Social antecedents of children's implicit prejudice: Direct contact,extended contact,explicit and implicit teachers' prejudice

Recent research has shown that children display implicit prejudice at least by age six (Baron & Banaji, 2006). In the present study, we investigated some potential antecedents of children's implicit intergroup attitudes: direct contact, extended contact, explicit and implicit racial attitudes of children's favourite teacher. Participants were Italian elementary school students. Results showed that, unexpectedly, direct contact increased negative implicit attitudes toward immigrants; extended contact reduced implicit prejudice only among those with less direct contact experiences. In addition, teachers' implicit (but not explicit) prejudice predicted children's implicit prejudice. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed, together with the importance of the social environment in the formation of children's implicit intergroup attitudes.     

Intergroup contact buffers against the intergenerational transmission of authoritarianism and racial prejudice

The present study focused on the buffering role of positive intergroup contact in the intergenerational transmission of authoritarianism and racial prejudice in a sample of adolescents and one of their parents. In accordance with our expectations, adolescents’ intergroup contact experiences moderated the mediated relationships between parental authoritarianism and adolescents’ prejudice, both via adolescents’ authoritarianism and via parental prejudice. These relationships were stronger among adolescents with lower, rather than higher, levels of intergroup contact. We conclude that intergroup contact buffers the indirect relationship between parents’ authoritarianism and adolescents’ racial prejudice and therefore constitutes a promising means of reducing the intergenerational transmission of prejudice.     

Avoiding affect in intergroup relations: The roles of dispositional and intergroup empathy in the relationship between alexithymia and prejudice

Alexithymia, that is, difficulties in recognizing, communicating, and processing one's own emotions, is associated with poorer interpersonal relations. Emotional processes are key drivers and mechanisms of prejudice and its reduction, and alexithymia is thought to influence individuals' empathic responses. This research examined the relationship between alexithymia and prejudice, and the role of empathy in this relationship. Three studies were conducted in three intergroup contexts to test whether alexithymia is also associated with poorer intergroup relations with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender+ individuals (Study 1, N = 126 heterosexual late adolescents) and Asian British people (Study 3, N = 300 White adults) in the United Kingdom, and immigrants in Italy (Study 2, N = 381 Italian adults). Participants completed the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), measures on dispositional and intergroup empathic concern (EC) and perspective taking (PT) as well as measures of prejudice (anti-outgroup hostility, anti-outgroup attitudes, and anti-outgroup behavioral intentions). Lower dispositional EC (Studies 1, marginal effect in Study 2) and intergroup EC and PT (Study 3) mediated the relationship between the Externally Oriented Thinking subscale of the TAS-20 (i.e., avoiding emotions and affective thinking) and greater prejudice. The findings are important for understanding the challenges of late adolescents and adults with alexithymia in intergroup relations, highlighting the role of dispositional and intergroup empathy for individual differences such as alexithymia in endorsing prejudice.     

Direct and indirect intergroup friendship effects: testing the moderating role of the affective-cognitive bases of prejudice

Direct friendship with outgroup members and the knowledge of ingroup-outgroup friendships (indirect friendship) can both reduce outgroup prejudice. Three correlational studies (Ns = 338, 141, and 798) tested the moderating role of the affective-cognitive bases of prejudice, assessing whether the size of the friendship- prejudice relationship depends on the extent to which emotions (vs. thoughts) are relevant to the prejudiced attitudes at stake. In Study 1, direct friendship effects were larger with outgroups generating stronger affective responding than with outgroups generating stronger cognitive responding, whereas indirect friendship effects were larger with cognitive than with affective outgroups. Study 2 detected a similar pattern but with prejudice basis assessed in terms of individual differences. Study 3 replicated Study 2's indirect friendship-cognitive basis moderation in a context of historically polarized intergroup relations and on two new outcome variables, intergroup trust and negative action tendencies.     

