Differential relationships between intergroup contact and affective and cognitive dimensions of prejudice

Research on affective dimensions of intergroup relationships suggests that positive effects of intergroup contact can generalize through establishing affective ties with outgroup members. However, research on cognitive dimensions emphasizes that it is often difficult to generalize positive contact outcomes. In this research, the authors examine whether affective and cognitive dimensions of prejudice bear different relationships to intergroup contact. Using data from a larger meta-analysis of contact effects, Study 1 demonstrates that affective indicators of prejudice typically yield stronger, inverse contact-prejudice relationships than such cognitive indicators as stereotypes. Study 2 replicates these trends in a survey study using multiple indicators of affective and cognitive dimensions of prejudice. Study 2 also shows significant, inverse relationships between contact and affective prejudice when contact is assessed either as number of outgroup friends or intergroup closeness. Together, these results suggest that affective dimensions of intergroup relationships are especially critical for understanding the nature of contact-prejudice effects.     

Challenging the Stubborn Core of Opposition to Equality: Racial Contact and Policy Attitudes

A Random Digit Dialing survey (n = 794) examined the interracial contact experiences and racial attitudes of White South Africans. The survey measured racial attitudes not only in terms of individuals' prejudice, but also in terms of their perceptions of group threat, perceived injustice, and support for various government policies designed to rectify the legacy of apartheid. The results indicated that the frequency and quality of interracial contact predicted Whites' support for both race compensatory and race preferential policies of redress, and these effects were partly mediated by perceived threat, sense of fairness, and racial prejudice. The research points to a potential rapprochement between the social psychological theories of intergroup contact and group positioning theories derived from the work of Blumer. It also highlights the value of adopting a more expansive and politically nuanced conception of the “consequences” of contact and desegregation.     

With a little help from my cross-group friend: reducing anxiety in intergroup contexts through cross-group friendship

The authors induced cross-group friendship between Latinos/as and Whites to test the effects of cross-group friendship on anxiety in intergroup contexts. Cross-group friendship led to decreases in cortisol reactivity (a hormonal correlate of stress; W. R. Lovallo & T. L. Thomas, 2000) over 3 friendship meetings among participants high in race-based rejection sensitivity (R. Mendoza-Denton, G. Downey, V. J. Purdie, A. Davis, & J. Pietrzak, 2002) and participants high in implicit prejudice (A. G. Greenwald, B. A. Nosek, & M. R. Banaji, 2003). Cross-group partners' prior intergroup contact moderated the relationship between race-based rejection sensitivity and cortisol reactivity. Following the manipulation, participants kept daily diaries of their experiences in an ethnically diverse setting. Implicitly prejudiced participants initiated more intergroup interactions during the diary period after making a cross-group friend. Participants who had made a cross-group friend reported lower anxious mood during the diary period, which compensated for greater anxious mood among participants high in race-based rejection sensitivity. These findings provide experimental evidence that cross-group friendship is beneficial for people who are likely to experience anxiety in intergroup contexts.     

What predicts anti‐Roma prejudice? Qualitative and quantitative analysis of everyday sentiments about the Roma

The present research focused on two primary goals: (a) identifying the content of sentiments about the Roma to which Hungarians are exposed during everyday family conversations, and (b) determining which types of everyday sentiments about the Roma most strongly predict Hungarian respondents’ anti‐Roma prejudice. Content analyzing open‐ended responses from a representative sample of Hungarians (N = 505), we found that more than 76% of the respondents reported being exposed to negative stereotypes about the Roma, 27% to threats posed by Roma, and 16% to overt dehumanization of Roma; additionally more than 20% reported hearing no positive sentiments about the Roma in everyday family conversations. We then examined which negative and positive sentiments most strongly predicted respondents’ anti‐Roma prejudice (using measures of social distance and modern racism). Higher social distance scores were predicted by a lack of positive sentiments, whereas lower social distance scores were most strongly predicted by unambiguously positive sentiments expressed during family conversations. Higher modern racism scores were further predicted by sentiments expressing dehumanization, threat, and violence against Roma. Together, these results attest to the extremity of anti‐Roma sentiments expressed regularly by Hungarians, and suggest how exposure to specific sentiments may foster anti‐Roma hostility. Moreover, these findings provide guidance regarding the specific negative anti‐Roma sentiments that should be combated to enhance the effectiveness of anti‐prejudice interventions.     

