The Experts below are selected from a list of 7104 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Miles Hewstone - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
affective generalization from Intergroup Contact associations between Contact related and outgroup related empathy anxiety and trust
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2020Co-Authors: Giulia Fuochi, Miles Hewstone, Alberto Voci, Jessica BoinAbstract:This paper studied affective generalization from Intergroup Contact, namely when and how affective empathy, anxiety, and trust-related feelings towards specific outgroup members (Contact-related af...
-
when integration policies shape the impact of Intergroup Contact on threat perceptions a multilevel study across 20 european countries
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 2020Co-Authors: Eva G T Green, Emilio Paolo Visintin, Oriane Sarrasin, Miles HewstoneAbstract:ABSTRACTThere is ample evidence of the beneficial effects of Intergroup Contact in reducing negative attitudes towards immigrants. Although the valuable role of institutional support, one of the in...
-
seeking and avoiding Intergroup Contact future frontiers of research on building social integration
Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2018Co-Authors: Stefania Paolini, Miles Hewstone, Jake Harwood, David L NeumannAbstract:Over 60 years of research and comprehensive reviews now support Gordon Allport's Contact hypothesis that face‐to‐face interactions between members of opposing groups should be promoted to lessen prejudice and improve Intergroup relations. Society however does not yet enjoy the full prejudice‐reducing benefits of Intergroup Contact because opportunities for Contact are often not taken up, and segregation persists in the face of diversity. In this article, we review recent investigations on the social psychology of individuals' seeking and avoiding Intergroup Contact and set the stage for new research in this area. We call for a new generation of research on Intergroup Contact that addresses a novel and critical research question: What personal, situational, and wider social factors move individuals towards or away from engaging in Intergroup Contact? This research can help us design intervention strategies to ensure that opportunities for, and benefits of, Intergroup Contact are fully enjoyed by individuals and groups in increasingly diverse societies.
-
positive and negative Intergroup Contact interaction not asymmetry
European Journal of Social Psychology, 2018Co-Authors: Katrin Arnadottir, Simon Lolliot, Rupert Brown, Miles HewstoneAbstract:This research reports a novel investigation into the comparative effects of positive and negative direct and extended Intergroup Contact on Intergroup orientations. It tested the generality of the positive-negative asymmetry effect among majority (N = 357) and minority (N = 101) group members in Iceland. Little evidence of asymmetry was observed: the beneficial effects of positive Contact were mostly as strong as the detrimental effects of negative Contact, for both direct and extended Contact. However, evidence was found for alternative interaction models in which positive Contact buffers the negative effects of negative Contact, and negative Contact enhances the benefits of positive Contact. These interaction effects were found only for direct Contact and principally in the majority group, but were also found for the minority group, though more weakly. No interaction was observed for extended Contact. It appeared that differential group salience elicited by positive and negative Contact could partly contribute to the explanation of the observed effects, at least in the majority sample.
-
beyond the dyadic perspective 10 reasons for using social network analysis in Intergroup Contact research
British Journal of Social Psychology, 2017Co-Authors: Ralf Wölfer, Miles HewstoneAbstract:This article presents 10 reasons why social network analysis, a novel but still surprisingly underused approach in social psychology, can advance the analysis of Intergroup Contact. Although Intergroup Contact has been shown to improve Intergroup relations, conventional methods leave some questions unanswered regarding the underlying social mechanisms that facilitate social cohesion between different groups in increasingly diverse societies. We will therefore explain the largely unknown conceptual and methodological advantages of social network analysis for studying Intergroup Contact in naturally existing groups, which are likely to help Contact researchers to gain a better understanding of Intergroup relations and guide attempts to overcome segregation, prejudice, discrimination, and Intergroup conflict.
