Extended contact through cross‐group romantic relationships

Cross‐group romantic relationships are an extremely intimate and often maligned form of intergroup contact. Yet, according to intergroup contact theory, these relationships have the potential to improve the intergroup attitudes of others via extended contact. This study combines the interpersonal and intergroup literatures to examine the outcomes associated with knowing a partner in a cross‐group romantic relationship. Results suggest that cross‐group romantic partners encounter greater disapproval toward their relationships than same‐group partners and, as a result, their relationships are perceived more negatively. Nevertheless, extended contact with cross‐group partners, controlling for participants' cross‐group friendships and romantic relationships, predicts more positive attitudes toward cross‐group dating and positive intergroup attitudes in general, mediated by perceived ingroup norms toward cross‐group relationships.     

When Harry met Meghan (got married,had a baby,and “Megxited”): Intergroup anxiety,ingroup norms,and racialized categorization as predictors of receptivity to interracial romances

Despite being frequently met with disapproval, interracial romantic relationships have the potential to transform intergroup relations through marriage and children. However, relatively little is known about the receptivity to these important intergroup relationships. Capitalizing on three historical events involving a world-famous interracial couple, Prince Harry and Meghan, we expand the intergroup relations literature by longitudinally and cross-sectionally examining White Briton's perceptions and receptivity to interracial romances. Study 1 (N = 585) showed that intergroup anxiety around the couple's wedding was longitudinally associated with less receptivity to interracial dating and less favorable intergroup attitudes a month later, even when controlling for strong autoregressive paths. Study 2 (N = 402), conducted around the birth of the couple's son (Archie), found that intergroup anxiety (negatively) and favorable ingroup norms (positively) were longitudinally associated with receptivity to intergroup romances and favorable intergroup attitudes a month later in statistically conservative tests. Study 3 (N = 507), conducted at the time of the so-called “Megxit,” cross-sectionally found that media exposure to Meghan was positively associated with favorable ingroup norms which was, again, related to positive intergroup outcomes. However, these associations were suppressed by the perception that Meghan had tainted the Royal Family which was, in turn, negatively associated with the intergroup outcomes. Moderation analyses across the studies revealed these associations were often stronger for those who categorized the biracial Royals as more Black (vs. White). Together, the novel research highlights the often-complex perceptions and longitudinal predictors of interracial romances and does so in historic social contexts.     

Extended contact effects: is exposure to positive outgroup exemplars sufficient or is interaction with ingroup members necessary?

Previous research does not inform us if exposure to positive outgroup exemplars is sufficient to explain the observed prejudice reduction effect of extended contact or if interaction with ingroup members is necessary. An experiment (N = 108) in which Romanian students read identical stories about the friendship between a Roma and a Romanian/Bulgarian found that, while information about close outgroup-outgroup relationships is sufficient to improve outgroup attitudes and reduce intergroup anxiety, information about close ingroup-outgroup relationships has stronger and broader positive effects. Mediational analyses revealed that group emotions rather than intergroup anxiety, ingroup norms, or outgroup norms mediated the effect of extended contact on outgroup perception. A core affect perspective of group emotions is used to explain the results.     

How intergroup friendship works: A longitudinal study of friendship effects on outgroup attitudes

Cross‐sectional research has shown that frequency of self‐disclosure to outgroup members mediates the positive relationship between intergroup friendship and outgroup attitudes. The current research investigated the relationship between self‐disclosure and attitudes in more depth. New undergraduate students were asked to nominate an ingroup or outgroup friend and then report the intimacy of their disclosures to them, their anxiety and attitudes towards a series of social groups, in the first week of the semester and 6 weeks later. Intimacy of disclosure predicted more positive attitudes towards outgroups over time, but this association was only found among participants who nominated an outgroup friend. In the ingroup friend condition, a negative association was found. These associations were mediated by general intergroup anxiety. These relationships highlight the importance of integrating theories of interpersonal and intergroup relations when investigating intergroup contact. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Cross-Community Contact, Perceived Status Differences, and Intergroup Attitudes in Northern Ireland: The Mediating Roles of Individual-level versus Group-level Threats and the Moderating Role of Social Identification

We tested a model which examined the relationship between contact quantity and quality, relative ingroup status, and intergroup attitudes in Northern Ireland. Intergroup anxiety was considered an individual-level mediator and realistic and symbolic threat as group-level mediators in the model. We examined the idea that the strength of ingroup identification moderates the predictive power of individual- versus group-level variables. Both contact and relative ingroup status predicted anxiety and perceived threats to the ingroup, which were significant mediators in the model. Our results also suggest that while anxiety predicts attitudes for low but not high identifiers, symbolic threats to the ingroup are more important for high than for low identifiers. There was also some evidence indicating that status perceptions moderate contact effects. We discuss these results in terms of their implications for intergroup relations in Northern Ireland.     

