing an explanation 
of the methodology used for this purpose (Ivković 2010). Finally, the problem 
with Bogardus’ social distance scale is that its applicability under contemporary 
social conditions differs from the time when Bogardus constructed the instru-
ment, as does its precision and sensitivity as a measurement tool in general (Par-
rillo & Donoghue 2005; Mather et al. 2017), or temporality (Tusini 2022).
Considering the above challenges and the first results of the research study 
presented herein, focusing on different aspects of attitudes of law students to-

52
wards Middle East migrants (see Mrakovčić & Gregurović 2020),
 
the paper 
aims to investigate the level of social distance expressed by law students towards 
different groups of immigrants to Croatia, both in terms of the geographical and 
socio-cultural background of immigrants and in terms of their religious affilia-
tion, as well as the level of social distance towards asylum seekers and asylees/
refugees in general and towards Roma – a social group towards which the great-
est distance is usually expressed.
 
W e also wanted to investigate whether members 
of certain groups are perceived as potentially desirable and potentially undesir-
able immigrants in our country, and how good a predictor of social distance to-
wards these immigrant groups are the different value orientations, attitudes and 
socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents. The reason for choosing 
law students is related to the fact that they, as future experts, are more likely to 
come into contact with the analysed groups and to ensure the implementation of 
specific rights that different types of migrants have in Croatia. Therefore, it is im -
portant to determine whether they perceive the issue of migration and migrants’ 
rights primarily through the prism of national and international legal norms or 
whether they experience these phenomena in the same way as legal laymen. 
Finally, the paper also aims to present the initial ideas and assumptions of the 
authors responsible for the development and operationalization of the concept 
of social distance to stimulate a professional discussion on the advantages and 
disadvantages of using this concept/scale in the research of social phenomena.
2. Theoretical-Conceptual Framework
Unlike many concepts used in sociology that are “children of many parents” , the 
concept of social distance has a very clear origin. It comes from the “fertile mind 
of Georg Simmel” , while its original meaning was partially reduced but also pop-
ularized by the work of Robert E. Park and finally operationalized in the work of 
Emory S. Bogardus (Ethington 1997, 2). Simmel argues that social distance (i.e., 
closeness/remoteness) is one of the fundamental properties of space, which in 
turn is one of the fundamental aspects of sociality in general (Ivković 2010). 
In his discussions, he distinguishes between the geometrical and metaphorical 
aspects of distance (Rukavina 2020, 1). Simmel’s remarks (2001) on the “geom-
etry of social life”, on the differences and connections between the spatial and 
symbolic distance between people, can be better understood through the ex-
ample of the “stranger-merchant” . This social actor is a synthesis of the two afore -
mentioned features of sociality: he is at once geometrically close to the group 
with which he trades through exchange interactions, but at the same time he is 
symbolically distanced from it because he is experienced as a stranger and out-
sider (Ethington 1997, 3–4). Simmel (2001, 152) believes that the sociological 
form of the “stranger” makes it clear that “spatial relations are only the condition, 
on the one hand, and the symbol, on the other, of human relations. ” The “unity 
89 / 2022 TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Law Students and Social Distance towards Migrants and Some ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72    

53
of nearness and remoteness involved in every human relation” is thus specific to 
the social relationship with the stranger-merchant and can be expressed as fol-
lows: “in the relationship to him, distance means that he, who is close by, is far, 
and strangeness means that he, who also is far, is actually near” (Simmel 2001, 
152). Nevertheless, it is immanent to the stranger’s position within that group 
and the social order in which that group exists and operates that he is perceived 
and in certain cases treated as someone who is “being outside it and confronting” 
that group and that order (Simmel 2001, 152).
Park (1924, 339) considers that the concept of social distance, as distinct 
from spatial distance, can be useful to sociologists because it enables them to 
analyse and explain the grades and degrees of understanding and intimacy that 
characterize personal, as well as social, relations in general. He believes that 
people not only have a sense of distance towards the individuals with whom 
they come into contact but that they have almost the same sense towards entire 
classes and racial groups. In his view, the terms “race consciousness” and “class 
consciousness” actually describe a state of mind in which people become aware 
of the distance that separates them (or at least that they perceive as separating 
them) from other classes and races that they do not fully understand (or that 
they regard as different from their own) (Park 1924, 340). Racial and class con-
sciousness, Park argues, as well as prejudice and social distance towards those 
considered different and other, intensify when members of a group feel that 
members of other groups threaten their economic interests or social status. 
Consequently, prejudice can be understood as “forces” that tend to “preserve the 
existing social order” and the desirable “social distances upon which that order 
rests” (Park 1924, 344). If the members of different social groups are “all right in 
[their] place” and maintain a “proper distance” from each other, then “everyone 
is capable of getting on with everyone else” (Park 1924, 341). The analysis of the 
perceived appropriate distance between different actors in a social order is useful 
for the study of social relations because it reveals the “subtle taboos and inhibi-
tions” on which the social organization of that order is based (Park 1924, 344).
Bogardus (1925a, 216–217), in his attempt to find out how and why the 
“grades of understanding and intimacy” that characterize pre-social and social 
relations, i.e., social distance, vary, asked the research participants to classify dif-
ferent groups according to whether they harboured friendly, neutral feelings to-
wards them or feelings of antipathy and dislike. He found that friendly feelings 
were most often directed towards groups to which the participants themselves 
belonged, that neutral feelings were directed towards groups they did not know, 
and that tradition and accepted opinions about particular groups were the most 
common reason for antipathy and dislike towards them, with personal negative 
experiences with members of those groups being another reason generalizing 
such feelings to the entire “despised” groups (Bogardus 1925a, 226). Further on, 
the operationalization of the social distance concept yielded a measurement that 
 RAZPRAVE IN GRADIVO REVIJA ZA NARODNOSTNA VPRAŠANJA 89 / 2022
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Študenti prava in socialna distanca do migrantov in nekaterih ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72

54
serves as a means of ensuring adequate interpretation of the various degrees and 
grades of understanding and feelings that represent the character of social rela-
tions between members of different groups in different social situations (Bogardus 
1925b, 299). This evolved to the final version of the social distance scale (Bogardus 
1933, 369) which included seven categories for assessing the closeness/distance 
to different groups (racial, professional, and religious) and measured whether the 
respondents would agree to 1. marry, 2. have as regular friends, 3. work beside 
in an office, 4. have several families in their neighbourhood, 5. have merely as 
speaking acquaintances, 6. have live outside their neighbourhood, 7. have live 
outside their country. He believed that by using the social distance scale at dif-
ferent time intervals, it would be possible to determine changes in the attitudes 
(distance) of an individual respondent or group of respondents towards differ-
ent social groups (Bogardus 1933, 270).
Ever since its operationalization, the concept of social distance has become 
a frequently used tool for analysing attitudes, prejudices, and possible/desirable 
relationships with various social groups, especially those perceived as deviating 
from the dominant socio-cultural matrix or threatening the social order. The 
concept has proven useful for at least two reasons. First, as Pehlić (2019) points 
out, according to the social identity theory (Triandis 1994; Tajfel & Turner 
1979), people generally tend to classify themselves and other people into differ-
ent categories. As part of this process and as a result of their own need to create 
and maintain a positive social identity, people are often simultaneously posi-
tively biased towards the group they consider their own and negatively biased 
towards groups they consider different. Second, the above bias has been shown 
to be strengthened in situations of conflict exacerbation. In such situations, indi-
viduals tend to identify more strongly with their social group and adhere more 
closely to its norms and standards, while expressing more negative attitudes and 
behaviours towards the social group or groups they consider to be on the op-
posite side (Pehlić 2019).
In Croatia, the concept of social distance has been most frequently used to 
analyse closeness or distance to different national/ethnic groups (Katunarić 
1991; Malešević & Uzelac 1997; Malenica 2003; Banovac & Boneta 2006; Bo-
neta et al. 2013). Sometimes the concept has been used to analyse distance to-
wards different religious groups (Previšić et al. 2004; Mrnjaus 2013), sometimes 
only towards Roma (Šlezak & Šakaja 2012; Kalebić Maglica et al. 2018), and 
sometimes against groups characterized as different from the dominant social 
matrix for some reason (i.e., drug addicts, alcoholics or criminals, people with 
health, physical or mental limitations etc.) (Lotar et al. 2010; Vučković Juroš et 
al. 2014; Baloban et al. 2019). Finally, the concept has also been used, albeit very 
rarely, for the analysis of the attitude towards refugees and exiles in the context 
of migrations related to the wars in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bulat 
1995; Čolić & Sujoldžić 1995) and towards migrants, refugees, and asylum seek-
89 / 2022 TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Law Students and Social Distance towards Migrants and Some ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72    