Thomas F. Pettigrew - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
in pursuit of three theories authoritarianism relative deprivation and Intergroup Contact
Annual Review of Psychology, 2016Co-Authors: Thomas F. PettigrewAbstract:Throughout my career, I have pursued three theories related to Intergroup prejudice--each with a different mentor. Each theory and its supporting research help us to understand prejudice and ways to ameliorate the problem. This autobiographical review article summarizes some of the advances in these three areas during the past six decades. For authoritarianism, the article advocates removing political content from its measurement, linking it with threat and dismissive-avoidant attachment, and studying how authoritarians avoid Intergroup Contact. Increased work on relative deprivation made possible an extensive meta-analysis that shows the theory, when appropriately measured, has far broader effects than previously thought. Increased research attention to Intergroup Contact similarly made possible a meta-analysis that established the pervasive effectiveness of Intergroup Contact to reduce prejudice under a wide range of conditions. The article closes by demonstrating how the three theories relate to each other and contribute to our understanding of prejudice and its reduction.
-
recent advances in Intergroup Contact theory
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 2011Co-Authors: Thomas F. Pettigrew, Linda R. Tropp, Ulrich Wagner, Oliver ChristAbstract:Abstract Recent advances in Intergroup Contact theory and research are reviewed. A meta-analysis with 515 studies and more than 250,000 subjects demonstrates that Intergroup Contact typically reduces prejudice (mean r = −.21). Allport's original conditions for optimal Contact – equal status, common goals, no Intergroup competition, and authority sanction – facilitate the effect but are not necessary conditions. There are other positive outcomes of Intergroup Contact, such as greater trust and forgiveness for past transgressions. These Contact effects occur not only for ethnic groups but also for such other groups as homosexuals, the disabled and the mentally ill. Intergroup friendship is especially important. Moreover, these effects typically generalize beyond the immediate outgroup members in the situation to the whole outgroup, other situations, and even to other outgroups not involved in the Contact. They also appear to be universal – across nations, genders, and age groups. The major mediators of the effect are basically affective: reduced anxiety and empathy. And even indirect Contact reduces prejudice – vicarious Contact through the mass media and having a friend who has an outgroup friend. Of course, negative Contact occurs – especially when it is non-voluntary and threatening. Criticisms of the theory and policy implications are also discussed.
-
when groups meet the dynamics of Intergroup Contact
2011Co-Authors: Thomas F. Pettigrew, Linda R. TroppAbstract:1. The Origins of Intergroup Contact Theory. 2. Does Intergroup Contact Typically Reduce Intergroup Prejudice? 3. Do Intergroup Contact Effects Generalize? 4. Are the Effects of Intergroup Contact Universal? 5. When Does Intergroup Contact Reduce Prejudice? 6. How Does Intergroup Contact Reduce Prejudice? 7. Does Intergroup Contact Reduce All Aspects of Prejudice? 8. Does Cross-Group Friendship Play a Special Role in Reducing Prejudice? 9. Does Group Status Moderate Contact Effects? 10. Intergroup Contact as One of Many Predictors of Prejudice. 11. Criticisms of Intergroup Contact Theory. 12. When Intergroup Contact Fails. 13. Summing Up and Looking to the Future.
-
Secondary transfer effect of Contact: Do Intergroup Contact effects spread to nonContacted outgroups?
Social Psychology, 2009Co-Authors: Thomas F. PettigrewAbstract:This paper reviews the evidence for a secondary transfer effect of Intergroup Contact. Following a Contact’s typical primary reduction in prejudice toward the outgroup involved in the Contact, this effect involves a further, secondary reduction in prejudice toward noninvolved outgroups. Employing longitudinal German probability samples, we found that significant secondary transfer effects of Intergroup Contact exist, but they were limited to specific outgroups that are similar to the Contacted outgroup in perceived stereotypes, status or stigma. Since the Contact-prejudice link is bidirectional, the effect is inflated when prior prejudice reducing Contact is not controlled. The strongest evidence derives from experimental research. Both cognitive (dissonance) and affective (evaluative conditioning) explanations for the effect are offered.
