Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three european countries.

A widely researched panacea for reducing intergroup prejudice is the contact hypothesis. However, few longitudinal studies can shed light on the direction of causal processes: from contact to prejudice reduction (contact effects) or from prejudice to contact reduction (prejudice effects). The authors conducted a longitudinal field survey in Germany, Belgium, and England with school students. The sample comprised members of both ethnic minorities (n = 512) and ethnic majorities (n = 1,143). Path analyses yielded both lagged contact effects and prejudice effects: Contact reduced prejudice, but prejudice also reduced contact. Furthermore, contact effects were negligible for minority members. These effects were obtained for 2 indicators of prejudice: negative intergroup emotions and desire for social distance. For both majority and minority members, contact effects on negative emotions were stronger when outgroup contacts were perceived as being typical of their group. Contact effects were also mediated by intergroup anxiety. This mediating mechanism was impaired for minority members because of a weakened effect of anxiety on desire for social distance. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

White fears and native apprehensions: An integrated threat theory approach to intergroup attitudes.

Motivational and cognitive factors have been used to explain negative attitudes toward out-group members. According to the integrated threat theory of prejudice, negative intergroup attitudes are predicted by proximal factors consisting of perceived threats from out-group members; these threats, in turn, are predicted by distal factors such as perceived differences in group status or negative out-group contact. In the present study, White and First Nation people (adolescents and adults) completed measures assessing distal and proximal variables and attitudes toward members of the other ethnic group. Path analyses indicate that realistic and symbolic threats, intergroup anxiety, and negative stereotypes predicted negative out-group attitudes. Many of these threats, and in some cases ethnic attitudes, were associated with negative intergroup contact, strength of in-group identity, perceptions of intergroup conflict, and perceived status inequality. Theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reducing explicit and implicit outgroup prejudice via direct and extended contact: The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety.

In 4 studies, the authors investigated mediators of the effect of cross-group friendship. In Study 1, cross-group friendship among White elementary school children predicted more positive explicit outgroup attitude toward South Asians, mediated by self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. In Study 2, cross-group friendship and extended contact among White and South Asian high school students positively predicted explicit outgroup attitude, mediated by self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. Study 3 replicated these findings in a larger independent sample. In all 3 studies, exposure to the outgroup positively predicted implicit outgroup attitude. Study 4 further showed that self-disclosure improved explicit outgroup attitude via empathy, importance of contact, and intergroup trust. The authors discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings, which argue for the inclusion of self-disclosure as a key component of social interventions to reduce prejudice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A test of the extended intergroup contact hypothesis: The mediating role of intergroup anxiety, perceived ingroup and outgroup norms, and inclusion of the outgroup in the self.

S. C. Wright, A. Aron, T. McLaughlin-Volpe, and S. A. Ropp (1997) proposed that the benefits associated with cross-group friendship might also stem from vicarious experiences of friendship. Extended contact was proposed to reduce prejudice by reducing intergroup anxiety, by generating perceptions of positive ingroup and outgroup norms regarding the other group, and through inclusion of the outgroup in the self. This article documents the first test of Wright et al.'s model, which used structural equation modeling among two independent samples in the context of South Asian-White relations in the United Kingdom. Supporting the model, all four variables mediated the relationship between extended contact and outgroup attitude, controlling for the effect of direct contact. A number of alternative models were ruled out, indicating that the four mediators operate concurrently rather than predicting one another. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reasons for skepticism about the efficacy of simulated social contact interventions.

Comments on Crisp and Turner (May–June 2009), who argued that imagining intergroup interactions reduces intergroup prejudice. They argued that the procedure is remarkably effective, with “significant potential application for policymakers and educators seeking to promote tolerance for social diversity” (p. 238). We believe that such interventions, although appealing to many individuals, are problematic and that the authors’ conclusions are overly optimistic. We believe that simulated contact interventions are highly unlikely to produce meaningful attitude change. In sum, we are deeply skeptical about the ability of imagined contact interventions to reduce prejudice. A single, brief, imaginary encounter with an outgroup member is unlikely to reverse or erase the psychological mechanisms that create prejudice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Have confidence in contact.