55
ers in the context of the European 2015/2016 migration/refugee crisis (Med-
lobi & Čepo 2018; Ajduković et al. 2019).
Although the social distance scale has so far not been widely used in the 
context of research on the (un)desirability of different groups as potential im-
migrants to Croatia, the results of the aforementioned research on ethnic and 
religious distance have produced multiple findings that can be used to conceptu-
alize and operationalize research on the aforementioned topic.
First, research studies have found that people exhibit varying levels of dis-
tance towards members of various other social groups and that prejudice and 
this distance can be affected by the social context (situational factors and pre-
vailing social and (sub)cultural norms) (cf. Vučković Juroš et al. 2014) or can 
change parallel with the changing social circumstances and over time (cf. Šiber 
1997; Malenica 2003; Previšić et al. 2004; Baloban et al. 2019). Further on, 
studies have shown that influential social actors (especially the political elites) 
and the media can affect the degree of social distancing towards members of 
certain social groups by shaping discourses in which members of those groups 
are portrayed in a negative light (cf. Katunarić 1991; Malešević & Uzelac 1997; 
Medlobi & Čepo 2018). Finally, they have found that the degree of distancing 
from groups perceived as other may be related to various socio-demographic 
and socio-cultural characteristics of people, their contacts and experiences with 
members of these groups, and the values, political orientations, and attitudes 
they support or hold (cf. Bulat 1995; Šiber 1997; Malenica 2003; Banovac & 
Boneta 2006; Vučković Juroš et al. 2014; Medlobi & Čepo 2018; Baloban et al. 
2019).
3. Main Aim and Research Questions
Following the above theoretical-conceptual framework and the results and con-
clusions of the cited empirical research studies, the main aim of this research is 
to determine the level of social distance expressed by students of law faculties of 
Zagreb, Rijeka, Osijek, and Split towards various national/ethnic and religious 
groups of immigrants to Croatia, and how the distance towards these groups is 
related to the socio-demographic, contextual-experiential, and value-attitudinal 
characteristics of respondents. The research questions with which we begin our 
analyses are:
1) Do law students perceive different ethnic and religious groups as more or 
less (un)desirable in the context of their immigration to Croatia, and do they 
position (distance) themselves differently from them?
2) Are and to what extent are different socio-demographic, contextual-experi-
ential (e.g., acquaintances with migrants and/or asylum seekers) and value-
attitudinal characteristics of the respondents good predictors of their social 
distance from different ethnic and religious groups?
 RAZPRAVE IN GRADIVO REVIJA ZA NARODNOSTNA VPRAŠANJA 89 / 2022
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Študenti prava in socialna distanca do migrantov in nekaterih ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72

56
4. Method
4.1 Respondents
The paper is based on a research study conducted in mid-2019 among law stu -
dents at four law schools in Croatia: Zagreb, Rijeka, Split, and Osijek.
2
 This group 
of respondents was selected because law students, as future experts, may come 
into contact with asylum seekers, refugees, and other migrants in their work, and 
it is important to determine their attitudes towards vulnerable migrant groups 
(cf. Mrakovčić & Gregurović 2020). The survey was conducted in a class set -
ting among 1st and 4th year students. The aim was to include between 100 and 
150 students from each selected cohort in each faculty to allow comparisons 
between younger and older students and between different faculties. A sample 
of 667 respondents was obtained, whose detailed characteristics are shown in 
T able 1.
T able 1: Sample structure
Variable Categories N %
Location of the Law  
Faculty 
Zagreb 265 39.4
Rijeka 193 28.7
Split 119 17.7
Osijek 95 14.1
Y ear of study
1 352 52.4
4 320 47.6
Gender
Female 494 73.5
Male 173 25.7
Source: Own data.
The largest proportion of students comes from Zagreb (almost 40 %). Slightly 
more than a quarter comes from Rijeka, 18 % from Split and 14 % from Osijek. 
The sample is balanced in terms of the year of study – slightly more than a half 
(52 %) are first-year students. The gender distribution is clearly skewed in favour 
of female students, who make up almost three quarters of the sample. In addi-
tion to the above characteristics, it is important to note that almost half of the 
respondents (48.7 %) estimate their family’ s financial situation to be neither bet-
ter nor worse than that of the majority, but on average they estimate their family’ s 
financial situation to be slightly better than that of the majority (M = 3.54, SD = 
.692). The sample is markedly ethnically homogeneous (93 % Croats) while 5 % 
of respondents did not answer this question.
89 / 2022 TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Law Students and Social Distance towards Migrants and Some ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72    

57
4.2 Measuring Instruments
The dependent variable used in the study was Bogardus’ social distance scale 
(Bogardus 1933), which was modified and evaluated for several immigrant 
groups. Students were asked to rate the closest relationship they are willing to 
have with different migrant groups and with members of selected ethnic and re-
ligious groups using a seven-point scale: 1 – Marital relationship; 2 – Personal 
friend; 3 – Immediate neighbour; 4 – Colleague at work; 5 – Resident in my 
country; 6 – Visitor to my country; 7 – T o exclude from my country. Migrants 
towards whom social distance was assessed were grouped according to their 
historical and geographical background, while relations with asylum seekers, 
asylees/refugees, and Roma were additionally analysed. Members of the Roma 
ethnic group are included in this instrument to further investigate the hypoth-
esis that refugees and asylum seekers represent the new Roma, i.e., a group with 
which there is (the greatest) social distance (Miočić 2018, cf. CMS 2017). An-
other ethnically unspecified group was added to the questionnaire due to the 
often-mainstream perception of economic immigrants as foreign workers in 
Croatia (cf. Čačić-Kumpes et al. 2012). The result on the scale was considered 
summative, meaning that the marked closest relationship also implies all less 
close relationships.
The independent variables are divided into three groups. The first group 
consists of socio-demographic characteristics: gender, size of place of residence, 
highest parents’ education level, family socio-economic status, and nationality. 
The place of residence was determined by the students on the following scale: 
1 – Village, 2 – Small town (10,000 to 35,000 inhabitants), 3 – Large town (over 
35,000 inhabitants), 4 – Zagreb. The socio-economic status of the family was 
determined using 5 categories from 1 – significantly worse than the majority to 
5 – significantly better than the majority. The nationality of the respondents was 
divided into two categories: 1 – Croatian, 2 – other. The second group consists 
of contextual variables related to experiences with migrants and asylum seekers/
refugees and personal/family exile or refugee experience. Students were asked 
if they had friends in the Republic of Croatia who were non-Croatian citizens 
or foreigners, if they had ever met a refugee or an asylum seeker, and if they or 
someone in their immediate family had an exile or refugee experience in their 
lives. The third group of independent indicators refers to value orientations and 
attitudes based on several sociological studies. Propensity to political concepts 
was examined using 15 out of 24 items of the original scale constructed by Čulig 
et al. (2007). The latent structure of the analysed items is almost identical to the 
original: in addition to the extracted items on the original factors clericalism (3 
items, Cronbach’s α = .892), expertocratism (3 items, Cronbach’s α = .729), and 
Europeanism (3 items, Cronbach’s α = .582), items that originally formed two 
conceptually opposed factors (nationalism and multiculturalism) were com-
 RAZPRAVE IN GRADIVO REVIJA ZA NARODNOSTNA VPRAŠANJA 89 / 2022
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Študenti prava in socialna distanca do migrantov in nekaterih ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72