-
how does Intergroup Contact reduce prejudice meta analytic tests of three mediators
European Journal of Social Psychology, 2008Co-Authors: Thomas F. Pettigrew, Linda R. TroppAbstract:Recent years have witnessed a renewal of interest in Intergroup Contact theory. A meta-analysis of more than 500 studies established the theory's basic contention that Intergroup Contact typically reduces prejudices of many types. This paper addresses the issue of process: just how does Contact diminish prejudice? We test meta-analytically the three most studied mediators: Contact reduces prejudice by (1) enhancing knowledge about the outgroup, (2) reducing anxiety about Intergroup Contact, and (3) increasing empathy and perspective taking. Our tests reveal mediational effects for all three of these mediators. However, the mediational value of increased knowledge appears less strong than anxiety reduction and empathy. Limitations of the study and implications of the results are discussed. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Linda R. Tropp - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
need satisfaction in Intergroup Contact a multinational study of pathways toward social change
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2021Co-Authors: Tabea Hassler, Johannes Ullrich, Simone Sebben, Nurit Shnabel, Michelle Bernardino, Daniel Valdenegro, Colette Van Laar, Roberto Gonzalez, Emilio Paolo Visintin, Linda R. TroppAbstract:What role does Intergroup Contact play in promoting support for social change toward greater social equality? Drawing on the needs-based model of reconciliation, we theorized that when inequality between groups is perceived as illegitimate, disadvantaged group members will experience a need for empowerment and advantaged group members a need for acceptance. When Intergroup Contact satisfies each group's needs, it should result in more mutual support for social change. Using four sets of survey data collected through the Zurich Intergroup Project in 23 countries, we tested several preregistered predictions, derived from the above reasoning, across a large variety of operationalizations. Two studies of disadvantaged groups (Ns = 689 ethnic minority members in Study 1 and 3,382 sexual/gender minorities in Study 2) support the hypothesis that, after accounting for the effects of Intergroup Contact and perceived illegitimacy, satisfying the need for empowerment (but not acceptance) during Contact is positively related to support for social change. Two studies with advantaged groups (Ns = 2,937 ethnic majority members in Study 3 and 4,203 cis-heterosexual individuals in Study 4) showed that, after accounting for illegitimacy and Intergroup Contact, satisfying the need for acceptance (but also empowerment) is positively related to support for social change. Overall, findings suggest that Intergroup Contact is compatible with efforts to promote social change when group-specific needs are met. Thus, to encourage support for social change among both disadvantaged and advantaged group members, it is essential that, besides promoting mutual acceptance, Intergroup Contact interventions also give voice to and empower members of disadvantaged groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
-
Intergroup Contact research in the 21st century lessons learned and forward progress if we remain open
Journal of Social Issues, 2021Co-Authors: Stefania Paolini, Linda R. Tropp, Elizabeth Pagegould, Rhiannon Turner, Fiona A White, Fiona Kate Barlow, Angel GomezAbstract:This article presents the 2021 JSI special issue on Intergroup Contact, which we designed to offer a fresh outlook on a rapidly expanding literature on the antecedents, dynamics, and consequences of interactions between members of opposing groups in society—or Intergroup Contact. We start by discussing the results of a bibliographic search of Intergroup Contact research between 1937 and 2021 and organizing our analysis around two distinct phases of this research, as they are demarcated in volume and quality by Pettigrew and Tropp's landmark meta-analysis in 2006. We then turn our attention to an overview of the 12 review and commentary articles contributing to the special issue, which reflect advancements in themes, methodologies, and analytics of the last 15 years of research. We argue that this second generation of research has effectively addressed influential and legitimate critiques of the literature and, as a result, led to a more complex and nuanced understanding of Intergroup Contact that can now be readily harnessed by social cohesion practitioners and policy makers to increase the efficacy of Contact-based interventions in society. We conclude by calling on a third generation of research on Intergroup Contact that fully harnesses diversity of ideas, peoples, and minds and keeps in close check unproductive dynamics that stifle scientific progress, and pose a threat to healthy and safe research communities. Together with the 50 diverse contributors of this special issue, we commit to making the Intergroup Contact research community, like the topic of Intergroup Contact itself, diverse and inclusive.