In an article in the May–June 2009 American Psychologist, we discussed a new approach to reducing prejudice and encouraging more positive intergroup relations (Crisp & Turner, 2009). We named the approach imagined intergroup contact and defined it as “the mental simulation of a social interaction with a member or members of an outgroup category” (Crisp & Turner, 2009, p. 234). Our proposition is that simply imagining contact with outgroup members can produce more positive perceptions of outgroups. In his commentary, Honeycutt noted that our “article is excellent in its premise” (p. 129), but he was critical of our decision not to discuss his own work in imagined interactions (IIs). Imagined contact is not a magic cure, and it is not a one-shot solution to the problem of prejudice. But as a first step on the road to reduced prejudice and more positive intergroup relations, it may just turn out to be invaluable. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

When trying to understand detracts from trying to behave: Effects of perspective taking in intergroup interaction.

Four studies demonstrate that perspective taking can backfire in intergroup interaction, leading lower prejudice individuals to treat an outgroup member less positively than they do when they adopt alternative mind-sets; for higher prejudice individuals, perspective taking instead had a positive, albeit less consistent, effect on behavior. The net result was behavior disruption, whereby individuals' treatment of an outgroup member became incongruent with their inner attitudes. This disruption effect was evident for cognitive and affective forms of perspective taking, in ostensible and real face-to-face intergroup interactions, and for feelings of happiness experienced by individuals' interaction partner as well as outside observers' behavior assessments. Results further suggested that self-regulatory effort mediated the effect of perspective taking on intergroup interaction behavior, with the negative consequences of perspective taking for lower prejudice individuals' behavior appearing to stem from complacency rather than trying too hard. Overall, the findings reveal that perspective taking rather than self-focus accounts for the cognitive resource depletion and behavior disruption effects previously demonstrated to stem from evaluative concern in intergroup interaction and indicate that perspective taking may be more reliably helpful outside of intergroup interaction situations than within them. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Seeming ambivalent, being prejudiced: The moderating role of attitude basis on experienced affect.

One experiment examined the potential for ambivalence toward the outgroup based on cognitive but not affective information to be functional to justify the prior expression of prejudice. To this end, the (prejudice expression vs. no prejudice expression) context of holding ambivalence toward the outgroup was manipulated before assessing all participants' cognitively based ambivalence and affectively based ambivalence toward the outgroup. Finally, all participants self-reported their positive affect. As predicted, participants whose prejudice was previously assessed, exhibited increased levels of positive affect to the extent that they were cognitively but not affectively ambivalent toward the outgroup. By contrast, replicating prior work, participants whose prejudice was not previously assessed exhibited decreased levels of positive affect to the extent that they were both cognitively and affectively ambivalent toward the outgroup. Consistent with recent, functional approaches to the conceptualization of attitude structure and prejudice, these findings provide direct evidence that cognitively based ambivalence toward the outgroup can contribute to the need to be prejudicial. The implications of these findings for ambivalence and intergroup research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Secondary transfer effects of intergroup contact: Alternative accounts and underlying processes.

Although intergroup contact is one of the most prominent interventions to reduce prejudice, the generalization of contact effects is still a contentious issue. This research further examined the rarely studied secondary transfer effect (STE; Pettigrew, 2009), by which contact with a primary outgroup reduces prejudice toward secondary groups that are not directly involved in the contact. Across 3 cross-sectional studies conducted in Cyprus (N = 1,653), Northern Ireland (N = 1,973), and Texas (N = 275) and 1 longitudinal study conducted in Northern Ireland (N = 411), the present research sought to systematically rule out alternative accounts of the STE and to investigate 2 potential mediating mechanisms (ingroup reappraisal and attitude generalization). Results indicated that, consistent with the STE, contact with a primary outgroup predicts attitudes toward secondary outgroups, over and above contact with the secondary outgroup, socially desirable responding, and prior attitudes. Mediation analyses found strong evidence for attitude generalization but only limited evidence for ingroup reappraisal as an underlying process. Two out of 3 tests of a reverse model, where contact with the secondary outgroup predicts attitudes toward the primary outgroup, provide further evidence for an indirect effect through attitude generalization. Theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed, and directions for future research are identified. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Biological conceptions of race and the motivation to cross racial boundaries.

The present studies demonstrate that conceiving of racial group membership as biologically determined increases acceptance of racial inequities (Studies 1 and 2) and cools interest in interacting with racial outgroup members (Studies 3-5). These effects were generally independent of racial prejudice. It is argued that when race is cast as a biological marker of individuals, people perceive racial outgroup members as unrelated to the self and therefore unworthy of attention and affiliation. Biological conceptions of race therefore provide justification for a racially inequitable status quo and for the continued social marginalization of historically disadvantaged groups. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Beyond the Optimal Contact Strategy: A Reality Check for the Contact Hypothesis.