58
bined into a single factor nationalism (6 items, Cronbach’s α = .812). In addition 
to the political concepts analysed, students were also asked about their values 
using the authoritarianism (5 items, Cronbach’s α = .740) and conservatism (3 
items, Cronbach’s α = .512) scales (Sekulić & Šporer 2006). Higher scores on all 
factors indicate a stronger acceptance of the attitudinal constructs analysed. In 
addition to the stated attitudes, the respondents’ political orientation was exam-
ined on a five-point scale: 1 – left to 5 – right, and religious self-identification on 
a six-point scale: 1 – convinced believer to 6 – non-religious, opposing religion 
(Marinović Jerolimov 2005).
4.3 Analyses
The paper uses a series of univariate, bivariate, and multivariate analyses con -
ducted using the SPSS 18.0 software package. Univariate analyses first describe 
dependent variables, which are then related to selected independent indicators. 
In addition, the latent structure of the dependent variables is checked using fac-
tor analysis, and the identified factors are considered as dependent constructs 
– criteria in multiple regression analysis. The relationship between each depen -
dent construct is tested with paired samples t-test.
5. Results
As indicated earlier, the evaluation of social distance towards a particular group 
can serve as an indicator of prejudice, hostility, and even discrimination towards 
that group. Looking at the types of relationships that law students are willing 
to form with certain immigrant groups and with members of the Roma ethnic 
group, it appears that they are ready for the closest (friendly) relationship with 
immigrants from North America – more specifically from the United States and 
Canada – and from Western European countries (Figure 1). They are somewhat 
less favourable on average to immigrants from the countries of the former Yu-
goslavia and are as willing to have neighbourly relations with them as they are 
about immigrants from Asian countries such as China, Korea, etc., Africa, and 
unspecified foreign workers. It is worth noting that most of the immigrant work-
ers and migrants, in general, come to Croatia from neighbouring countries (i.e., 
ex-Yugoslavia countries), especially from Bosnia and Herzegovina (Podgorelec 
et al. 2019). On average, they are willing to accept members of all other groups 
as work colleagues, with the greatest average distance expressed towards asylum 
seekers. They estimate an equally close relationship with refugees and Roma.
The distance that law students estimate in relation to members of different 
religions is fairly consistent. Apart from the lowest average distance towards 
Catholics with whom they are on average willing to maintain the closest rela-
89 / 2022 TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Law Students and Social Distance towards Migrants and Some ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72    

59
tions (marriage), respondents are on average willing to maintain friendly rela-
tions with Orthodox, Protestants, and atheists or neighbourly relations with 
Jews, non-Christians, and Muslims.
Figure 1: Frequency distribution on the social distance scale towards migrant, ethnic, and 
religious groups
Source: Own data.
Factor analysis was used to test whether there is a latent structure behind the 
expressed distance towards migrant, ethnic and religious groups.
3
 It was deter-
mined that migrant and ethnic groups form two latent dimensions, i.e., two fac-
tors that together explain 80.95 % of the variance. The first dimension comprises 
groups towards which a greater social distance is expressed (asylees, asylum 
seekers, Roma, immigrants from the Middle East, and immigrants from Africa), 
while the second dimension comprises groups towards which a lower social dis-
tance is expressed (immigrants from the United States and Canada, immigrants 
from Western European countries, immigrants from the countries of the former 
Yugoslavia, and immigrants from Asian countries). Foreign workers are exclud-
ed from this analysis. Both factors have high internal reliability (Cronbach’s α1 
= .920; Cronbach’s α2 = .928) and are used as dependent indicators of desir-
able and undesirable immigrant groups in further analyses. Factorization of so-
cial distance towards members of other religions yielded a single-factor solution 
with high internal reliability (Cronbach’s α = .947). This factor did not include 
the item used to measure social distance toward Catholics.
 RAZPRAVE IN GRADIVO REVIJA ZA NARODNOSTNA VPRAŠANJA 89 / 2022
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Študenti prava in socialna distanca do migrantov in nekaterih ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 
Immigrants from USA and Canada (M=2.45; SD=1.543) 
Immigrants from Western European countries (M=2.48; SD=1.578) 
Immigrants from ex-Yugoslavia countries (M=2.61; SD=1.624) 
Immigrants from Asian countries (Chinese, Koreans... ) (M=3.05; SD=1.649) 
Foreign workers (M=3.22; SD=1.523) 
Immigrants from Africa (M=3.32; SD=1.781) 
Immigrants from the Middle East (M=3.57; SD=1.864) 
Refugees (M=4,14; SD=1,755) 
Roma (M=4.17; SD=1.720) 
Asylum seekers (M=4.32; SD=1.735) 
Catholics (M=1.42; SD=1.058) 
Orthdox (M=2.17; SD=1.368) 
Atheists (M=2.26; SD=1.532) 
Protestants  (Baptists, Adventists...) (M=2.46; SD=1.515) 
Jewes (M=2.53; SD=1.546) 
Non-Christians (Buddhists, Hindus…) (M=2.56; SD=1.562) 
Muslims (M=2.59; SD=1.573) 
Marital relationship Personal friend Immediate neighbor Colleague at work 
Resident in my country Visitor in my country To exclude from my country 