-
recent advances in Intergroup Contact theory
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 2011Co-Authors: Thomas F. Pettigrew, Linda R. Tropp, Ulrich Wagner, Oliver ChristAbstract:Abstract Recent advances in Intergroup Contact theory and research are reviewed. A meta-analysis with 515 studies and more than 250,000 subjects demonstrates that Intergroup Contact typically reduces prejudice (mean r = −.21). Allport's original conditions for optimal Contact – equal status, common goals, no Intergroup competition, and authority sanction – facilitate the effect but are not necessary conditions. There are other positive outcomes of Intergroup Contact, such as greater trust and forgiveness for past transgressions. These Contact effects occur not only for ethnic groups but also for such other groups as homosexuals, the disabled and the mentally ill. Intergroup friendship is especially important. Moreover, these effects typically generalize beyond the immediate outgroup members in the situation to the whole outgroup, other situations, and even to other outgroups not involved in the Contact. They also appear to be universal – across nations, genders, and age groups. The major mediators of the effect are basically affective: reduced anxiety and empathy. And even indirect Contact reduces prejudice – vicarious Contact through the mass media and having a friend who has an outgroup friend. Of course, negative Contact occurs – especially when it is non-voluntary and threatening. Criticisms of the theory and policy implications are also discussed.
-
when groups meet the dynamics of Intergroup Contact
2011Co-Authors: Thomas F. Pettigrew, Linda R. TroppAbstract:1. The Origins of Intergroup Contact Theory. 2. Does Intergroup Contact Typically Reduce Intergroup Prejudice? 3. Do Intergroup Contact Effects Generalize? 4. Are the Effects of Intergroup Contact Universal? 5. When Does Intergroup Contact Reduce Prejudice? 6. How Does Intergroup Contact Reduce Prejudice? 7. Does Intergroup Contact Reduce All Aspects of Prejudice? 8. Does Cross-Group Friendship Play a Special Role in Reducing Prejudice? 9. Does Group Status Moderate Contact Effects? 10. Intergroup Contact as One of Many Predictors of Prejudice. 11. Criticisms of Intergroup Contact Theory. 12. When Intergroup Contact Fails. 13. Summing Up and Looking to the Future.
-
how does Intergroup Contact reduce prejudice meta analytic tests of three mediators
European Journal of Social Psychology, 2008Co-Authors: Thomas F. Pettigrew, Linda R. TroppAbstract:Recent years have witnessed a renewal of interest in Intergroup Contact theory. A meta-analysis of more than 500 studies established the theory's basic contention that Intergroup Contact typically reduces prejudices of many types. This paper addresses the issue of process: just how does Contact diminish prejudice? We test meta-analytically the three most studied mediators: Contact reduces prejudice by (1) enhancing knowledge about the outgroup, (2) reducing anxiety about Intergroup Contact, and (3) increasing empathy and perspective taking. Our tests reveal mediational effects for all three of these mediators. However, the mediational value of increased knowledge appears less strong than anxiety reduction and empathy. Limitations of the study and implications of the results are discussed. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Katharina Schmid - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Intergroup Contact and social change implications of negative and positive Contact for collective action in advantaged and disadvantaged groups
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2017Co-Authors: Nils Karl Reimer, Oliver Christ, Katharina Schmid, Kristof Dhont, Julia C Becker, Angelika Benz, Ulrich Klocke, Sybille Neji, Magdalena Rychlowska, Miles HewstoneAbstract:Previous research has shown that (a) positive Intergroup Contact with an advantaged group can discourage collective action among disadvantaged-group members and (b) positive Intergroup Contact can encourage advantaged-group members to take action on behalf of disadvantaged outgroups. Two studies investigated the effects of negative as well as positive Intergroup Contact. Study 1 (n = 482) found that negative but not positive Contact with heterosexual people was associated with sexual-minority students’ engagement in collective action (via group identification and perceived discrimination). Among heterosexual students, positive and negative Contacts were associated with, respectively, more and less LGB (lesbian, gay, bisexual) activism. Study 2 (N = 1,469) found that only negative Contact (via perceived discrimination) predicted LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) students’ collective action intentions longitudinally while only positive Contact predicted heterosexual/cisgender students’ LGBT activism. Implications for the relationship between Intergroup Contact, collective action, and social change are discussed.
