The role of sender credibility in migration information campaigns

Morgenstern, Sandra Article — Published Version The role of sender credibility in migration information campaigns International Migration Provided in Cooperation with: John Wiley & Sons Suggested Citation: Morgenstern, Sandra (2025) : The role of sender credibility in migration information campaigns, International Migration, ISSN 1468-2435, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, Vol. 63, Iss. 1, https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.13383 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/319296 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ International Migration. 2025;63:e13383. | 1 of 17 https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.13383 wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/imig Received: 25 April 2024 | Revised: 10 November 2024 | Accepted: 2 January 2025 DOI: 10.1111/imig.13383 SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLE The role of sender credibility in migration information campaigns Sandra Morgenstern This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2025 The Author(s). International Migration published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Organization for Migration. MZES University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany Correspondence Sandra Morgenstern, University of Mannheim, Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische Sozialforschung (MZES), Mannheim, Germany. Email: [email protected] Funding information Cluster of Excellence “The Politics of Inequality” University of Konstanz Abstract The actors who carry out migration information campaigns—and thus serve as ‘information senders’—vary greatly. Existing studies on the effectiveness of such campaigns typically focus on one case of an information campaign. It is difficult to compare these case studies because, in addition to the different implementing actors, they differ substantially in terms of the content conveyed and the ways they are carried out. As a result, evidence of the causal effect of the information senders is missing. I argue that who implements the campaign is not trivial, as each type of information sender may be associated with a different level of credibility, and psychological models of information processing suggest that a senders' credibility is key to the impact of information. To corroborate and complement existing research, I present findings from a longitudinal survey experiment in Nigeria among students who were presented with the same hypothetical information campaign while the information sender was varied: each an international and local NGO, government and social contact. The results show overall similar effect directions for the different information senders, namely an increase in awareness of the campaign topic of irregular migration and a reduction of (irregular) migration intentions among the participants. However, notable differences are observed in effect size and effect persistence per sender 2 of 17 | MORGENSTERN INTRODUCTION It is a stylised fact that social capital and migration networks are crucial determinants of migration behaviour (Castles et al., 2014; Lubbers et al., 2020; Massey, 1999). One main reason for this is their provision of relevant information (i.a. Borjas, 1992). The policy of migration information campaigns aims to harness these information effects to tackle irregular migration.1 Their declared aim is to spread information about migration and combat misinformation (European Commission, 2015). The campaigns are implemented in places with high levels of irregular migration to Europe but no originbased legal claim for asylum. Although governments most often fund these campaigns, there is a wide variety of implementers (Tjaden et al., 2018). The most common implementers are governments themselves, NGOs and social contacts. Hence, from the audience's perspective the perceived source of information varies between these implementing sender types. Migration information campaigns are an exemplary case for studying informationsender effects as the audience does not ‘gather’ the information themselves but receives it regardless of their receptive motivation. Evidence on the effectiveness of migration information campaigns is scarce and often contradictory. Nonempirical research literature doubts the effectiveness of this policy tool due to an expected lack of trust in the source of information (Schans & Optekamp, 2016). Recent empirical testing studies show that migration information campaigns have a direct impact on migration intentions of the audience with NGOs (Morgenstern, 2024), IGOs (Dennison, 2022) and migrants as senders (Dunsch et al., 2019), while others reveal a limited effectiveness among the campaigntargeted society (Caso & Carling, 2024). Despite suggesting that effectiveness varies by sender type, existing studies lack comparability between the effects of sender types and do not reflect the diversity of senders. With the aim of complementing existing research, I empirically investigate the moderating role of the sendertype in depth, keeping other campaigncomponents, such as message or audience, constant. Using a survey experimental design, the study loses generalisability compared to previous field experimental studies due to its