60
The values of the composite variables created based on the factors obtained 
show that the lowest social distance is expressed towards members of other reli-
gions, with the largest grouping of responses to the first two categories of social 
distance: marital relationship and friendship (Figure 2). The values of the two 
composite variables based on the factors of social distance to more or less desirable 
immigrant groups are also consistent with the previously analysed frequencies 
of each variable. Comparing all three composite variables, law students associate 
marriage primarily with desirable immigrants, and friendship with members of 
other religions. They are most likely to accept undesirable migrants as residents 
of their country, although about one fifth of respondents are open to friendly 
and cooperative relationships. Similar conclusions also emerge from the statisti-
cally significant differences between means of the composite variables: the low-
est average distance is expressed towards religious groups – on average at the 
friends level, and the greatest towards the undesirables – at the level of associates 
at work.
4
 It is important to note that the most exclusive category of social dis-
tance is chosen by an extremely small number of law students: about 3 % of them 
would like to exclude undesirable migrant groups from Croatia, and less than  
1 % would exclude desirable migrants and members of other religions.
Figure 2: Distribution of the composite variables of social distance towards migrant, ethnic, and 
religious groups based on factor analysis
Source: Own data.
Furthermore, an analysis of variance was conducted to check the differences in 
the evaluation of social distance towards migrant, ethnic, and religious groups 
among students from different universities (T able 2). Statistically significant dif-
ferences between law students from four Croatian universities were found for all 
three composite variables of social distance, with law students from the univer-
sities of Zagreb and Rijeka showing on average a lower social distance towards  
89 / 2022 TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Law Students and Social Distance towards Migrants and Some ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72    
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Marital
relationship
Personal friend Immediate
neighbor
Colleague at work Resident in my
country
Visitor in my
country
To exclude from
my country
Social distance - undesirable (M=3.869; SD=1.575)
Social distance - desirable (M=2.662; SD=1.495)
Social distance - religious groups (M=2.475; SD=1.385)

61
all analysed groups than law students from Osijek and Split. At the same time, 
students from Zagreb and Rijeka are on average willing to establish a coopera-
tive relationship with undesirable migrants (students from Osijek and Split on 
average accept them as residents of their country), a friendly and neighbourly re-
lationship with desirable migrants (students from Osijek and Split are willing to 
establish a neighbourly and collaborative relationship), and a friendly relation-
ship with members of other religions (students from Osijek and Split are willing 
to establish a neighbourly relationship).
Table 2: Average differences in the expressed social distance towards migrant, ethnic, and 
religious groups between law students from four universities
N M SD F (p) post hoc
*
Social distance – undesirable
Zagreb 264 3.602 1.494
20.867
(.000)
ZG≠ST , OS
RI≠ST , OS
Rijeka 192 3.500 1.548
Split 116 4.491 1.607
Osijek 94 4.617 1.329
Social distance – desirable
Zagreb 264 2.288 1.236
32.822
(.000)
ZG≠ST , OS
RI≠ST , OS
Rijeka 191 2.319 1.352
Split 115 3.409 1.632
Osijek 94 3.521 1.605
Social distance – religious groups
Zagreb 264 2.303 1.176
20.063
(.000)
ZG≠ST , OS
RI≠ST , OS
Rijeka 193 2.109 1.152
Split 116 2.836 1.609
Osijek 94 3.255 1.646
Source: Own data.
* T amhane T2 post hoc test was applied due to the determined inhomogeneity of the variables
Finally, hierarchical multiple regression was used to test the effect of the three 
models on the expression of social distance towards migrant, ethnic, and reli-
gious groups (Table 3). The first predictor model includes the respondents’ 
socio-demographic characteristics: gender, size of the place of residence, fam-
ily socio-economic status, highest parents’ education level, and nationality. The 
second consists of contextual indicators that point to personal and/or family 
exile or refugee experience and familiarity with foreigners and refugees/asylum 
seekers. The third predictor model introduces value orientations and political 
attitudes, describing the propensity towards nationalism, clericalism, experto-
cratism, and Europeanism as political constructs, authoritarianism and conser-
vatism as value constructs, with respondents’ political orientation and religious 
self-identification additionally included.
 RAZPRAVE IN GRADIVO REVIJA ZA NARODNOSTNA VPRAŠANJA 89 / 2022
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Študenti prava in socialna distanca do migrantov in nekaterih ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72

62
Table 3: Hierarchical regression analysis of the assessment of the effects on social distance 
towards migrant, ethnic, and religious groups
Social distance towards 
undesirables
Social distance towards 
desirables
Social distance towards 
members of other religions
 
Model 1 
(β)
Model 2 
(β)
Model 3 
(β)
Model 1 
(β)
Model 2 
(β)
Model 3 
(β)
Model 
1 (β)
Model 
2 (β)
Model 3 
(β)
Gender -.010 -.014 -.022 -.016 -.016 -.010 -.049 -.048 -.040
Size of the place of 
residence
-.099* -.089 -.034 -.085 -.082 -.077 -.108* -.105* -.078
Highest level of parents’ 
education 
-.006 -.003 -.022 -.042 -.040 -.041 -.059 -.056 -.067
Family socio-economic 
status
.058 .062 .041 -.028 -.025 -.042 -.020 -.017 -.034
Nationality  
(1 – Croats; 2 – other)
-.115* -.118* -.088* -.032 -.029 -.020 -.091* -.086 -.072
Personal/family exile/ 
refugee experience  
(1 – yes)
.013 -.01 .040 .023 .056 .033
Friends – foreigners in 
Croatia (1 – yes)
-.031 .024 -.073 -.051 -.084 -.036
Met an asylum seeker or 
refugee (1 – yes)
-.119* -.052 -.038 -.006 -.034 .030
Attitude towards religion 
(convinced believer →  
opponent of religion)
-.073 -.049 -.047
Political orientation  
(left → right)
.113* .015 .017
Nationalism .362*** .107* .302***
Clericalism .010 .111 .184***
Expertocratism -.012 -.060 -.027
Europeanism -.028 .046 .104**
Authoritarianism .119** .014 .041
Conservativism .165*** .081 .204***
R
2
=.025
F=2.383
p=.038
R
2
=.041
F=2.462
p=.013
R
2
=.335
F=14.302
p=.000
R
2
=.015
F=1.442
p=.208
R
2
=.024
F=1.427
p=.183
R
2
=.084
F=2.616
p=.001
R
2
=.033
F=3.315
p=.006
R
2
=.045
F=2.802
p=.005
R
2
=.307
F=13.054
p=.000
* p<.05; ** p<.01; ***p<.001
Source: Own data.
The results in Table 3 show that the analysed models interpret social distance 
towards undesirable migrant groups and members of other religions almost the 
same, while they interpret social distance towards desirable migrant groups as 
somewhat weaker. Place of residence and nationality were found to be the only 
statistically significant predictors in the first model, explaining between 2.5 % 
and 3.3 % of the variance of the dependent variables. Croats, compared to  
89 / 2022 TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Law Students and Social Distance towards Migrants and Some ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72    