-
effects of majority members positive Intergroup Contact on minority members support for ingroup rights mobilizing or demobilizing effects
European Journal of Social Psychology, 2016Co-Authors: Mathias Kauff, Miles Hewstone, Katharina Schmid, Eva G T Green, Oliver ChristAbstract:While some research suggests that ethnic and cultural diversity hinders societal cohesion, other studies show that it promotes Intergroup Contact opportunities, which, if exploited, help to overcome Intergroup prejudice. Recently, however, Intergroup Contact theory has been criticized for neglecting the wider social context as well as for ignoring potential demobilizing Contact effects for minority members. Using two cross-sectional general population surveys (European Social Survey in 22 countries, Swiss MOSAiCH), we address these criticisms by examining whether ethnic majority members' positive Contact influences ethnic minority members' support for ingroup rights at the social context level. Applying multilevel path analysis, we show that minority members are more likely to support anti-discrimination laws and immigrant rights when living in social contexts in which majority members have positive Intergroup Contact experiences. Theoretical and practical implications of our findings are discussed for understanding how minority groups are affected by the climate of the social context they reside in.
-
Developmental Dynamics of Intergroup Contact and Intergroup Attitudes: Long-Term Effects in Adolescence and Early Adulthood.
Child development, 2016Co-Authors: Ralf Wölfer, Katharina Schmid, Miles Hewstone, Maarten Van ZalkAbstract:Intergroup Contact represents a powerful way to improve Intergroup attitudes and to overcome prejudice and discrimination. However, long-term effects of Intergroup Contact that consider social network dynamics have rarely been studied at a young age. Study 1 validated an optimized social network approach to investigate Intergroup Contact (N = 6,457; Mage = 14.91 years). Study 2 explored the developmental trajectories of Intergroup Contact by applying this validated network approach in a cross-sequential design (four-cohort-four-wave; N = 3,815; 13-26 years). Accelerated growth curve models showed that Contact predicts the development of attitudes in adolescence, whereas acquired attitudes buffer against decreasing Contact in adulthood. Findings highlight the potential of social network analysis and the developmental importance of early Intergroup Contact experiences.
-
measures of Intergroup Contact
Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Constructs, 2015Co-Authors: Simon Lolliot, Oliver Christ, Katharina Schmid, Hermann Swart, Alberto Voci, Ralf Wölfer, Benjamin Fell, Rachel New, Miles HewstoneAbstract:Allport’s (1954) ‘Contact hypothesis’ proposed that Intergroup Contact is a powerful means for improving Intergroup attitudes. Subsequent theory and research has developed this hypothesis into a full-blown theory that makes precise predictions about the effects of different types of Contact on mainly attitudinal outcomes, and how and when those effects will occur. This chapter reviews some of the most important measures commonly used in research on Intergroup Contact; those specifically pertaining to Intergroup Contact (both direct and extended), mediating (Intergroup anxiety) and moderating (membership salience) mechanisms, and outcomes (outgroup attitudes). Our aim is that the information assembled here can serve both (a) as a ‘toolkit’ for the interested novice researcher and (b) as a useful resource to the experienced Intergroup Contact practitioner regarding the psychometric properties of these commonly used measures. Research on Intergroup Contact is of great practical and policy importance, hence it behoves us as researchers to take care to use the best possible tools for the job.