surveyartificiality but gains in extracting the sender effect and, hence, internal validity. The central relationship under investigation is between systematically delivered information and its impact on the recipient regarding issue awareness and behavioural intention to migrate. I argue that this relationship is moderated by the type of sender perceived as the source of information. According to the social psychological literature, the default mode of information processing is superficial and, therefore, highly influenced by peripheral cues (Chaiken & Trope, 1999; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). As this is the case when information is provided by an external source, such as in migration information campaigns, the cue sent by the sender type is expected to work as a heuristic or signalling mechanism for its adequacy of processing, which can then be observed in the level of change in the recipient's awareness or intentions following the information. In line with the communication research literature, the effects should be most durable with repeated information exposure (Lecheler & de Vreese, 2013; Oxley, 2020). I expect that the mechanism behind this relationship, i.e., the influence of the sender type in an information campaign setting on issue awareness and behavioural intention to migrate, can be traced back to different credibility levels the audience associates with each sender type. Associated credibility with an (inter- )national NGO, government and social contact is, however, a highly subjective endeavour. Based on the literature, one could try and opposing actors are most influential regarding general versus irregular migration. Descriptive mediation analyses support the relevance of credibility per sender and imply the existence of a topicdependent sender credibility effect. | 3 of 17 SENDER CREDIBILITY IN INFORMATION CAMPAIGNS to make initial assumptions, for example in terms of higher/lower credibility of local sender, but this does not do justice to the subjectivity on the individual nor the group level. To include this subjective judgement and therefore keep the level of experimental artificiality low, I examine this mechanism only in a noncausal exploratory manner. The online survey experiment is conducted in Benin City, Nigeria, and consists of three survey waves over a threeweek period. About 600 students (N) participate in wave 1, with a significant—but not systematic—attrition, about 150 students continue in waves 2 and 3. The study focuses on the treatment implemented in the first wave: the type of sender of a hypothetical information campaign is varied between NGOs, governments and social contacts, each being local or international. Thus, the treatment consists of six treatment arms, i.e., the six different information senders. The studies' tested sender effect is hence causal, while the presumed mechanism via associated credibility level will be descriptive in nature. The study follows a causally identified yet exploratory study design. Benin City, Nigeria, was selected as a case study for two reasons. First, Benin City plays an exemplary role as a ‘migration hub’ (Obi et al., 2019). In an environment with high fluctuations of people arriving and leaving, regularly or irregularly, there is a high market for information about migration, but also a high fluctuation of misinformation. Especially in a less regulated environment, such as the present one, the high fluctuation of (mis)information causes different information channels to compete. Therefore, the source of information becomes all the more critical. Second, from the perspective of European governments, Nigeria is one of the most frequently chosen places for migration information campaigns. This is because Nigeria is classified as a ‘safe place’, and Nigerians have represented the highest national proportion of irregular migrants from West Africa to Europe in the last halfdecade (World Bank—country data), making Nigeria a typical country for this policy implementation. THEORY This study is based on the fundamental premise that information about a given topic affects the level of awareness among the audience and influences their intentional behaviour with regard to that topic. One frequently debated topic in the context of migration information campaigns is the question of whether the conveyed information could aim to correct a lack of information or misinformation. This issue has been discussed by several scholars, including Nieuwenhuys and Pecoud (2007), Oeppen (2016), and Schans and Optekamp (2016). The empirical evidence is inconclusive (Gilbert & Koser, 2006; Schapendonk, 2015). In this study, it is assumed that, although the level of previous knowledge may vary among individuals, comprehensive information is implausible, and a campaign may deliver new or revised information to varying degrees. Moreover, according to prior empirical research, it is anticipated that the information provided by a migration information campaign will positively impact topic awareness, but have a negative impact on behavioural intentions to migrate irregularly (Dunsch et al., 2019; Morgenstern, 2020). This is because the campaign focuses on the challenges of irregular migration, and this additional cost inducement may reduce aspirations (Carling, 2002; Massey, 1999). The relationship