63
members of other ethnic groups and residents of less urban areas, were found to 
have greater social distance towards undesirable migrant groups and members of 
other religions. Nationality remained a significant predictor of social distance to-
wards less desirable migrants in models 2 and 3. Most of the contextual variables 
proved not to be statistically significant. Only personal contact with refugees/
asylum seekers proved to be statistically positive in assessing social distance to-
wards the undesirables, the group that includes these two types of migrants. In 
other words, students who had the opportunity to meet a refugee or an asylum 
seeker showed lower social distance towards the group of migrants defined as less 
desirable. Finally, when respondents’ values and political orientations are included, 
the effect of the third model increases to a prominent 33.5 % of the variance 
of social distance towards undesirables and 30.7 % of social distance towards  
members of other religions. This model is the only significant model in predict -
ing social distance towards desirables, accounting for 8.4 % of the variance. Na-
tionalism has the strongest effect on all three dependent variables. Those who en -
dorse this construct to a greater degree, i.e., those who are more inclined towards  
national exclusivity, national homogeneity, and lack of openness towards cultural 
differences, show greater social distance towards all three groups. In addition, 
a tendency towards conservatism is significantly associated with greater social 
distance towards the undesirables and members of other religions. Greater dis-
tance towards the undesirables is also expressed by law students who are more 
right-oriented politically and those who are more inclined towards authoritarian 
values. At the same time, in the third model, no significant positive effect of con-
textual contact with refugees or asylum seekers can be attributed to this depen-
dent variable anymore. On the other hand, students who are more inclined to 
clericalism, but also Europeanism, show greater social distance towards members 
of other religions, i.e., students who attach greater political importance to the 
Catholic Church and students who advocate European unity show greater social 
distance towards members of other religions.
6. Discussion 
In general, law students have been found willing to establish varying levels of 
distance towards members of different ethnic groups and towards undefined for-
eign workers, refugees, and asylum seekers. On average, they are willing to main-
tain the closest relationships with immigrants from North America and Western 
European countries, followed by immigrants from the countries of the former 
Yugoslavia. The aforementioned groups are followed by immigrants from Asian 
countries and Africa, and foreign workers in general. Finally, on average, students 
show the greatest distance towards immigrants from the Middle East, refugees 
and asylum seekers, and Roma. Factor analysis confirmed that, in terms of so-
cial distance, students perceive some groups as somewhat more desirable im-
 RAZPRAVE IN GRADIVO REVIJA ZA NARODNOSTNA VPRAŠANJA 89 / 2022
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Študenti prava in socialna distanca do migrantov in nekaterih ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72

64
migrants to Croatia (immigrants from the U.S. and Canada, Western European 
countries, countries of the former Yugoslavia, and Asian countries) and other 
as somewhat more undesirable (immigrants from the Middle East and Africa, 
refugees and asylum seekers, and Roma). The inclusion of Roma in the same 
group as asylum seekers and the fairly even expression of social distance towards 
asylum seekers and Roma suggests that the thesis of asylum seekers as the new 
Roma is justified even among law students in Croatia, according to which asy-
lum seekers become the group towards which the greatest distance is expressed – 
a place previously occupied by the Roma ethnic group (cf. CMS 2017).
Since ethnic prejudice, including prejudice against immigrants, is usually 
linked to the perceived threat that a foreign group may pose to the host society 
and its residents (Vučković Juroš et al. 2014), it is reasonable to assume that our 
respondents perceive some groups as a more serious threat and others as a less 
serious threat, either to the existing social order or to their interests and iden-
tities. Thus, whether it is the fear of losing their social, economic, or political 
power with the arrival of some immigrants (cf. Berg 2009; Rustenbach 2010) 
or the fact that some groups, in addition to the aforementioned threats, also 
pose a symbolic threat that may threaten their cultural and social identities (cf. 
Pereira et al. 2009), it is evident that our respondents show lower social distance 
towards potential immigrants from the West and neighbouring countries than 
towards those coming from the Middle East and Africa, for example, or towards 
refugees and asylum seekers in general. Although the relationship between social 
distance towards different migrant groups and the perception of these groups 
as a real and/or symbolic threat in Croatia needs to be further investigated, the 
results of some studies support the thesis that prejudice towards immigrants is 
related to the perception of these groups as a potential threat to the host country 
(especially to the ethnic majority) and the perception of the justification/legiti-
macy of one’s own (im)migration.
For example, the results of research by Mrakovčić and Gregurović (2020) on 
the law students’ attitudes towards Middle East migrants and asylum seekers in 
Croatia show that students who perceive asylum seekers as a threat to Croatia’s 
culture, identity, economy, and security or as disguised economic migrants in 
search of a better life, rather than as genuine refugees, tend to have more negative 
attitudes towards Middle East migrants and the possibility of their residence in 
Croatia. Similarly, Gregurović et al. (2019) showed that residents of the Zagreb 
city quarter where the shelter for asylum seekers is located express, compared 
to residents of the control city quarter, a greater social distance towards asylum 
seekers and perceive them as a health and economic threat rather than seeing 
them as genuine refugees. Medlobi and Čepo (2018) found in their research 
that respondents with stronger national pride were more likely to express a sense 
of threat from the arrival of refugees and that the respondents’ basic personal 
willingness (at the attitudinal level) to help people who have come through/to 
89 / 2022 TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Law Students and Social Distance towards Migrants and Some ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72    

65
Croatia as part of the migration/refugee crisis depends on whether they perceive 
these people as refugees, asylum seekers, or migrants. Greater willingness was 
expressed if they were perceived as refugees and less if they were perceived as 
migrants in general. Although this needs further investigation, it suggests that 
people are more likely to distance themselves from those groups of migrants that 
they perceive as posing a realistic and/or symbolic threat and as economic op-
portunists, rather than as refugees fleeing from war-torn areas (cf. Ajduković et 
al. 2019; V erkuyten et al. 2018).
Further on, the level of social distance towards the analysed migrant and reli-
gious groups differs considerably between students from the four largest Croatian 
universities. Law students from Zagreb and Rijeka show, on average, lower levels 
of social distance towards all groups studied than those from Osijek and Split. 
For example, while the former are on average willing to establish a cooperative 
relationship with undesirable migrants, the latter are willing to accept them only 
as residents of their country. Students from Zagreb and Rijeka are also ready for 
friendly relations with desirable migrants and other religious groups, while stu-
dents from Osijek and Split are ready to establish a neighbourly and collabora- 
tive relationship with them. Although their results are not directly comparable 
to ours, some studies have also pointed out the importance of analysing regional 
differences in social distance towards other ethnic groups and asylum seekers in 
Croatia (cf. Bullat 1995; Banovac & Boneta 2006; Malenica 2003; Ajduković et 
al. 2019), indicating more positive attitudes towards different ethnic groups and 
asylum seekers in the contexts of Istria-Primorje and Central Croatia opposed 
to more negative attitudes in the contexts of Eastern Croatia and Dalmatia. The 
findings and conclusions of these research studies suggest that in order to ad-
equately understand and explain social distance, as well as regional differences in 
this matter, it is necessary to examine the social and cultural characteristics from 
which meanings can be derived to interpret social reality and how influential ac-
tors and institutions use these meanings to shape and legitimize the desired so-
cial order and the desired social relations with different social groups. 
Looking at the effects of respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics, 
contextual indicators, value orientations and attitudes on social distance, it is 
clear that the effect differs significantly depending on which group it refers to.
Of the socio-demographic variables, only the respondents’ size of the place 
of residence and nationality proved to be significant predictors of distance to-
wards undesirable migrants and religious groups. Respondents belonging to 
the majority group (Croats) and respondents from less urban areas showed 
greater distance towards undesirable migrants and members of other religions 
than members of ethnic minorities and respondents from more urban areas. 
Of the contextual variables, only the experience of meeting a refugee or asylum 
seeker proved to be a significant predictor of distance, but only in the case of 
undesirable migrants. In addition, it seems interesting to point out that socio-
 RAZPRAVE IN GRADIVO REVIJA ZA NARODNOSTNA VPRAŠANJA 89 / 2022
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Študenti prava in socialna distanca do migrantov in nekaterih ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72