-
secondary transfer effects of Intergroup Contact via social identity complexity
British Journal of Social Psychology, 2014Co-Authors: Katharina Schmid, Miles Hewstone, Nicole TauschAbstract:Secondary transfer effects (STEs) of Intergroup Contact refer to the generalization of Contact effects from a primary encountered outgroup to attitudes towards secondary outgroups (Pettigrew, 2009). Using two large, cross-sectional data sets from Germany (N = 1,381) and Northern Ireland (N = 1,948), this article examined the extent to which STEs of Intergroup Contact on attitudes towards a range of secondary outgroups occur via a previously unexplored psychological construct, social identity complexity (operationalized as similarity complexity and overlap complexity). Study 1 found primary outgroup Contact to be associated with greater similarity complexity, but no indirect effects on secondary outgroup attitudes via complexity emerged. Study 2, however, revealed indirect positive relationships between primary outgroup Contact and secondary outgroup attitudes via increased similarity complexity and overlap complexity. These relationships were obtained while controlling for two previously tested mediating mechanisms, attitude generalization (operationalized as primary outgroup attitude) and deprovincialization (operationalized as ingroup attitude and identification). We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings and the contribution of social identity complexity to understanding processes underlying STEs of Contact.
Oliver Christ - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
How do we get people into Contact? Predictors of Intergroup Contact and drivers of Contact seeking
Journal of Social Issues, 2020Co-Authors: Mathias Kauff, Ulrich Wagner, Stefania Paolini, Marta Beneda, Michał Bilewicz, Patrick F. Kotzur, Alexander W. O'donnell, Clifford Stevenson, Oliver ChristAbstract:Compared to the impressive amount of research on consequences of Intergroup Contact, relatively little work has been devoted to predictors of Intergroup Contact. Although opportunities for Intergroup Contact are constantly growing in modern diverse societies, these Contact opportunities are not necessarily exploited. In the present review article, we describe current research on predictors of Intergroup Contact and drivers of Contact seeking on a micro‐, meso‐, and macro‐level. We provide an overview of predictors, while focusing on recent research that is especially relevant for designing interventions and planning social policies aiming at increasing Contact between different groups in varied societies. On the micro‐level, we discuss relational self‐expansion motives and confidence in Contact as predictors of Intergroup Contact. On the meso‐level, we focus on the role of intragroup processes and historical Intergroup conflicts in facilitating Contact. On the macro‐level, we reflect on changing societal norms as a potential tool to increase the frequency Intergroup Contact. By focusing on the applied value of research findings, discussing diverse predictors, and applying a multilevel approach, we also address recent criticisms of the Intergroup Contact literature and demonstrate the generative nature of contemporary research in this area.
-
Intergroup Contact and social change implications of negative and positive Contact for collective action in advantaged and disadvantaged groups
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2017Co-Authors: Nils Karl Reimer, Oliver Christ, Katharina Schmid, Kristof Dhont, Julia C Becker, Angelika Benz, Ulrich Klocke, Sybille Neji, Magdalena Rychlowska, Miles HewstoneAbstract:Previous research has shown that (a) positive Intergroup Contact with an advantaged group can discourage collective action among disadvantaged-group members and (b) positive Intergroup Contact can encourage advantaged-group members to take action on behalf of disadvantaged outgroups. Two studies investigated the effects of negative as well as positive Intergroup Contact. Study 1 (n = 482) found that negative but not positive Contact with heterosexual people was associated with sexual-minority students’ engagement in collective action (via group identification and perceived discrimination). Among heterosexual students, positive and negative Contacts were associated with, respectively, more and less LGB (lesbian, gay, bisexual) activism. Study 2 (N = 1,469) found that only negative Contact (via perceived discrimination) predicted LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) students’ collective action intentions longitudinally while only positive Contact predicted heterosexual/cisgender students’ LGBT activism. Implications for the relationship between Intergroup Contact, collective action, and social change are discussed.