A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory

The present article presents a meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. With 713 independent samples from 515 studies, the meta-analysis finds that intergroup contact typically reduces intergroup prejudice. Multiple tests indicate that this finding appears not to result from either participant selection or publication biases, and the more rigorous studies yield larger mean effects. These contact effects typically generalize to the entire outgroup, and they emerge across a broad range of outgroup targets and contact settings. Similar patterns also emerge for samples with racial or ethnic targets and samples with other targets. This result suggests that contact theory, devised originally for racial and ethnic encounters, can be extended to other groups. A global indicator of Allport's optimal contact conditions demonstrates that contact under these conditions typically leads to even greater reduction in prejudice. Closer examination demonstrates that these conditions are best conceptualized as an interrelated bundle rather than as independent factors. Further, the meta-analytic findings indicate that these conditions are not essential for prejudice reduction. Hence, future work should focus on negative factors that prevent intergroup contact from diminishing prejudice as well as the development of a more comprehensive theory of intergroup contact.     

Interpreting references to group membership in context: feelings about intergroup contact depending on who says what to whom

Contact research often manipulates the salience of group membership, with little consideration of how such manipulations affect feelings toward intergroup contact, and how contextual features may moderate its effects. We propose that feelings toward intergroup contact may not depend solely on the degree to which group membership appears to be salient, but on how references to group membership are interpreted in the intergroup context. Two experimental studies examined how references to group membership may be interpreted differently depending on their source (ingroup or outgroup) and the recipient (minority or majority), and how these interpretations predict feelings toward cross‐group interactions. In Study 1, references to group membership were interpreted more negatively from an outgroup source among majority participants, yet a reverse pattern was observed for minority participants. Similar effects were obtained in Study 2, yet participants tended to respond negatively when an outgroup member referred specifically to their group. Moreover, feelings about cross‐group interactions were predicted only (Study 1) and strongly (Study 2) by the degree to which outgroup members' references were interpreted negatively, beyond what was predicted by participants' general awareness of group membership. Implications of these findings for future research on contact and salience are discussed. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Don't judge a living book by its cover: effectiveness of the living library intervention in reducing prejudice toward Roma and LGBT people

In Hungary, prejudices toward Roma and the LGBT community are highly salient and explicit in public opinion, the media, and in the political discourse. The present study examined the effectiveness of the Living Library prejudice reduction intervention—in which participants as “Readers” have engaging contact with living “Books” who are trained volunteers from the Roma and LGBT communities. In a pre‐post intervention study with high school students (N = 105), results suggest that the Living Library intervention reduced participants’ scores on multiple measures of prejudice. The Living Library intervention appeared to be effective among both those participants whose friends endorsed prejudice or more tolerant attitudes toward Roma and LGBT people. In sum, Living Library appears to be a useful method for reducing prejudice in contexts which are characterized by strong negative attitudes toward these different groups.     

Testing a contact intervention based on intergroup friendship between Roma and non‐Roma Hungarians: reducing bias through institutional support in a non‐supportive societal context

Although intergroup friendships have been shown to reduce prejudice, little research has considered whether interventions fostering intergroup friendship would be effective in highly prejudicial contexts. We conducted a quasi‐experiment (N = 61) to test whether a contact‐based intervention based on intergroup friendship could reduce bias against Roma people among non‐Roma Hungarians. Participants in the contact condition engaged in a face‐to‐face interaction with a Roma person, and responded to questions involving mutual self‐disclosure. Through pre‐ and post‐test questionnaires, we observed significant positive change in attitudes and contact intentions among participants in the contact condition, while these effects were not observed among participants in the control condition. Positive change was moderated by perceived institutional norms, which corroborates the potential of contact‐based interventions.     

Trust and Acceptance in Response to References to Group Membership: Minority and Majority Perspectives on Cross‐Group Interactions1

This research examined anticipated feelings of trust and acceptance in cross‐group interactions among members of ethnic minority and majority groups, depending on whether an out‐group member referred to their group membership. In Study 1, Asian, Latino, and White participants read scenarios describing interactions between them and an in‐group member, an out‐group member, or an out‐group member who referred to their group membership. Participants from each group responded more negatively toward interactions with out‐group members when they referred to group membership. These findings were replicated in Study 2 with samples of Black and White participants, also showing that anticipated prejudice partially mediated the effects of out‐group members' references to group membership on feelings of trust and acceptance. Implications of these findings are discussed in terms of facilitating intergroup communication and conversations about group differences.     

How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta‐analytic tests of three mediators

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.