Implicit and explicit ethnocentrism: revisiting the ideologies of prejudice

Two studies investigated relationships among individual differences in implicit and explicit prejudice, right-wing ideology, and rigidity in thinking. The first study examined these relationships focusing on White Americans' prejudice toward Black Americans. The second study provided the first test of implicit ethnocentrism and its relationship to explicit ethnocentrism by studying the relationship between attitudes toward five social groups. Factor analyses found support for both implicit and explicit ethnocentrism. In both studies, mean explicit attitudes toward out groups were positive, whereas implicit attitudes were negative, suggesting that implicit and explicit prejudices are distinct; however, in both studies, implicit and explicit attitudes were related (r = .37, .47). Latent variable modeling indicates a simple structure within this ethnocentric system, with variables organized in order of specificity. These results lead to the conclusion that (a) implicit ethnocentrism exists and (b) it is related to and distinct from explicit ethnocentrism.     

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.     

Predicting policy attitudes from general prejudice versus specific intergroup emotions

How are people’s social policy attitudes related to their affective reactions to the social groups affected by those policies? From a threat-based perspective, specific emotions toward a group—above and beyond general prejudice toward that group—should predict attitudes toward a policy affecting the group. To test this, 128 participants reported their support for four social policies, their general and specific affective reactions to each affected group, and the threats ostensibly posed by that group. Although general prejudice failed to predict each policy attitude after controlling for the specific emotions, specific emotions did indeed significantly predict each policy attitude after controlling for general prejudice. Moreover, these specific emotions tended to mediate predicted relationships between perceived threats and policy attitudes. In all, these results highlight the benefits of assessing specific intergroup emotions as they relate to political arenas.     

Predicting support for racial transformation policies: Intergroup threat,racial prejudice,sense of group entitlement and strength of identification

Policies and programs designed to challenge the effects of racial discrimination (such as affirmative action) are hotly contested. Factors which have been proposed to explain opposition to these policies include racial prejudice, group threat and self‐interest, and perceptions of intergroup justice. We report the results of two random national telephone surveys which tested a theoretically based model of the predictors of policy support in post‐apartheid South Africa. The results provided limited support for Blumer's group position model. Compensatory and preferential treatment policies had different underlying predictors: Violated entitlement featured in the models of compensatory policy attitudes, but not preferential treatment policy attitudes, where threat was the strongest predictor. In addition to threat and violated entitlement, policy attitudes among the black sample were related to ingroup identification but those of the white sample were related to prejudice. The effects of these variables were in the opposite directions for the two samples: Policy support was associated with strong ingroup identification and high levels of threat among the black sample (i.e. prospective beneficiaries of the transformation policies), but with low levels of prejudice and threat among the white sample. We conclude by considering the implications that these findings have for social change programs. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

Improving outgroup attitudes in schools: First steps toward a teacher‐led vicarious contact intervention

Despite the urgent need for promoting positive intergroup relations in schools, research on intergroup relations is not systematically translated into prejudice‐reduction interventions. Although prejudice‐reduction interventions in schools based on indirect contact have been conducted for decades, they have all been carried out by researchers themselves. In a field experiment in Finland in autumn 2015, we tested for the first time a vicarious contact prejudice‐reduction intervention for its effectiveness among adolescents (N = 639) when implemented independently by school teachers instead of researchers. In addition, we tested the extent to which the intervention's effect depends on initial outgroup attitudes, previous direct outgroup contact experiences, and gender, hypothesizing that the intervention improves outgroup attitudes particularly among adolescents with more negative prior attitudes and less positive prior direct contact, and more among girls than among boys. We found an unanticipated overall deterioration in the outgroup attitudes during intervention in both the experimental and control groups. However, attitudes seemed to deteriorate somewhat less in the experimental than in the control group, and the intervention had a significant positive effect on outgroup attitudes in one experimental subgroup that needed it most: girls who had negative rather than positive outgroup attitudes at the outset. We discuss our results in light of previous research and contextual particularities.     

