The integration of refugees is a widely debated issue, yet scholarly discussions often overlook a crucial factor: The role of host society hostility in shaping this process. Across Europe, the erosion of social norms has emboldened xenophobic discourse, fueling a surge in anti-refugee sentiments. As hostility toward refugees intensifies, a critical question emerges: How does this environment affect the lived experiences of refugees themselves? One key yet underexplored aspect of refugee experiences is social marginalization, the perception of being unappreciated, excluded, or unwelcome in society. This paper contributes to the growing literature on host society antagonism by examining how anti-refugee violence in Germany influences social marginalization among refugees. Drawing on the German Socio-Economic Panel surveys from 2016 to 2017, linked to administrative data on anti-refugee violence from the Anti Refugee Violence in Germany (ARVIG) project, the study employs multilevel modeling to assess this relationship. The findings show that refugees living in counties with higher levels of anti-refugee violence report significantly greater social marginalization. These results underscore the importance of considering the broader socio-political climate of the host society when analysing integration and assimilation outcomes.

Migration scholars often present democratic decline as an emigration driver. This effect is more pronounced among highly‐skilled citizens who have the resources and capability to settle abroad. Yet, not much attention has been paid to why highly‐skilled emigrants would opt to return to their autocratizing countries, even if they are concerned about the political path the country has taken. This article provides answers to this puzzle through 41 semi‐structured interviews with highly‐skilled Turkish citizens who were born and raised in Turkey and who, after living abroad, voluntarily returned after 2016, when Turkey's autocratization reached its peak. In line with the existing literature, it finds that socio‐economic and affective reasons play an important role in shaping return decisions. However, as a novel contribution to the literature, it finds that autocratization paradoxically acts as a motivating factor for some migrants who want to move back to contribute to the fight for democratisation. Building on this, the article conceptualises “return migration as voice” (a la Hirschman), a new analytical lens to approach highly‐skilled migration flows in autocratizing countries.

Existing research on descriptive representation maintains that political candidates often receive more political support from in-group voters than their out-group competitors. Scholars claim this is due in large part to the assumption that descriptive candidates have a greater inclination to act in ways that benefit their shared identity group. This paper explores the other side of these heightened expectations and asks—How do voters evaluate a descriptive representative whose actions are perceived as being at odds with group expectations? Moreover, how do those evaluations compare to out-group candidates who behave in similarly? Using an experimental test, we examine the costs leveraged against political candidates who meet voters’ expectations and those who do not, and seeing whether the shared identity conditions voters’ evaluations. In doing so, we provide a more holistic view of the ways in which descriptive representation matters to voters.