66
demographic and contextual variables do not have predictive power for distance 
towards the desirable migrant groups. Finally, it is important to point out that 
the above socio-demographic and contextual characteristics are no longer signif-
icant predictors of distance towards undesirable (except for belonging to a ma-
jority or minority ethnic group) and religious groups when value and attitudinal 
constructs are included in the model. This certainly suggests that the problem of 
students’ social distance towards others is, for the most part, actually some kind 
of worldview issue.
Many studies in Croatia (Banovac & Boneta 2006; Katunarić 1991; Maleni-
ca 2003; Medlobi & Čepo 2018) show that the tendency towards national exclu-
sivism is usually associated with greater social distance towards others. The re -
sults of our study show that national exclusivism, which is in the background of 
(ethno)nationalism and anti-multiculturalism, is the only statistically significant 
predictor of distance towards undesirable and desirable migrants and religious 
groups. Although it does not have the same predictive power in all three cases, it 
is evident that those respondents who support the idea that the ideal state is one 
in which only one (ethno)nation lives and reject the idea that the state should help 
preserve the culture and customs of all ethnic groups exhibit a kind of universal 
lack of openness towards members of all groups perceived as other, regardless 
of the degree of situational threat they may feel from them at a given moment.
Moreover, conservatism proved to be a significant predictor of distance only 
in the case of undesirable migrants and religious groups. Since the effect is larger 
in the case of distance towards religious groups than towards undesirable mi-
grants, we assume that this is more a matter of a certain ethnocentric suspicious-
ness towards diversity that rejects any significant change in the existing cultural 
and social order rather than a universal closeness towards all outsiders. This is 
supported, albeit indirectly, by Bulat’s (1995) research findings showing that 
there is a correlation between the level of social distance towards different refu-
gee groups and the perception of their socio-cultural difference from the host so-
ciety. Considering that, according to the 2011 Croatian census (Croatian Bureau 
of Statistics 2011), 86.28 % of the citizens identified themselves as Catholics and 
that Catholicism is often highlighted in public discourse as a fundamental com-
ponent of Croatian national identity, there is a strong case for arguing that dis-
tance towards religious groups can be explained as part of the conservative sus-
piciousness towards diversity due to resistance to change in the existing national 
identity, while support of clericalism has been shown to be a significant predic-
tor of distance only toward religious groups. Indeed, students who support the 
idea that society should be organized according to the principles and norms of 
the Catholic Church have shown to simultaneously express greater distance to-
wards religious but not to other groups analysed.
Furthermore, it is somewhat surprising that respondents who support the 
idea of a Europe without borders and believe that European countries can pro-
89 / 2022 TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Law Students and Social Distance towards Migrants and Some ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72    

67
tect their economic and political interests only in a united Europe also show 
greater distance towards other religious groups. Although we cannot determine 
with certainty why this is so, it is possible that law students view the affiliation 
with both Catholicism and the EU as a sign of belonging to the West rather than 
the East, and therefore those who are more religious support the idea of a united 
Europe. The above statement is partially confirmed by Petrović et al. (2021) who 
found that before the outbreak of the migration/refugee crisis in 2015, higher 
frequency of church attendance was a statistically significant, albeit weak, predic-
tor in many CEE countries of the support for the idea that their country should 
follow EU decisions, even if one does not fully agree with them. In addition, the 
PEGIDA movement (Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the Oc-
cident) bases its position on preserving borders and strengthening Fortress 
Europe on a religious foundation and is considered a defender of Western civili-
zation and Christianity (Murariu 2017), which can also be linked to the results 
of this research.
Additionally, authoritarianism proved to be a statistically significant pre-
dictor of social distance towards undesirable migrants. The fact that more au -
thoritarian respondents express greater distance only towards the group of un-
desirable immigrants suggests that the latter group, towards which the greatest 
social distance is expressed, is perceived as a significant realistic and/or symbolic 
threat. Namely, according to the assumption of the theory of authoritarian dy-
namics (Stenner 2005), the difference in intolerance between authoritarian and 
non-authoritarian individuals occur only in situations of normative threat. In 
such a situation, actors with authoritarian predispositions react with increased 
intolerance towards those they hold responsible for this threat.
It was also shown that the political orientation of respondents is related to 
the level of their distance only towards undesirable migrants. That is, it seems 
that the attitude towards this group has become an important political issue that 
distinguishes those who identify with the left from those who identify with the 
right. Those who are more politically oriented to the right tend to have a greater 
distance towards the aforementioned group, and those who are more oriented 
to the left tend to have a lower distance. It is important to look at this relation 
in terms of the relationship between political orientation and nationalism be-
cause it often turns out that those on the right tend to support authoritarian po-
litical actors and aggressive nationalism, which often implies that migrants are 
held responsible for various economic and social problems (Medlobi & Čepo 
2018, 64). The fact that political orientation is only related to the distance to the 
mentioned group and not to the other analysed groups supports Šiber’s (1997, 
24–25) conclusion that when analysing social distance towards others, it is nec-
essary to distinguish between “traditional/cultural” and “political” distance. The 
latter is important for understanding the dynamics of political attitudes towards 
others since their (non)acceptance in a society depends significantly on both 
 RAZPRAVE IN GRADIVO REVIJA ZA NARODNOSTNA VPRAŠANJA 89 / 2022
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Študenti prava in socialna distanca do migrantov in nekaterih ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72

68
personal political attitudes and orientations of its citizens and the messages sent 
out by influential social and political actors and the media. The interplay of the 
above factors has a significant effect on the expression of (in)tolerance towards 
others at the level of personal action as well as on the support to discriminatory 
policies directed towards them at the systemic level.
7. Conclusion
Law students as future experts who are likely to come into contact with different 
aspects of lawbreaking and provide for the rights of specific groups of migrants in 
Croatia (immigrant workers and asylum seekers and refugees alike) are willing 
to establish varying levels of distance toward members of migrant and religious 
groups. A striking result of the study is the greatest social distance expressed to-
wards asylum seekers, the group which could be included among the most sen-
sitive and vulnerable groups (along with Roma). Placing this result in the post-
migration/refugee crisis period, one keeps wondering about the effects of this 
crisis on students’ attitudes. Even though we do not have comparable data from 
the pre-crisis period, we can only presume that the larger proportion of migrants 
coming from significantly different cultural and religious settings (including asy-
lum seekers and refugees) as well as negative media portrayals (emphasizing the 
threat posed by those groups) of the migration/refugee crisis led to a shift in at-
titudes and greater social distance expressed towards migrants described in this 
paper as undesirable.
We also find it worth pointing out that Bogardus’ social distance scale is the 
basis for a discussion about its applicability in today’s context (see, e.g., Mather 
et al. 2017; Parrillo & Donoghue 2005). This is also suggested by the results of 
this study, which showed relatively weak differences in the expressed distance 
towards individual groups – although they can still ultimately be defined as 
desirable or undesirable. It would therefore be advisable to initiate a scholarly 
discussion on how to improve the sensitivity of the scale because it is an open 
question whether the difference in mean values between desirable and undesir-
able (friends/neighbours for the former and colleagues at work for the latter) is 
substantively and realistically too small.
Finally, it should be noted that due to the limitations of this study in terms 
of the sample adequacy and specificity of the population analysed, the results 
of our research should be additionally confirmed in a new study, preferably on 
a representative sample of the entire student body or the general population. In 
future research, more attention should also be paid to the analysis and explana-
tion of regional specificities and differences in social distance towards different 
migrant groups, and the effect of political and media discourse on the social dis-
tance of different social groups towards migrants should be further investigated.
89 / 2022 TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Law Students and Social Distance towards Migrants and Some ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72    