Relationships between intergroup contact and prejudice among minority and majority status groups

Considerable research has shown that greater intergroup contact corresponds with lower intergroup prejudice, yet little is known regarding how the relationships between contact and prejudice may vary for members of minority and majority status groups. The present research examined differences in contact-prejudice relationships among members of minority and majority status groups, using data from a larger meta-analytic study of the effects of intergroup contact. Results indicate that the relationships between contact and prejudice tend to be weaker among members of minority status groups than among members of majority status groups. Moreover, establishing Allport's (1954) proposed conditions for optimal intergroup contact significantly predicts stronger contact-prejudice relationships among members of majority status groups, but not among members of minority status groups. Implications of these findings for future research on contact between minority and majority status groups are discussed.     

Like parent,like child? Development of prejudice and tolerance towards immigrants

Although intergroup attitudes are assumed to develop due to the influence of parents, there is no longitudinal evidence supporting this claim. In addition, research on socialization of intergroup attitudes has omitted possible effects of adolescents on their parents. We also know little about the conditions under which intergroup attitudes are transmitted. This two‐wave, 2 years apart, study of adolescents (N = 507) and their parents examined the relations between parents and adolescents' prejudice and tolerance from a longitudinal perspective. The study tested whether parental prejudice and tolerance would predict over‐time changes in adolescents' attitudes and whether adolescents' prejudice and tolerance would elicit changes in parental attitudes. Additionally, it explored whether some of the effects would depend on perceived parental support. Results showed significant bidirectional influences between parents and adolescents' attitudes. In addition, adolescents who perceived their parents as supportive showed higher parent–adolescent correspondence in prejudice than youth with low parental support. These findings show that intergroup attitudes develop as a result of mutual influences between parents and adolescents. Hence, the unidirectional transmission model and previous research findings should be revisited. The results also suggest that parents' prejudice influence adolescents' attitudes to the extent that youth perceive their parents as supportive.     

Entitativity and prejudice: Examining their relationship and the moderating effect of attitude certainty

Previous research suggests that perceived entitativity, which represents the degree to which groups are perceived to possess unity, coherence, and organization, predicts intergroup stereotyping and bias. The present research yielded complementary evidence that prejudice (toward Muslims in Study 1 and toward South Asians in Study 2) can also predict groups’ perceived entitativity. In particular, Study 1 found that the relationships of two predictors, intergroup contact and social dominance orientation, with perceived entitativity were mediated by prejudice. Study 2 demonstrated, as predicted, that this set of relationships occurred primarily for intergroup attitudes of relatively high certainty. Neither study found support for models in which entitativity mediated the relationships of the predictors with prejudice. Conceptual and analytical factors that may account for evidence of the potential bi-directionality of the bias-entitativity relationship are considered.     

Prejudice and behavior: A review

Originally it was thought that prejudiced intergroup attitudes were very closely related to negative intergroup behavior. More recently, empirical studies reveal a weak and inconsistent relationship, that discriminatory intergroup behavior is therefore largely determined by situational factors, and that it is relatively independent of an individual’s attitudes. A detailed review of this research, however, suggests that the relationship between prejudice and behavior may be much more consistent than has been thought. Moreover, although the relationship is usually not very powerful, most research has involved methodological inadequacies which would have inappropriately depressed it. Finally, it is noted that, for negative intergroup behavior to be situationally determined, does not exclude a strong relationship between it and prejudiced attitudes.     

Getting connected: Intergroup contact on Facebook

One correlational study examined whether virtual contact via Facebook is positively related to intergroup relations. The followers of two online campaigns from Iran and Israel—whose countries have been in a politically hostile relationship since the 1980s—indicated the amount of direct and indirect virtual (Facebook) and real-life outgroup contact they have had, a number of quality and affective judgments about that contact, and completed an affective prejudice measure about the respective outgroup. Overall, contact was negatively associated with affective prejudice, providing support for the contact hypothesis in a specific and exclusively virtual setting with citizens of hostile nations. Previously experienced real-life contact did not moderate the results, suggesting that virtual contact has an independent link to positive outgroup attitudes.     