Do they want contact with us? The role of intergroup contact meta‐perceptions on positive contact and attitudes

This research examined the role of contact meta‐perceptions on positive intergroup contact and outgroup attitudes. Specifically, perceptions of the ingroup's and outgroup's desire for intergroup contact were simultaneously tested as predictors of intergroup contact and outgroup attitudes. Three correlational studies were conducted in three distinct contexts, international students' view of British students, general public views of people with schizophrenia, and both Muslims' and non‐Muslims' views of one another. Among these three intergroup relationships, the role of outgroup contact meta‐perceptions was consistently highlighted as predictor of intergroup contact. In stark contrast, ingroup contact meta‐perceptions did not emerge as a significant predictor of contact. Intergroup contact then predicted outgroup attitudes (Studies 1, 2, and 3) and stereotyping (Studies 2 and 3) via reduced anxiety (Studies 2 and 3). The results demonstrate the importance of explicitly highlighting outgroups' openness for intergroup interactions and are discussed in the context of intergroup relations literature.     

Extending Contact Across Generations: Comparison of Direct and Ancestral Intergroup Contact Effects on Current Attitudes Toward Outgroup Members

There is a growing body of evidence that intergroup relations are affected not only by direct contact with outgroup members, but also by extended contact: the mere knowledge that an ingroup member has a positive relationship with an outgroup. The present article focuses on the transgenerationally transmitted effects of contact, namely the impact of knowledge about ancestors’ contact with outgroup members on descendants’ attitudes toward the outgroup. A correlational study in the Polish–Ukrainian borderland region (N = 288) shows that ancestral intergroup contact – independently from direct intergroup contact – plays a crucial role in the process of improving intergroup attitudes. The mediating mechanisms of perceived similarity of the outgroup to the self and of perspective taking are discussed. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Dominant group members in intergroup interaction: safety or vulnerability in numbers?

An experiment examined how low- and high-prejudice dominant group members' (LPs' and HPs') reactions to intergroup contact were affected by whether they were accompanied by fellow ingroup members who exhibited prejudice-relevant behavior. Participants answered questions alone or in a group and then estimated how they were viewed by an observer who was an ingroup or an outgroup member. HPs believed that they were viewed more negatively by an outgroup member in the individual than the group condition. LPs showed the opposite effect, which led them to evaluate the outgroup member more negatively in the group condition. All participants in the group condition expected an outgroup member to exaggerate their similarity to the other ingroup members present, and LPs evaluated the other ingroup members more negatively when the observer was an outgroup member. The results suggest that intergroup attitudes guide the types of intergroup contact situations that are experienced most positively.     

The effects of intergroup context of evaluation on ambivalence toward the ingroup and the outgroup

A study is reported which examines the relations between ambivalence toward the ingroup and the outgroup. The basic assumption was that ambivalent attitudes in intergroup contexts contribute to satisfying two competing motivations of group members, i.e. establishment of positive distinctiveness for the ingroup and conformity to the fairness norm. Participants were asked to evaluate the ingroup and one other group by using unipolar (positively and negatively valenced) affect‐ and cognition‐based items. We predicted an interaction effect of target group (ingroup versus outgroup) and attitude domain (affect‐based versus cognition‐based) on ambivalence. Additional hypotheses were formulated taking separately into account the positive and the negative unipolar items. We expected that on positively valenced items the ingroup would be favoured over the outgroup on both affect‐ and cognition‐based evaluations. Besides, we predicted that on negatively valenced items, the ingroup would be favoured over the outgroup on affect‐based evaluation but not on cognition‐based evaluation. Results indicated support for the predictions and shed light on the moderating role played by attitude domains on both ambivalence and ingroup favouritism. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Friendship and romance across the U.S. political divide: Hindrance or help for outgroup political attitudes?

Consistent with the intergroup contact literature, cross-political relationships (e.g., friendships or romantic relationships between different partisans) may help reduce inter-political group prejudice. Given that unfavorable attitudes based on the political group membership are particularly heightened at present in the United States, we explored whether having cross-political friendships (Study 1) or romantic relationships (Study 2) predict more positive interpersonal or intergroup attitudes among American Democrats and Republicans. In Study 1, using a social network measure (N = 301), where participants reported on their closest friends, cross-political (versus same-political) friendship was associated with less positive interpersonal attitudes when this relationship was unsatisfying. Having any (versus no) or more (versus less) cross-political group friendships was not associated with holding more positive intergroup attitudes. In Study 2, cross-political romantic relationships were examined (N = 392). Having a cross- (versus same-) political romantic relationship was associated with relatively less positive attitudes toward the political outgroup via lower empathy when relationship satisfaction was low. Study findings highlight the potential limitations of the beneficial effects of intergroup contact.     

