We show that an information nudge increased the rate of American citizenship applications among low-income immigrants eligible for a federal fee waiver. Approximately half of the 9 million naturalization-eligible immigrants qualify for a federal programme that waives the cost of the citizenship application for low-income individuals. However, take-up of this fee waiver programme remains low1,2,3. Here we use a randomized field experiment to test the effectiveness of a low-cost intervention (a ‘nudge’) that informed low-income immigrants about their eligibility for the fee waiver. We find that the information nudge increased the rate of citizenship applications by about 8.6 percentage points from 24.5% in the control group to 33.1% in the treatment group (ordinary least squares regression with robust standard errors (d.f. = 933); P = 0.015; 95% confidence interval ranged from 1.7 to 15.4 percentage points). We found no evidence that the nudge was less effective for poorer or less educated immigrants. These findings contribute to the literature that addresses the incomplete take-up of public benefits by low-income populations4,5,6,7,8,9,10 and suggest that lack of information is an important obstacle to citizenship among low-income immigrants who demonstrate an interest in naturalization.
Access optionsAccess options
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $8.67 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Replication code is available at the Harvard Dataverse with the identifier https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/Z1REHB.
2016 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics Technical Report (US Department of Homeland Security, Office of Immigration Statistics, 2017).
USCIS Fee Waiver Policies and Data Techical Report (US Department of Homeland Security, Office of Immigration Statistics, 2017).
Lee, J. & Baker, B. Estimates of the Lawful Permanent Resident Population in the United States: January 2014 Technical Report (US Department of Homeland Security, Office of Immigration Statistics, 2017).
Currie, J. The Take Up of Social Benefits Technical Report (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2004).
Remler, D. K. & Glied, S. A. What other programs can teach us: increasing participation in health insurance programs. Am. J. Public Health 93, 67–74 (2003).
Milkman, K. L., Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D. & Madrian, B. C. Using implementation intentions prompts to enhance influenza vaccination rates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 10415–10420 (2011).
Bettinger, E. P., Long, B. T., Oreopoulos, P. & Sanbonmatsu, L. The role of application assistance and information in college decisions: results from the H&R Block FAFSA experiment. Q. J. Econ. 127, 1205–1242 (2012).
Daponte, B. O., Sanders, S. & Taylor, L. Why do low-income households not use food stamps? Evidence from an experiment. J. Hum. Resour. 34, 612–628 (1999).
Bhargava, S. & Manoli, D. Psychological frictions and the incomplete take-up of social benefits: evidence from an IRS field experiment. Am. Econ. Rev. 105, 3489–3529 (2015).
Finkelstein, A. & Notowidigdo, M. J. Take-up and Targeting: Experimental Evidence from SNAP Working Paper 24652 http://www.nber.org/papers/w24652 (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2018).
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine The Integration of Immigrants into American Society (eds Waters, M. C. & Gerstein Pineau, M.) (National Academies Press, 2016).
Bloemraad, I. Becoming a Citizen: Incorporating Immigrants and Refugees in the United States and Canada (Univ. California Press, 2006).
Liebig, T. et al. Citizenship and the socio-economic integration of immigrants and their children: an overview across European Union and OECD countries. In Proc. Naturalisation: A Passport for the Better Integration of Immigrants? Ch. 1, 23–64 (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2011).
Portes, A. & Curtis, J. W. Changing flags: naturalization and its determinants among Mexican immigrants. Int. Migr. Rev. 21, 352–371 (1987).
Bratsberg, B., Ragan, J. F.Jr. & Nasir, Z. M. The effect of naturalization on wage growth: a panel study of young male immigrants. J. Labor Econ. 20, 568–597 (2002).
OECD. Naturalisation: A Passport for the Better Integration of Immigrants? (OECD/European Commission, 2011).
Hainmueller, J., Hangartner, D. & Pietrantuono, G. Catalyst or crown: does naturalization promote the long-term social integration of immigrants?. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 111, 256–276 (2017).
Hainmueller, J., Hangartner, D. & Pietrantuono, G. Naturalization fosters the long-term political integration of immigrants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 12651–12656 (2015).
Gonzalez-Barrera, A. & Krogstad, J. M. Naturalization Rate Among U.S. Immigrants Up Since 2005, With India Among The Biggest Gainers Technical Report (Pew Research Center, 2018).
Hainmueller, J. et al. A randomized controlled design reveals barriers to citizenship for low-income immigrants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 939–944 (2018).
Yang, P. Q. Explaining immigrant naturalization. Int. Migr. Rev. 28, 449–477 (1994).
Bloemraad, I. Citizenship and immigration a current review. J. Int. Migr. Integr. 1, 9–37 (2000).
Mossaad, N., Ferwerda, J., Lawrence, D., Weinstein, J. M. & Hainmueller, J. Determinants of refugee naturalization in the United States. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 9175–9180 (2018).
Sumption, M. & Flamm, S. The Economic Value of Citizenship for Immigrants in the United States Technical Report (Migration Policy Institute, 2012).
Ramìrez, R. & Medina, O. Catalysts and Barriers to Attaining Citizenship: an Analysis of ya es hora ¡CIUDADANIA! Technical Report (National Council of La Raza, 2010).
Pastor, M., Sanchez, J., Ortiz, R. & Scoggins, J. Nurturing Naturalization: Could Lowering the Fee Help? Technical Report (Center for the Study of Immigrant Integration, Univ. Southern California, 2013).
Coddou, M. A Case Study in Innovative Partnerships: How Human Services Agencies Can Help Increase Access to U.S. Citizenship Technical Report (New Americans Center, 2016).
Mullainathan, S. & Shafir, E. Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much (Macmillan, 2013).
We thank V. Bahl, S. Morehead, L. Gonzalez-Murphy, M. Francis, E. Yessoh, K. Bansak and J. Gest for advice; R. Koslowski for facilitating our partnership with the Office for New Americans in New York State. This research was funded by Robin Hood (SPO 123714), The New York Community Trust (P16-000101) and the UPS Endowment Fund. We also acknowledge funding from the Ford Foundation for operational support of the Immigration Policy Laboratory at Stanford University. The funders had no role in the data collection, analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Methods, Supplementary Discussion, Supplementary Tables 1–10, Supplementary Figures 1–5, and Supplementary References.
Description of Supplementary Datasets 1–8, including code and csv files.
File containing code and data files.
About this article
Nature Human Behaviour (2019)
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2019)