Including Both Voices: A New Bidirectional Framework for Understanding and Improving Intergroup Relations

Methods: If successful intergroup harmony is to be achieved between two groups, then both groups' voices must be heard. Despite this, 60 years of social psychological “intergroup” prejudice research has tended to adopt a solely majority‐centric perspective, with the majority group portrayed as the active agent of prejudice, and the minority group as passive targets. Objective: This paper critically reviews relevant literature, highlighting this unidirectional imbalance, and proposes a new, two‐stage bidirectional framework, where we encourage researchers and educators to first understand how minority and majority groups' intergroup attitudes and emotions impact intergroup dynamics, before tailoring and implementing contact and recategorisation strategies to improve intergroup relations, nationally and internationally. Conclusion: We argue that the interactive nature of the intergroup dynamic needs to be better understood, and each group's voice heard, before prejudice can be effectively reduced. Lastly, we describe an Australian study, the Dual Identity and Electronic‐contact (DIEC) programme, that has been conducted and has successfully applied this bidirectional framework.     

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.     

Prejudice and behavior: A review

Originally it was thought that prejudiced intergroup attitudes were very closely related to negative intergroup behavior. More recently, empirical studies reveal a weak and inconsistent relationship, that discriminatory intergroup behavior is therefore largely determined by situational factors, and that it is relatively independent of an individual’s attitudes. A detailed review of this research, however, suggests that the relationship between prejudice and behavior may be much more consistent than has been thought. Moreover, although the relationship is usually not very powerful, most research has involved methodological inadequacies which would have inappropriately depressed it. Finally, it is noted that, for negative intergroup behavior to be situationally determined, does not exclude a strong relationship between it and prejudiced attitudes.     

Cultural Inclusiveness Contributing to International Students' Intercultural Attitudes: Mediating Role of Intergroup Contact Variables

This study sought to examine the relationships among Asian‐born international students' perceived cultural inclusiveness and intercultural contact, along with the contributions these variables made to the students' attitudes towards culturally different domestic students. Based on Pettigrew's (1998) intergroup contact theory and previous research on educational cultural climate, we hypothesised that more positive intercultural attitudes would be associated with perceptions of a culturally inclusive educational environment and higher levels of intergroup contact as indicated by quantity of contact, quality of contact, and extent of intercultural friendships. Anonymous survey participants were 190 (76 male and 113 female) Asian‐born international university students at an Australian university. Results showed small to moderate relationships among perceived cultural inclusiveness, all the dimensions of intercultural contact, and intercultural attitudes, except for an unexpected insignificant association between intercultural friendship and attitudes. Hierarchical regression analysis showed that cultural inclusiveness and quality of contact were the only significant predictors of intercultural attitudes. Mediation analysis indicated that quality of contact partially mediated the relationship between cultural inclusiveness and intercultural attitudes. The importance of an inclusive educational environment on intergroup contact and attitudes, from international students' viewpoint, is discussed. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Preventing prejudice and improving intergroup attitudes: A meta-analysis of child and adolescent training programs

This article reports the results of a meta-analysis of 81 research reports containing 122 intervention–control comparisons of structured programs to reduce prejudice or promote positive intergroup attitudes in children and adolescents. Overall, the analysis revealed a mean effect size of d = 0.30, indicating low to moderate intervention effects. From the great variety of different approaches, interventions based on direct contact experiences along with social-cognitive training programs designed to promote empathy and perspective taking showed the strongest effect sizes. In addition, effects varied according to the program participant's social status (higher effects for majority groups), the target out-group (lower effect sizes for ethnic vs. disabled and aged out-groups), and the type of outcome assessment (higher effects for cognitive vs. affective and behavioral measures of intergroup attitudes). The discussion considers several limitations including the lack of implementation and follow-up research as well as future direction of research on promoting intergroup relations.