The Role of Personal Centrality of Ingroup Victimhood in Intergroup Relations and Political Agenda in Northern Ireland

Even though the violent conflicts during the Troubles officially ended decades ago, the memories of violence and division between Catholics and Protestants linger in Northern Ireland. We argue that the personal centrality of collective victimhood, which is formed by the memory and perception of past and ongoing victimization, may play an important role in people's attitudes in postconflict societies. The current study investigated both the antecedents and outcomes of the personal centrality of ingroup victimhood in Northern Ireland and examined the vital role it plays in the aftermath of a violent intergroup conflict among Catholics and Protestants. The results demonstrated that ongoing experiences of victimization such as personal and group-level discrimination and memories of personal and close others' suffering are strongly related to people's personal centrality of ingroup victimhood. The centrality of ingroup victimhood, in turn, predicted various strategies for intergroup interaction and policy preferences such as collective action, support for nonviolence, and attitudes toward reunification of Ireland, which were moderated by group membership. The findings provide empirical evidence for the role of the centrality of ingroup victimhood as a link between experiences of victimization and intergroup interactions as well as policy preferences.     

Effects of direct and indirect cross-group friendships on judgments of Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland: the mediating role of an anxiety-reduction mechanism

Recent evidence suggests that both direct and indirect friendship with outgroup members (knowledge of ingroup members' friendship with outgroup members) can reduce prejudice toward the outgroup. Two surveys of cross-community relationships in Northern Ireland, using a student sample (N = 341) and a representative sample of the general population (N = 735), tested whether (a) direct and indirect friendships had generalized effects on both prejudice and perceived outgroup variability and (b) reduced anxiety about future encounters with outgroup members mediated such relationships. Structural equation modeling confirmed that, in both samples, direct and indirect cross-group friendships between Catholics and Protestants were associated with reduced prejudice toward the religious outgroup and increased perceived outgroup variability, via an anxiety-reduction mechanism. It is argued that emerging generalization hypotheses help to integrate both cognition and affect and interpersonal and intergroup approaches to contact.     

The ingroup as pars pro toto: projection from the ingroup onto the inclusive category as a precursor to social discrimination

In an approach to intergroup discrimination and tolerance, it is assumed that the outgroup's difference from the ingroup is evaluated with reference to the prototype of the higher-order category that includes both groups. Two correlational studies yielded evidence that (a) group members tend to perceive their ingroup as relatively prototypical for the inclusive category (projection), (b) members highly identified with both ingroup and inclusive category (dual identity) tend to project most, and (c) relative prototypicality is related to negative attitudes toward the outgroup. The latter relation was further specified in Study 3, manipulating the valence of the inclusive category. Projection was related to more negative attitudes toward the outgroup when the inclusive category was primed positively but to more positive attitudes when it was primed negatively. The meaning of dual identities for intergroup relations is discussed.     

Group membership,group norms,empathy, and young children's intentions to aggress

This study assessed the effect of ingroup norms and empathy on 6 and 9‐year‐old children's (N=161) attitudes and aggressive intentions toward outgroup members. Prior to an intergroup drawing competition against an outgroup, participants' empathy was measured, and they were randomly assigned to a simulated group with a norm of direct or indirect aggression, or no aggression norm. Results indicated participants' attitudes were less positive toward the outgroup vs. the ingroup, and that both direct and indirect aggressive intentions were displayed toward the outgroup. Most importantly, the ingroup was liked less when it had an aggression norm, and the participants' aggressive intentions were not enhanced by the group aggression norm. Empathy was a significant negative predictor of direct but not indirect aggression intentions. Implications for understanding the instigation and inhibition of children's aggression intentions are discussed. Aggr. Behav. 35:244–258, 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

The Role of Personality Factors in the Reduction of Intergroup Anxiety and Amelioration of Outgroup Attitudes via Intergroup Contact