between systematic information about irregular migration and its impact on the recipient can be moderated by several factors, including the source of the information. A higher likelihood for moderation is mainly when the information is not gathered by the individual in question but delivered from outside, as in migration information campaigns (Morgenstern, 2024). This absence of individual action is also described as the default mode of information processing and is understood to be primarily superficial (Marcus, 2000). The superficial processing path facilitates the application of heuristics and cue signals (Chaiken & Trope, 1999; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). Studies have shown that heuristic processing can be as effective as deep processing, but more efficient, particularly given the difficulty in assessing the veracity of new information (Lupia, 1994). The impact of information sources on processing has been demonstrated across various contexts, including externally provided and selfgathered information (DeBono & Harnish, 1988; James & Van Ryzin, 2017; Malhotra & Kuo, 2008). In migration research, the link is primarily established for the latter. In this context, 4 of 17 | MORGENSTERN information obtained through international social contacts has the most significant influence on migration intentions in general, while local social networks are shown to be of particular importance in the case of irregular migration (Castles et al., 2014; Frouws et al., 2016). In a recent review, Williams et al. (2020) demonstrate how prospective migrants employ a range of information sources strategically tailored to their particular requirements. Mechanism: credibility per sender type The reasoning behind variation in the impact of different senders of information is generally attributed to different levels of credibility of the source, i.e., the sender of information and hence the information itself. Applying information processing paths of heuristics and cue signals (Chaiken & Trope, 1999; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986), information conveyed by credible sources is perceived as more credible information and identified as worthy of processing, whereas information from less credible sources is regarded as less credible information and of lesser value. The concept of credibility comprises three key aspects used to evaluate the sender of information and the information itself (Brinol & Petty, 2009; McCroskey & Teven, 1999): expertise (a), trustworthiness (b) and goodwill (c). This study examines how the impact of information varies according to the sender type in an exploratory manner, as the concept of credibility and the different subcomponents are difficult to assign to the different sender types from the perspective of the audience. The concept of expertise (a) implies the capacity to provide valid information. Organisations with a more institutionalised structure, such as government or nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), may be perceived by the audience as more knowledgeable due to their ability to draw on the experiences of numerous individuals. In contrast, social contacts may be perceived as more knowledgeable because they possess expertise based on lived experience, either their own experience (international social contact) or that of a close person. The aspect of trustworthiness (b) pertains to the motivation to provide accurate information in general. In the light of the assumption that destination countries may be interested in reducing irregular migration, it is reasonable to posit that international governments and potentially even international NGOs may have divergent interests, which could result in lower levels of trustworthiness being attributed to them. Goodwill (c) denotes the intention to provide the recipient with accurate information. Although the first two components may be subject to objective classification and exhibit some degree of crosscultural consistency (Freitag & Bauer, 2013; Putnam, 2000; Uslaner, 2018), the component of goodwill is characterised by a clear dyadic dependency between the sender and the receiver, underscoring the subjective nature of the process. Hence, the perception of the senders by the audience is highly subjective and difficult to ascertain from existing literature, making it an unsuitable basis for developing differentiated hypotheses on the extent of variation that is expected. In vague terms, however, it can be formulated that 1. different sender types are expected to have different effects on issue awareness and behavioural intention to migrate, and 2. the level of credibility associated with the sender type is the reason for the relationship between sender type and issue awareness/behavioural intention to migrate. This proposed moderating effect of the assigned credibility per sender type is the argument used in some of the literature to explain why information campaigns are unable to influence migration: a lack of trust in the source of information (Nieuwenhuys & Pecoud, 2007; Oeppen, 2016). The evidence on the impact of information campaigns is mixed. Some studies (e.g., Morgenstern, 2024) have identified empirical evidence of the impact of migration information campaigns on the attitudes or intentions of the target society. Other studies (e.g., Caso & Carling, 2024) have found that such campaigns exert limited influence. The mechanism of variation by sender type might provide a resolution to this apparent contradiction. | 5 of 17 SENDER CREDIBILITY IN INFORMATION CAMPAIGNS Another argument from the literature that calls into question the impact of migration information campaigns, and which is equally applicable to information campaigns more broadly, is that externally provided information has only a shortterm effect in the form of nudging (Davenport et al., 2010; Gerber et al., 2011; Williamson et al., 2020). In order to gain a deeper understanding of this topic, I will examine the impact of the information campaigns in question, both in terms of the magnitude of the effect and the persistence of the effect. RESEARCH DESIGN This study aims to shed light on the role of the sender type in a campaign setting on topic awareness and subsequent behavioural intentions. To achieve high internal validity while keeping the conditions as generalisable as possible, an online survey experiment is implemented among a relevant target group following a labinthefield experimental design. Analytically, only the first wave, including baseline, treatment and endline, is used to extract the effect magnitude per sender type. The two waves of panel followup surveys act as first insights into the persistence of change, i.e., the effect persistence over time. The research design received ethical approval from the ethics committee of the researchers' university and from the University of Benin City, Nigeria, where the study is implemented. Setting In Nigeria, Benin City is known as a migration hub across state borders. A migration hub setting is a loose construct. In this study, I understand it as a setting in which (a) migration is an omnipresent issue with high mobility among the people, whether through immigration, emigration, or both, whether irregular or regular, and (b) various sources of migrationrelated information compete with each other. The latter criterion is generally more likely in a less regulated environment, such as places with low governmental restrictions and considerable irregular emigration movement. This is the case for Benin City in Edo State, Nigeria. Due to its relative richness through oil resources, migration behaviour to and from Benin City goes back in time. In the last decade, Benin City has become an epicentre for irregular migration. In such a setting, different sources of information compete with each other, and receiving information from an external source—instead of by selfselection—is inevitable: the most common information sources are social contacts (local ones and the international diaspora), different organisations and brokers (Aker et al., 2011), local governments, and international governments such as the EU or European nation states (Tjaden et al., 2018). With a high variation in sender types providing systematic or strategic information, the source of information becomes ever more important. One reason for this increased sendertype effect is that the level of misinformation naturally increases as more information fluctuates. This environment comes with a decreased level of generalised trust among society and higher levels of scepticism (Draude et al., 2018), which is visualised by the ‘circle of trust’ in Chabal and Daloz (1999). Empirical evidence indicates deficient levels of generalised trust in subSaharan Africa (Inglehart & Welzel, 2010; Mattes & Moreno, 2018) and considers it a potential relic from the African history of slavery (Nunn & Wantchekon, 2011). Migration information campaigns are an exemplary case for studying the sender effects of information provision in a high migration setting, as the one described. Although generally funded by governments themselves, the campaign is then implemented by different actors, such as NGOs, social contacts and governments themselves. Hence, the perceived source of information varies between these senders. For European national governments it has become popular to invest in this policy direction since the socalled migration crisis in 2015. The declared aim of migration information campaigns is to inform audiences about the issue of migration (Cleton & Schweitzer, 2021) as well as to combat the circulating misinformation disseminated by smuggling 6 of 17 | MORGENSTERN organisations and others (European Commission, 2015). The campaigns are implemented in places with high levels of irregular migration to Europe but no originbased legal claim for asylum. A typical country for this policy implementation is Nigeria. Nigerians have represented the highest national proportion of irregular migrants from West Africa to Europe in the last halfdecade, the majority starting their journey from the migration hub, Benin City (Morgenstern & Strijbis, 2024; The World Bank Group, 2018). According to the statistics upon arrival in Europe, most migrants are young, male adults, have a lowermiddle to middleclass socioeconomic status, and possess a school education and often a university degree (see UNHCR Operational Portal); they are hence defined as the target group of this policy. The setting resembles a typical case for this policy implementation regarding country and city. Sample To match the described target audience of migration information campaigns, the