69
References
Ajduković, D., Čorkalo Biruški, D., Gregurović, M., Matić Bojić, J. & Župarić-Iljić, D., 2019. 
Challenges of Integrating Refugees into Croatian Society: Attitudes of Citizens and the Readi-
ness of Local Communities. Government of the Republic of Croatia, Office for Human 
Rights and Rights of National Minorities, Zagreb.
Baloban, S., Kompes, M. & Migles, S., 2019. Kriza solidarnosti i desolidarizacija u hrvatskom 
društvu. Bogoslovska smotra 89 (2), 355–384. 
Banovac, B. & Boneta, Ž., 2006. Etnička distanca i socijalna (dez)integracija lokalnih zajednica. 
Revija za sociologiju 37 (1/2), 21–46.
Berg, J. A., 2009. Core Networks and Whites’ Attitudes toward Immigrants and Immigration 
Policy. Public Opinion Quarterly 73 (1), 7–31.
Bježančević, S., 2019. Migrantska kriza u Europskoj uniji – izazovi, europska sigurnost i zaštita 
temeljnih prava. Zbornik Pravnog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Rijeci 40 (3), 1231–1248.
Bogardus, E. S., 1925a. Social Distance and Its Origins. Journal of Applied Sociology 9, 216– 226.
Bogardus, E. S., 1925b. Measuring Social Distances. Journal of Applied Sociology 9, 299–308.
Bogardus, E. S., 1933. A Social Distance Scale. Sociology and Social Research 17, 265–271.
Boneta, Ž., Ivković, Ž. & Lacmanović, T., 2013. Interkulturalne kompetencije odgojiteljica i 
socijalna distanca. Školski vjesnik 62 (4), 479–494.
Bulat, N., 1995. Dimenzije stereotipova i predrasuda u odnosu na raseljene osobe i izbjeglice iz 
Bosne i Hercegovine. Migracijske i etničke teme 11 (2), 151–171.
CMS – Centar za mirovne studije, 2017. Zastupljenost i indikatori diskriminacijskih i ksenofobičnih 
stavova u Republici Hrvatskoj u 2017: istraživački izvještaj. CMS, Zagreb.
Croatian Bureau of Statistics, 2011. Census of Population, Households and Dwellings 2011. Croa-
tian Bureau of Statistics, Zagreb.
Čačić-Kumpes, J., Gregurović, S. & Kumpes, J., 2012. Migracija, integracija i stavovi prema imi-
grantima u Hrvatskoj. Revija za sociologiju 42 (3), 305–336.
Čolić, S. & Sujoldžić, A., 1995. Neki aspekti i pretpostavke akulturacije prognanih i izbjeglih 
obitelji na otoku Hvaru. Migracijske i etničke teme 11 (1), 37–52.
Čulig, B., Kufrin, K. & Landripet, I., 2007. EU + ? – Odnos građana Hrvatske prema pridruživanju 
Republike Hrvatske Europskoj uniji. FF press, Zagreb; B.a.B.e., Zagreb.
Ethington, P. J., 1997. The Intellectual Construction of “Social Distance”: Toward a Recovery 
of Georg Simmel’s Social Geometry. Cybergeo: European Journal of Geography 30, 1–20, 
https://journals.openedition.org/cybergeo/227 (accessed 12 May 2022). 
EUROSTAT, 2022. Asylum Applicants by Type of Applicant, Citizenship, Age and Sex – 
Annual Aggregated Data (Rounded), https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/
migr_asyappctza/default/table (accessed 10 July 2022).
Gregurović, M., Radeljak Kaufmann, P ., Župarić-Iljić, D. & Dujmović, M., 2019. Are Attitudes 
Determined by Location? Differences in Perceptions of Asylum Seekers between Resi-
dents of Two Zagreb Neighbourhoods. Geoforum 104, 244–258.
Henjak, A., 2018. Nose li parlamentarni izbori 2015. i 2016. godine promjenu političkih rascjepa 
u Hrvatskoj?. Društvena istraživanja 27 (3), 383–406.
Ivković, Ž., 2010. Revizija Bogardusove skale socijalne distance. Graduation Thesis. Faculty of 
Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Zagreb.
Kalebić Maglica, B., Anić, P. & Horvat, M., 2018. Odrednice stavova osmogodišnje djece i nji-
hovih roditelja prema Romima. Život i škola 64 (2), 41–50.
 RAZPRAVE IN GRADIVO REVIJA ZA NARODNOSTNA VPRAŠANJA 89 / 2022
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Študenti prava in socialna distanca do migrantov in nekaterih ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72

70
Katunarić, V ., 1991. Dimenzije etničke distance u Hrvatskoj. In F. Šiber-Bahtijarević & M. Lazić 
(eds.) Položaj naroda i međunacionalni odnosi u Hrvatskoj. Institut za društvena istraživanja, 
Zagreb, 129–139. 
Lončar, M., 2020. Europa između buđenja nacionalnog autoritarizma i neizvjesnih projekcija 
budućnosti (2015–2020). Mali Levijatan 7 (1), 64–79.
Lotar, M., Kamenov, Ž. & Lebedina Manzoni, M., 2010. Spolne razlike u stigmatizaciji osuđenih 
počinitelja kaznenih djela. Kriminologija i socijalna integracija 18 (2), 15–27.
Malenica, Z., 2003. Etničke i nacionalne predrasude u hrvatskom društvu danas. Stina 17, 1–9, 
https://stina.hr/staro/download/broj17.doc (accessed 10 July 2022).
Malešević, S. & Uzelac, G., 1997. Ethnic Distance, Power and War: The Case of Croatian Stu-
dents. Nations and Nationalism 3 (2), 291–298. 
Marinović Jerolimov, D., 2005. Društvene i religijske promjene u Hrvatskoj: teorijsko-hipotets-
ki okvir istraživanja. Sociologija sela 43 (2), 289–302.
Mather, D., Jones, S.W. & Moats, S., 2017. Improving upon Bogardus: Creating a More Sensi-
tive and Dynamic Social Distance Scale. Survey Practice 10 (4).
Medlobi, M. & Čepo, D., 2018. Stavovi korisnika društvenih mreža o izbjeglicama i tražiteljima 
azila: post festum tzv. izbjegličke krize. Političke perspektive 8 (1/2), 41–69. 
Miočić, P., 2018. Naš rasizam počinje s Romima i nastavlja neonaci maršem. Express/24 sata, 
26. junij 2018, https://express.24sata.hr/kultura/nas-rasizam-pocinje-s-romima-i-nas-
tavlja-neonaci-marsem-16304?page=2 (accessed 9 August 2022).
Mrakovčić, M. & Gregurović, M., 2020. Neprijatelj pred vratima? Ili kako studenti prava iz 
četiriju najvećih hrvatskih gradova doživljavaju azilante i migrante s Bliskog istoka. Socio-
logija i prostor 58 (3), 291–328.
Mrnjaus, K., 2013. Interculturality in Praxis – Social Distance towards “Different” . Pedagogijska 
istraživanja 10 (2), 324–324.
Murariu, M., 2017. “We Are Fortress Europe!” Nativism and Religion in the Ideology of Pegida 
in the Context of the European Crisis. Studia z Prawa Wyznaniowego 20, 53–68. 
Park, R. E., 1924. The Concept of Social Distance As Applied to the Study of Racial Attitudes 
and Racial Relations. Journal of Applied Sociology 8, 339–344.
Parrillo, V . N. & Donoghue, C., 2005. Updating the Bogardus Social Distance Studies: A New 
National Survey. The Social Science Journal 42 (2), 257–271.
Pehlić, I., 2019. Socijalna distanca među mladima. Centar za napredne studije, Sarajevo.
Petrović, N., Mrakovčić, M. & Fila, F., 2021. Anti-EU Backlash from Below or Above? Public 
Opinion in Central and Eastern Europe Prior to the 2015 Migration Crisis. Revija za soci-
ologiju 51 (3), 317–345.
Pereira, C., V ala, J. & Costa-Lopes, R., 2009. From Prejudice to Discrimination: The Legitimiz -
ing Role of Perceived Threat in Discrimination Against Immigrants. European Journal of 
Social Psychology 40 (7), 1231–1250.
Podgorelec, S., Gregurović, M. & Klempić Bogadi, S., 2019. Immigrants from Bosnia and Her-
zegovina in Croatia: A Sense of Belonging and Acceptance in the New Social Environ-
ment. Treatises and Documents, Journal of Ethnic Studies 82, 5–23.
Previšić, V ., Hrvatić, N. & Posavec, K., 2004. Socijalna distanca prema nacionalnim ili etničkim 
i religijskim skupinama. Pedagogijska istraživanja 1 (1), 105–118.
Rogelj, B., 2017. The Changing Spatiality of the “European Refugee/Migrant Crisis.” Migraci-
jske i etničke teme 33 (2), 191–219. 
Rukavina, I., 2020. O socijalnoj distanci u vrijeme koronavirusa – Nemojte se socijalno distan-
cirati, dovoljna je fizička distanca!. Hrvatsko sociološko društvo, 21. 3. 2020, http://hsd.
89 / 2022 TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Law Students and Social Distance towards Migrants and Some ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72    