-
effects of majority members positive Intergroup Contact on minority members support for ingroup rights mobilizing or demobilizing effects
European Journal of Social Psychology, 2016Co-Authors: Mathias Kauff, Miles Hewstone, Katharina Schmid, Eva G T Green, Oliver ChristAbstract:While some research suggests that ethnic and cultural diversity hinders societal cohesion, other studies show that it promotes Intergroup Contact opportunities, which, if exploited, help to overcome Intergroup prejudice. Recently, however, Intergroup Contact theory has been criticized for neglecting the wider social context as well as for ignoring potential demobilizing Contact effects for minority members. Using two cross-sectional general population surveys (European Social Survey in 22 countries, Swiss MOSAiCH), we address these criticisms by examining whether ethnic majority members' positive Contact influences ethnic minority members' support for ingroup rights at the social context level. Applying multilevel path analysis, we show that minority members are more likely to support anti-discrimination laws and immigrant rights when living in social contexts in which majority members have positive Intergroup Contact experiences. Theoretical and practical implications of our findings are discussed for understanding how minority groups are affected by the climate of the social context they reside in.
-
measures of Intergroup Contact
Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Constructs, 2015Co-Authors: Simon Lolliot, Oliver Christ, Katharina Schmid, Hermann Swart, Alberto Voci, Ralf Wölfer, Benjamin Fell, Rachel New, Miles HewstoneAbstract:Allport’s (1954) ‘Contact hypothesis’ proposed that Intergroup Contact is a powerful means for improving Intergroup attitudes. Subsequent theory and research has developed this hypothesis into a full-blown theory that makes precise predictions about the effects of different types of Contact on mainly attitudinal outcomes, and how and when those effects will occur. This chapter reviews some of the most important measures commonly used in research on Intergroup Contact; those specifically pertaining to Intergroup Contact (both direct and extended), mediating (Intergroup anxiety) and moderating (membership salience) mechanisms, and outcomes (outgroup attitudes). Our aim is that the information assembled here can serve both (a) as a ‘toolkit’ for the interested novice researcher and (b) as a useful resource to the experienced Intergroup Contact practitioner regarding the psychometric properties of these commonly used measures. Research on Intergroup Contact is of great practical and policy importance, hence it behoves us as researchers to take care to use the best possible tools for the job.
-
contextual effect of positive Intergroup Contact on outgroup prejudice
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2014Co-Authors: Oliver Christ, Katharina Schmid, Simon Lolliot, Hermann Swart, Dietlind Stolle, Nicole Tausch, Ulrich Wagner, Steven Vertovec, Ananthi Al Ramiah, Miles HewstoneAbstract:We assessed evidence for a contextual effect of positive Intergroup Contact, whereby the effect of Intergroup Contact between social contexts (the between-level effect) on outgroup prejudice is greater than the effect of individual-level Contact within contexts (the within-level effect). Across seven large-scale surveys (five cross-sectional and two longitudinal), using multilevel analyses, we found a reliable contextual effect. This effect was found in multiple countries, operationalizing context at multiple levels (regions, districts, and neighborhoods), and with and without controlling for a range of demographic and context variables. In four studies (three cross-sectional and one longitudinal) we showed that the association between context-level Contact and prejudice was largely mediated by more tolerant norms. In social contexts where positive Contact with outgroups was more commonplace, norms supported such positive interactions between members of different groups. Thus, positive Contact reduces prejudice on a macrolevel, whereby people are influenced by the behavior of others in their social context, not merely on a microscale, via individuals’ direct experience of positive Contact with outgroup members. These findings reinforce the view that Contact has a significant role to play in prejudice reduction, and has great policy potential as a means to improve Intergroup relations, because it can simultaneously impact large numbers of people.