sample population under study comprises young adults in Benin City, Nigeria. More precisely, the study focuses on university students. University students fulfil the aspects of a most typical case given the description of the target group of these campaigns with regard to age group, education and presumably social status, as only certain groups of society in Nigeria manage to attend university. However, this social group is expected to still be on the upper level of the socioeconomic status of the overall group of irregular migrants to Europe. Treatment specification and allocation Similar to the output of an information campaign, the treatment consists of a piece of information (A) shown to the participants and an indication of the source of this information (B). The source varies between three types—NGOs, governments and social contacts—each of which are international or local actors. This results in six distinct sender types (3 types × 2 versions, international and local). To guard against deception, participants are told that the information is similar to information from a migration information campaign. The information piece (A) deals with the challenges of irregular migration. The content of the information piece is based on a previous study on irregular migration among Nigerian students. A systematic compilation of texts from the participating students in the control group (N = 916), who were asked to write a letter to a friend, family member or acquaintance about irregular migration, resulted in five main themes (risks on the journey, challenges at destination, deception, conditions at home and legal ways) with 2–4 key sentences per theme. The piece of information is presented as a leaflet for the NGO and government sender types, and as a handwritten letter when the information source is a social contact (for an excerpt, see Appendix A in Data S1). This distinction in the means of information transmission ensures a certain degree of reality. However, it has the disadvantage of introducing some noise into the social contact treatment, as we had to add more words/sentences to the letter as compared to the content of the leaflets. All leaflets are identical except for the sender indication; the same applies to all letters. The layout of the leaflets was designed based on input from various actual migration information campaign leaflets. The type of sender (B) is communicated clearly and repeatedly: before the information piece, in the information piece, i.e., on the front page of the leaflet or in the first line of the letter, and after the information piece. The social contact is limited to close contact via the salutation ‘Dear friend, dear family’, in the information piece. It is assumed that each of the six senders has a different level of credibility with the target group. A posttreatment measure captures the credibility level of the different sender types using a 10item scale that captures all three credibility subgroups. | 7 of 17 SENDER CREDIBILITY IN INFORMATION CAMPAIGNS Operationalisation of variables of interest The central concepts of interest are awareness and behavioural intentions regarding migration. As direct questions have the disadvantage of being susceptible to social desirability bias, the questions are designed to be as indirect as possible. The author pretested the questions in previous fieldwork with Nigerian adolescents. Awareness is measured by the question asking how common irregular migration is in the respondent's society. A higher score indicates a higher awareness of the prevalence, in an environment such as the one studied. In addition to the level of awareness, the intention to migrate is measured. Students are asked to indicate the extent to which they intend to migrate, both regularly and irregularly,2 on a 10point scale. Migration intentions are correlated with actual migration flows, showing a higher number of intending migrants compared to the actual number of migrants (Ortega & Peri, 2013). Recent studies highlight the relevance of immobile but aspiring migrants, providing an additional reason to study how information can shape migration aspirations (Carling & Schewel, 2018). Study setup and design The online survey was set up via the online survey platform unipark. Students received the study link and a brief description of the study via mobile phone SMS. The phone numbers were provided to the research team confidentially by the student registry. The university administration provided a random selection of student phone numbers from across the university, i.e., from all pregraduate years and all cohorts. As agreed in the ethical approvals with the authors' and the studied university, only the numbers were passed on to the researcher without any additional information. Participants received an incentive of 500 naira mobile airtime after each wave of the survey in which they participated. The study design consisted of three waves. In the first wave, pretreatment covariates are collected in a baseline survey, the sendertype treatment with the information piece is implemented, and the dependent variables are then collected in an endline estimation. One week later, the second wave consists of a baseline to capture the shortterm persistence effects of the first treatment, a repeated exposure manipulation, and again a