The contact hypothesis proposes that interaction between members of different groups reduces intergroup prejudice if--and only if--certain optimal conditions are present. For over 50 years, research using this framework has explored the boundary conditions for ideal contact and has guided interventions to promote desegregation. Although supporting the contact hypothesis in principle, the authors critique some research practices that have come to dominate the field: (a) the prioritizing of the study of interactions occurring under rarefied conditions, (b) the reformulation of lay understandings of contact in terms of a generic typology of ideal dimensions, and (c) the use of shifts in personal prejudice as the primary measure of outcome. The authors argue that these practices have limited the contact hypothesis both as an explanation of the intergroup dynamics of desegregation and as a framework for promoting social psychological change. In so arguing, the authors look toward a complementary program of research on contact and desegregation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Fanning the flames of prejudice: The influence of specific incidental emotions on implicit prejudice.

Three experiments examined the impact of incidental emotions on implicit intergroup evaluations. Experiment 1 demonstrated that for unknown social groups, two negative emotions that are broadly applicable to intergroup conflict (anger and disgust) both created implicit bias where none had existed before. However, for known groups about which perceivers had prior knowledge, emotions increased implicit prejudice only if the induced emotion was applicable to the outgroup stereotype. Disgust increased bias against disgust-relevant groups (e.g., homosexuals) but anger did not (Experiment 2); anger increased bias against anger-relevant groups (e.g., Arabs) but disgust did not (Experiment 3). Consistent with functional theories of emotion, these findings suggest that negative intergroup emotions signal specific types of threat. If the emotion-specific threat is applicable to prior expectations of a group, the emotion ratchets up implicit prejudice toward that group. However, if the emotion-specific threat is not applicable to the target group, evaluations remain unchanged. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Role of Perceived Importance in Intergroup Contact.

Furthering G. W. Allport's (1954) contentions for optimal contact, the authors introduce a new construct: the perceived importance of contact. They propose that perceived importance is the best proximal predictor of contact's reduction of prejudice. If individuals have opportunities for contact at work or in the neighborhood, their chances to have intergroup acquaintances and friends increase. Intergroup contact among acquaintances and friends can be perceived as more or less important, which in turn determines intergroup evaluations. A 1st study shows that the new measure of perceived importance is indeed distinct from established quantity and quality indicators. The results are cross-validated in a 2nd study that also sheds light on the meaning of importance. In 3rd and 4th studies, structural equation analyses and a meta-analysis support the hypotheses. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Imagining intergroup contact enables member-to-group generalization.

Intergroup contact improves intergroup relations. In some cases, however, actual contact is impractical and here imagining intergroup contact (Crisp & Turner, 2009) may represent a viable alternative. While initial findings have been promising, imagined contact research has yet to confirm whether it enables a critical process involved in successful intergroup contact: member-to-group generalization. We tested the hypothesis that imagined contact, and specific enhancements to the technique, are enabling in the form of generalized contact self-efficacy. In Experiment 1 participants who imagined a positively toned encounter with a single outgroup member subsequently felt more confident about future interactions with the outgroup in general. Furthermore, imagining contact was maximally effective at achieving generalization when group versus individuating information was salient (Experiment 2) and when the imagined interaction involved an outgrouper who was typical versus atypical (Experiment 3). These findings contribute to growing support for the notion that imagined contact represents a flexible, effective tool for improving intergroup relations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Can imagined interactions produce positive perceptions?: Reducing prejudice through simulated social contact.

The contact hypothesis states that, under the right conditions, contact between members of different groups leads to more positive intergroup relations. The authors track recent trends in contact theory to the emergence of extended, or indirect, forms of contact. These advances lead to an intriguing proposition: that simply imagining intergroup interactions can produce more positive perceptions of outgroups. The authors discuss empirical research supporting the imagined contact proposition and find it to be an approach that is at once deceptively simple and remarkably effective. Encouraging people to mentally simulate a positive intergroup encounter leads to improved outgroup attitudes and reduced stereotyping. It curtails intergroup anxiety and extends the attribution of perceivers’ positive traits to others. The authors describe the advantages and disadvantages of imagined contact compared to conventional strategies, outline an agenda for future research, and discuss applications for policymakers and educators in their efforts to encourage more positive intergroup relations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Contact hypothesis in ethnic relations.