Two studies investigated the role of personality factors in the amelioration of outgroup attitudes via intergroup contact. In study 1, the effect of extraversion on outgroup attitude operated via an increase in cross‐group friendship, whereas openness to experience and agreeableness had a direct effect on outgroup attitude. In study 2, we included intergroup anxiety as a mediator explaining these relationships, and we ruled out ingroup friendship as a potential confound. We found that the relationships between openness to experience and agreeableness on the one hand and outgroup attitude on the other were mediated by reduced intergroup anxiety. In addition, the effect of extraversion on outgroup attitude operated via an increase in cross‐group friendship that was in turn associated with lower levels of intergroup anxiety. Across both studies, the friendship–attitude relationship was stronger among those low in agreeableness and extraversion. We discuss the importance of integrating personality and situational approaches to prejudice reduction in optimizing the impact of contact‐based interventions. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Essentialist beliefs affect children's outgroup empathy,attitudes and prosocial behaviours in a setting of intergroup conflict

Empathy for salient outgroups can promote positive intergroup attitudes and prosocial behaviours. Less is known about which factors may promote empathy, particularly among children, in contexts of intergroup conflict. Empathy may depend on underlying cognitions, such as social essentialist beliefs, that is, believing that certain social categories have an underlying essence that causes members to share observable and non-observable properties. This study explored the influence of essentialist beliefs about ethno-religious categories on outgroup-directed empathy, attitudes and prosocial behaviours of children living in Northern Ireland (N = 88; M = 7.09, SD = 1.47 years old). Bootstrapped chain mediation found that lower essentialist beliefs predicted greater outgroup-directed empathy, which was positively related to outgroup attitudes, which in turn, predicted more outgroup prosocial behaviours. The findings highlight the importance of essentialist beliefs as an underlying factor promoting empathy, with links to prosocial behaviours in settings of intergroup conflict. The intervention implications are discussed.     

Towards tolerance: Representations of superordinate categories and perceived ingroup prototypicality

According to Mummendey and Wenzel (1999), group members tend to perceive their ingroup, relative to an outgroup, as more prototypical of the superordinate category encompassing both groups. Hence, they tend to regard the outgroup as deviating from the norms of the superordinate category. Factors that inhibit perception of relative ingroup prototypicality should thus promote intergroup tolerance. In two experiments, the representation of the superordinate category was manipulated. Both an undefinable prototype (Experiment 1; N=63) and a complex representation (Experiment 2; N=88) led to a decrease in relative ingroup prototypicality. Dual identification with the ingroup and the superordinate category increased relative ingroup prototypicality, which was negatively correlated with positive attitudes towards the outgroup. The findings supported Mummendey and Wenzel’s assumptions about the conditions that lead to intergroup tolerance.     

The other side of we: when outgroup members express common identity

Previous research on the common ingroup identity model has focused on how one's representations of members of the ingroup and outgroup influence intergroup attitudes. Two studies reported here investigated how learning how others, ingroup or outgroup members, conceive of the groups within a superordinate category affects intergroup bias and willingness to engage in intergroup contact. Across both studies, high school students who learned that other ingroup members categorized students at both schools within the common identity of "students" showed less intergroup bias in evaluations and greater willingness for contact. However, consistent with the hypothesized effects of identity threat, when participants read that outgroup members saw the groups within the superordinate category, they exhibited a relatively negative orientation, except when ingroup members also endorsed a superordinate identity (Study 1). This result occurred even when the relative status of the groups was manipulated (Study 2).     

Polarizing effects of intergroup comparison

Compared the effects of intergroup and within-group comparison on attitudes differentiating two well-defined student groups. Social work students (n = 48) expressed attitudes either before or after estimating ingroup or outgroup (commerce students) norms. Subjects adopted more extreme attitudes following outgroup comparison, but were unaffected by comparison within the group.     

Intergroup Perceptions and Attitudes toward Immigrants in a Culturally Plural Society

The research examined perceptions of Chinese immigrants held by New Zealanders of European and Maori descent. The study (N = 318) adopted an intergroup perspective to test a predictive model of attitudes toward immigrants. It was based on a nation‐wide survey with prospective respondents randomly selected from the New Zealand Electoral rolls. Findings revealed that Maori differed from their European counterparts in predictable ways, reporting more relative deprivation and greater perceived threat, and holding more negative outgroup attitudes. Less contact and greater perceived threat predicted more negative attitudes toward immigrants; in addition, when intergroup boundaries were permeable, the link between perceived threat and negative attitudes was stronger in Maori than New Zealand Europeans. While intergroup relations are traditionally analysed in a dual group formation involving a privileged “dominant” ingroup and disadvantaged “minority” immigrant outgroup, the current research suggests the need to advance beyond this dichotomy to a more inclusive approach and to consider the interface between the historical and political milieux in specific national contexts.