measurement of the dependent variables in an endline survey part. In the third wave, after another week in between, only the dependent variable is measured to learn about the duration of the effect. The total time frame is, therefore, 3 weeks. Given the lack of repeated exposure and measurement in quantitative field studies, it is difficult to characterise this timeframe as typical. However, in terms of practical intentions from a campaign funding or implementation perspective, the 1 week in between and the 3week total timeframe could be seen as the absolute minimum of the desired effect duration, meaning that the smallest effects in an unintended effect direction would be relevant. Descriptive insights: case setting and sample The sample studied falls into the category of convenience sample. We invited a random sample of students from the student register and asked them to distribute the link to their peers at the university. A total of 619 students participated, of which 140 were from the student register. The lack of random selection for most of the sample, however, results in a lack of generalisability and carries the risk of obtaining a systematically selfselected sample. I expect that there is a high probability of potential systematic bias in the following directions: (a) people with an interest in the issue of migration, (b) people with altruistic values who want to get involved in supporting research, (c) people in financial need (air time incentive) and (d) people who are generally less suspicious or have a higher general level of trust. The first and last elements are particularly relevant. The first is because it is the target group 8 of 17 | MORGENSTERN that actors who provide information on migration want to reach. The latter is because a sample with a generally higher level of trust is similar to a conservative measurement scenario when studying the mechanism via sender credibility. When interpreting the results, it is important to bear in mind the possible selfselection of the sample due to interest in the topic and gullibility. The average study participant is around 23 years old, male, studies physical sciences at the University of Benin City, and lives outside campus (see Appendix C in Data S1). Prior to treatment, general awareness of irregular migration is medium (6.86, scale 1–10). The intention to migrate is generally high (7.74, scale 1–10), but the intention to migrate irregularly is much lower (2.33, scale 1–10). Table 1 and the balance tests reported in the Appendix S1 show the treatment is evenly distributed within each wave. Additional analyses show no systematic attrition based on the recorded covariates, but on the basis of the initial migration intentions. This slight systematic attrition among the less interested makes the sample more similar to the intended target group of migration information campaigns. RESULTS The results are presented in four parts. I focus first on the direct effect of migration information by the different sender types. Second the issue of durability is examined. Thus, the first part focuses exclusively on data from Wave 1, while the second part includes the panel structure. In the third part, I further explore the mechanism behind the sendertype effect via the construct of sender credibility. Fourth and finally, I sum up the results and discuss the outcomes, their limitations and paths for future research. Direct effects of sender type Before describing the variation by sender type, I check for an overall change prepost the information treatment, hence ‘the campaign impact’ (results, see Table in Appendix S1). Comparing the pre–posttreatment estimates within the first wave reveals a small but insignificant change regarding awareness levels. The lack of significance might be due to a lack of analytical power. General migration intentions and irregular migration intentions are estimated with the full sample size and reveal a small but significant decrease. The decreasing pre–posttreatment results for irregular migration intentions are in line with empirical evidence from prior studies on immediate and direct effects of migration information campaigns (Dennison, 2022; Dunsch et al., 2019; Morgenstern, 2024). Table 2 demonstrates that the withinsubject pre–posttreatment comparison effects vary by sender type. The awareness estimates are average mean comparisons, since they are measured in a random subgroup per wave. This smaller sample size has implications for statistical power, as shown in the rare significance. Still, it is observable that awareness increases in the treatment group with local governments and decreases with local social TABLE 1 Overview of treatment group distribution by treatment and wave. Sender type/credibility Total NGO I. NGO Gov. I. Gov. Soc. I. Soc. N Wave 1 99 104 100 105 102 109 619 Wave 2 24 23 32 34 21 32 166 Wave 3 19 18 28 25 20 27 137 Abbreviations: Gov., government; I., international; no additional indication, local agent; Soc., social contact. | 15 of 17 SENDER CREDIBILITY IN INFORMATION CAMPAIGNS PEER REVIEW The peer review history for this article is available at h t t p s : / / w w w . w e b o f s c i e n c e . c o m / a p i / g a t e w a y / w o s / p e e r - r e v i e w / 1 0 . 1 1 1 1 / i m i g . 