71
hr/hr/2020/03/26/o-socijalnoj-distanci-u-vrijeme-koronavirusa/?fbclid=IwAR1vXO1
Lbm_JAoPr0KEs3Da9S2EXPn8dcf IP7dj6BUj0RcVXJEP18LCetpA (accessed 12 May 2022). 
Rustenbach, E., 2010. Sources of Negative Attitudes toward Immigrants in Europe: A Multi-
Level Analysis. International Migration Review 44 (1), 53–77.
Sekulić, D. & Šporer, Ž., 2006. Religioznost kao prediktor vrijednosnih orijentacija. Revija za 
sociologiju 37 (1/2), 1–19.
Simmel, G., 2001. Kontrapunkti kulture. Jesenski i Turk, Zagreb; Hrvatsko sociološko društvo, 
Zagreb.
Stenner, K., 2005. The Authoritarian Dynamic. Cambridge University Press, New Y ork.
Strnad, V ., 2022. Les enfants terribles de l’Europe? The “Sovereigntist” Role of the Visegrád Group 
in the Context of the Migration Crisis. Europe-Asia Studies 74 (1), 72–100.
Šiber, I., 1997. War and the Changes in Social Distance toward the Ethnic Minorities in Croatia. 
Politička misao 3 (5), 3–26.
Šlezak, H. & Šakaja, L., 2012. Prostorni aspekti socijalne distance prema Romima. Hrvatski 
geografski glasnik 74 (1), 91–109. 
T ajfel, H. & Turner, J. C., 1979. An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict. In W. G. Austin 
& S. Worchel (eds.) The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Brooks/Cole Publishing, 
Monterey (CA), 33–37.
T riandis, H. C., 1994. Culture and Social Behavior. McGraw-Hill, New Y ork.
Tusini, S., 2022. A T emporal Perspective to Empirically Investigate the Concept of Social Dis-
tance. Quality & Quantity (2022).
V erkuyten, M., Mepham, K. & Kros, M., 2018. Public Attitudes towards Support for Migrants: 
The Importance of Perceived Voluntary and Involuntary Migration. Ethnic and Racial 
Studies 41 (5), 901–918.
Vučković Juroš T., Dobrotić I. & Zrinščak, S., 2014. Socijalna distanca i društveno okruženje 
– Manjinske skupine u Postkomunističkim i južnoeuropskim zemljama. In J. Baloban, K. 
Nikodem & S. Zrinščak (eds.) Vrednote u Hrvatskoj i u Europi – Komparativna analiza. 
Kršćanska sadašnjost, Zagreb, 13–41.
Vuksan-Ćusa, B., 2018. Birači, stranke i migranti. Političke analize 9 (36), 10–14.
Notes
1
 According to EUROST AT (2022), the number of people applying for asylum for the first time in 
the Republic of Croatia increased from over 100 in 2015 (140) to over 2,000 in 2016 (2,150).
2
 The approval of the Ethics Committee of the Institute for Migration and Ethnic Studies was 
obtained to conduct the research (April 2019).
3
 Two factor analyses were performed using the principal component analysis method, with 
varimax rotation and the G-K criterion for stopping factor extraction. The first was applied to 
items assessing social distance towards migrants and ethnic groups, and the second to items 
assessing distance to members of different religions. Conditions for implementation were met for 
both factor analyses: FA1) Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy = .890; Bartlett’ s 
T est of Sphericity = 5747.661; FA2) Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy = .907; 
Bartlett’s T est of Sphericity = 3817.722. The saturations of each item on the factor are shown in 
Appendix 1.
4
 The above results were obtained using the paired samples t-test, which tested the significance of 
the mean differences for all three pairs of social distance: 1) undesirable – desirable: t = 26.225; 
df = 663; p = .000, 2) undesirable – religious groups: t = 26,234; df = 664; p = .000, 3) desirable – 
religious groups: t = 3.810, df = 662, p = .000.
 RAZPRAVE IN GRADIVO REVIJA ZA NARODNOSTNA VPRAŠANJA 89 / 2022
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Študenti prava in socialna distanca do migrantov in nekaterih ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72

72
Appendix 1
Factor analysis of social distance towards members of migrant and ethnic groups
 
Factor
1 2
3.2. Social distance: Refugees .888 .283
3.1. Social. distance: Asylum seekers .887 .229
3.4. Social distance: Roma .796 .230
3.9. Social distance: Immigrants from the Middle East .710 .526
3.10. Social distance: Immigrants from Africa .658 .568
3.7. Social distance: Immigrants from the USA and Canada .213 .916
3.6. Social distance: Immigrants from Western European countries .258 .911
3.5. Social distance: Immigrants from ex-Yugoslavia countries .332 .818
3.8. Social distance: Immigrants from Asian countries (Chinese, Koreans ... ) .528 .719
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis;
Rotation Method: V arimax with Kaiser Normalization;
80.952 % of interpreted variance;
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy = 0.890; 
Bartlett’s T est of Sphericity = 5747.661
Factor analysis of social distance towards members of religious groups 
 
Factor
1
4.5. Social distance: Protestants (Baptists, Adventists ...) .929
4.6. Social distance: non-Christians (Buddhists, Hindus ...) .913
4.4. Social distance: Jews .901
4.3. Social distance: Muslims .883
4.2. Social distance: Orthodox .868
4.7. Social distance: atheists .845
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
79.239 % of interpreted variance
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy = .907
Bartlett‘s T est of Sphericity = 3817.722
 
89 / 2022 TREATISES AND DOCUMENTS JOURNAL OF ETHNIC STUDIES
M. GREGUROVIć, M. MRAKOVčIć Law Students and Social Distance towards Migrants and Some ...
DOI: 10.36144/RiG89.dec22.49-72