Reviews research regarding the effects of intergroup contact on ethnic relations. The investigations discussed include both intra- and cross-cultural studies involving contact between various ethnic groups. The principles and generalizations emerging from these studies are categorized under (1) opportunities for contact, (2) the principle of equal status, (3) contact with high-status representatives of a minority group, (4) cooperative and competitive factors, (5) casual vs. intimate contact, (6) institutional support, (7) personality factors, and (8) direction and intensity of initial attitude. The major generalization derived from the present review is that changes in ethnic relations do occur following intergroup contact, but the nature of this change is not necessarily in the anticipated direction; "favorable" conditions do tend to reduce prejudice, but "unfavorable" conditions may increase intergroup tension and prejudice. Ethnic attitudes may also change in their intensity, and they may be limited to specific areas of the ethnic attitude and not be generalized to other aspects of the intergroup relationships. Some practical applications are also considered. (2 p. ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The loyal member effect: On the preference for ingroup members who engage in exclusive relations with the ingroup.

The goal of this article was to investigate an indirect form of intergroup differentiation in children in the context of racial attitudes: the preference for ingroup members who interact positively with other ingroup members rather than with outgroup members. Study 1 confirmed this general hypothesis with preschool and 1st-grade children, demonstrating that respondents preferred the ingroup member who played only with other ingroup members, evaluated this child more positively, and felt more similar to him or her. Studies 2 and 3 tested the boundary conditions of the phenomenon. Study 4 analyzed developmental changes demonstrating that the effect is no longer observed among 9- to 11-year-old children. Overall, these studies suggest that engaging in positive interactions with the outgroup might have its costs in terms of a relative devaluation and rejection by one's peers. Results are discussed by stressing the importance of intragroup processes for the regulation of intergroup relations among very young children. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The evolution of intergroup bias: Perceptions and attitudes in rhesus macaques.

Social psychologists have learned a great deal about the nature of intergroup conflict and the attitudinal and cognitive processes that enable it. Less is known about where these processes come from in the first place. In particular, do our strategies for dealing with other groups emerge in the absence of human-specific experiences? One profitable way to answer this question has involved administering tests that are conceptual equivalents of those used with adult humans in other species, thereby exploring the continuity or discontinuity of psychological processes. We examined intergroup preferences in a nonhuman species, the rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta). We found the first evidence that a nonhuman species automatically distinguishes the faces of members of its own social group from those in other groups and displays greater vigilance toward outgroup members (Experiments 1–3). In addition, we observed that macaques spontaneously associate novel objects with specific social groups and display greater vigilance to objects associated with outgroup members (Experiments 4–5). Finally, we developed a looking time procedure—the Looking Time Implicit Association Test, which resembles the Implicit Association Test (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995)—and we discovered that macaques, like humans, automatically evaluate ingroup members positively and outgroup members negatively (Experiments 6–7). These field studies represent the first controlled experiments to examine the presence of intergroup attitudes in a nonhuman species. As such, these studies suggest that the architecture of the mind that enables the formation of these biases may be rooted in phylogenetically ancient mechanisms. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-protective biases in group categorization: Threat cues shape the psychological boundary between “us” and “them”.

Across 6 studies, factors signaling potential vulnerability to harm produced a bias toward outgroup categorization—a tendency to categorize unfamiliar others as members of an outgroup rather than as members of one's ingroup. Studies 1 through 4 demonstrated that White participants were more likely to categorize targets as Black (as opposed to White) when those targets displayed cues heuristically associated with threat (masculinity, movement toward the perceiver, and facial expressions of anger). In Study 5, White participants who felt chronically vulnerable to interpersonal threats responded to a fear manipulation by categorizing threatening (angry) faces as Black rather than White. Study 6 extended these findings to a minimal group paradigm, in which participants who felt chronically vulnerable to interpersonal threats categorized threatening (masculine) targets as outgroup members. Together, findings indicate that ecologically relevant threat cues within both the target and the perceiver interact to bias the way people initially parse the social world into ingroup vs. outgroup. Findings support a threat-based framework for intergroup psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Disruptive Effects of Vigilance on Dominant Group Members' Treatment of Outgroup Members: Choking Versus Shining Under Pressure.

Three studies examined the hypothesis that evaluative concerns exert a disruptive effect on intimacy-building behaviors exhibited by dominant group members in intergroup interaction. The authors predicted that although evaluative concerns would lead individuals with a negative baseline response to outgroup members to shine (i.e., to exhibit warmer, more friendly behavior), such concerns would have a contrary, choking, effect on individuals with a more positive baseline response. Results were generally consistent with these hypotheses across 3 different operationalizations of evaluative concerns and regardless of whether individuals' orientation toward outgroup members was assessed in terms of prejudiced racial attitudes or racial ingroup identification. Implications for lower status group members' experience of intergroup interaction and for the prejudice-reduction process are considered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)