1 3 3 8 3 . DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions. Endnotes 1 In this article, I define irregular migration from a government perspective as irregular entry, i.e., entry without the required legal documents (e.g., visa), often referred to as undocumented migration. 2 The actual wording in the questionnaire is different. To reduce any potentially perceived judgement and align with culturally accepted expression the wording ‘through the backdoor’ is used instead of ‘irregular’ migration. REFERENCES Aker, J.C., Clemens, M.A. & Ksoll, C. (2011) Mobiles and mobility: the effect of mobile phones on migration in Niger. In: Proceedings of the German Development Economics Conference, Berlin 2011, No. 2. Allcott, H. & Gentzkow, M. (2017) Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211–236. Alpes, M.J. (2017) Why aspiring migrants trust migration brokers: the moral economy of departure in Anglophone Cameroon. Africa: The Journal of the International African Institute, 87(2), 304–321. Bauer, P.C. (2019) Conceptualizing trust and trustworthiness (No. 61). Revised version of working paper published in: political concepts working paper series. Borjas, G.J. (1992) Ethnic capital and intergenerational mobility. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107, 123–150. Brinol, P. & Petty, R.E. (2009) Source factors in persuasion: a selfvalidation approach. European Review of Social Psychology, 20(1), 49–96. Carling, J. (2002) Migration in the age of involuntary immobility: theoretical reflections and Cape Verdean experiences. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 28(1), 5–42. Carling, J. & Schewel, K. (2018) Revisiting aspiration and ability in international migration. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(6), 945–963. Caso, N. & Carling, J. (2024) The reach and impact of migration information campaigns in 25 communities across Africa and Asia. Migration Policy Practice, 13(1), 3–11. Castles, S., De Haas, H. & Miller, M.J. (2014) The age of migration: international population movements in the modern world, 5th edition. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Chabal, P. & Daloz, J.- P. (1999) Africa works. Disorder as a political instrument. Canadian Journal of African Studies/Revue Canadienne des Études Africaines, 35(1), 181–183. Chaiken, S. & Trope, Y. (1999) Dualprocess theories in social psychology. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Cleton, L. & Schweitzer, R. (2021) ‘Our aim is to assist migrants in making a wellinformed decision’: how return counsellors in Austria and The Netherlands manage the aspirations of unwanted noncitizens. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 47(17), 3846–3863. Davenport, T.C., Gerber, A.S., Green, D.P., Larimer, C.W., Mann, C.B. & Panagopoulos, C. (2010) The enduring effects of social pressure: tracking campaign experiments over a series of elections. Political Behavior, 32(3), 423–430. DeBono, K.G. & Harnish, R.J. (1988) Source expertise, source attractiveness, and the processing of persuasive information: a functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(4), 541. Dennison, J. (2022) How migrant resource Centres affect migration decisions: quasiexperimental evidence from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Iraq and Pakistan. International Migration, 61(4), 104–119. Draude, A., Holck, L. & Stolle, D. (2018) Social trust. In: The Oxford Handbook of Governance and Limited Statehood. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 353. Dunsch, F., Tjaden, D. & Quiviger, W. (2019) Migrants as messengers: The Impact of peertopeer communication on potential migrants in Senegal. Impact evaluation report. International Organization for Migration, Geneva. European Commission. (2015) Communication from the commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: EU action plan against migrant smuggling (2015–2020). Freitag, M. & Bauer, P.C. (2013) Testing for measurement equivalence in surveys: dimensions of social trust across cultural contexts. Public Opinion Quarterly, 77(S1), 24–44. 16 of 17 | MORGENSTERN Frouws, B., Phillips, M., Hassan, A. & Twigt, M. (2016) Getting to Europe the WhatsApp way: the use of ICT in contemporary mixed migration flows to Europe. Regional mixed migration secretariat briefing paper. Gerber, A.S., Gimpel, J.G., Green, D.P. & Shaw, D.R. (2011) How large and longlasting are the persuasive effects of televised campaign ads? Results from a randomized field experiment. American Political Science Review, 105(1), 135–150. Gilbert, A. & Koser, K. (2006) Coming to the UK: what do asylumseekers know about the UK before arrival? Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 32(7), 1209–1225. Helbling, M. & Morgenstern, S. (2023) Migration aspirations and the perceptions of the political, economic and social environment in Africa. International Migration, 61(6), 102–117. Herrmann, A., Fischer, H., Amelung, D., Litvine, D., Aall, C., Andersson, C. et al. (2018) Household preferences for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in four European highincome countries: does health information matter? A mixedmethods study protocol. BMC Public Health, 18(1), 71. Inglehart, R. & Welzel, C. (2010) Changing mass priorities: the link between modernization and democracy. Perspectives on Politics, 8(2), 551–567. James, O. & Van Ryzin, G.G. (2017) Incredibly good performance: an experimental study of source and level effects on the credibility of government. The American Review of Public Administration, 47(1), 23–35. Lazer, D.M.J., Baum, M.A., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A.J., Greenhill, K.M., Menczer, F. et al. (2018) The science of fake news. Science, 359(6380), 1094–1096. Lecheler, S. & de Vreese, C.H. (2013) What a difference a day makes? The effects of repetitive and competitive news framing over time. Communication Research, 40(2), 147–175. Lubbers, M.J., Verdery, A.M. & Molina, J.L. (2020) Social networks and transnational social fields: a review of quantitative and mixedmethods approaches. International Migration Review, 54(1), 177–204. Lupia, A. (1994) Shortcuts versus encyclopedias: information and voting behavior in California insurance reform elections. American Political Science Review, 88, 63–76. Malhotra, N. & Kuo, A.G. (2008) Attributing blame: the public's response to hurricane Katrina. The Journal of Politics, 70(1), 120–135. Marcus, G.E. (2000) Emotions in politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 3(1), 221–250. Massey, D.S. (1999) International migration at the dawn of the twentyfirst century: the role of the state. Population and Development Review, 25(2), 303–322. Mattes, R. & Moreno, A. (2018) Social and political trust in developing countries: SubSaharan Africa and Latin America. McCroskey, J.C. & Teven, J.J. (1999) Goodwill: a reexamination of the construct and its measurement. Communication Monographs, 66(1), 90–103. Morgenstern, S. & Strijbis, O. (2024) Forecasting migration movements using prediction markets. Comparative Migration Studies, 12(1), 45. Morgenstern, S. (2024) (How) do information campaigns influence migration decisions? Journal of Experimental Political Science, 11(3), 314–326. Morgenstern, S.N. (2020) Political information & migration. PhD Thesis. Nieuwenhuys, C. & Pecoud, A. (2007) Human trafficking, information campaigns, and strategies of migration control. American Behavioral Scientist, 50(12), 1674–1695. Nunn, N. & Wantchekon, L. (2011) The slave trade and the origins of mistrust in Africa. American Economic Review, 101(7), 3221–3252. Obi, C., Bartolini, F. & D'Haese, M. (2019) Evaluating the impact of an information campaign in deterring irregular migration intention among youths: a randomised control experiment in Edo state, Nigeria. Invited paper presented at the 6th African Conference of Agricultural Economists, September 23–26, 2019, Abuja, Nigeria. Oeppen, C. (2016) ‘Leaving Afghanistan! Are you sure?’ European efforts to deter potential migrants through information campaigns. Human Geography, 9(2), 57–68. Ortega, F. & Peri, G. (2013) The effect of income and immigration policies on international migration. Migration Studies, 1(1), 47–74. Oxley, Z. (2020) Framing and political decision making: An overview. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Available from: h t t p s : / / o x f o r d r e . c o m / p o l i t i c s / v i e w / 1 0 . 1 0 9 3 / a c r e f o r e / 9 7 8 0 1 9 0 2 2 8 6 3 7 . 0 0 1 . 0 0 0 1 / a c r e f o r e - 9 7 8 0 1 9 0 2 2 8 6 3 7 - e - 1 2 5 0 Petty, R.E. & Cacioppo, J.T. (1986) Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: SpringerVerlag. Putnam, R.D. (2000) Bowling alone: America's declining social capital. In: Crothers, L. & Lockhart, C. (Eds.) Culture and politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Schans, D. & Optekamp, C. (2016) Raising awareness, changing behavior? Combatting irregular migration through information campaigns. Cahier 2016–11. Schapendonk, J. (2015) What if networks move? Dynamic social networking in the context of African migration to Europe. Population, Space and Place, 21(8), 809–819. | 17 of 17 SENDER CREDIBILITY IN INFORMATION CAMPAIGNS The World Bank Group. (2018) Asylum seekers in the European Union: building evidence to inform policy making (Vol. 2). The World Bank Group Working Paper. Tjaden, J. & Gninafon, H. (2022) Raising awareness about the risk of irregular migration: quasiexperimental evidence from Guinea. Population and Development Review, 48(3), 745–766. Tjaden, J., Morgenstern, S. & Laczko, F. (2018) Evaluating the impact of information campaigns in the field of migration: a systematic review of the evidence and practical guidance. Central Mediterranean Route Thematic Report Series. Uslaner, E.M. (2018) The Oxford handbook of social and political trust. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Williams, N.E., Hughes, C., Bhandari, P., Thornton, A., YoungDeMarco, L., Sun, C. et al. (2020) When does social capital matter for migration? A study of networks, brokers, and migrants in Nepal. International Migration Review, 54(4), 964–991. Williamson, S., Adida, C.L., Lo, A., Platas, M., Prather, L. & Werfel, S.H. (2020) Increasing immigrant inclusion: Family history, empathy, and immigration in the United States. Immigration Policy Lab, Working Paper 20-01. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Additional supporting information can be found online in the Supporting Information section at the end of this article. How to cite this article: Morgenstern, S. (2025) The role of sender credibility in migration information campaigns. International Migration, 63, e13383. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.13383