Search

Three studies investigated the effect of intergroup contact and social identification on social change among three advantaged groups in Cyprus, Romania, and Israel. In Study 1 (n = 340, Turkish Cypriots), intergroup contact with disadvantaged immigrant Turks positively predicted endorsement of their social change motivations directly, and via intergroup trust and perspective-taking indirectly. In Study 2 (n = 200, Romanians), contact with the ethnic minority Hungarians positively predicted endorsement of their social change motivations via intergroup trust, perspective-taking, and intergroup anxiety, while ingroup identification negatively predicted endorsement of Hungarian ethnic minority's collective action tendencies via perspective-taking and anxiety. In Study 3 (n = 240, Israeli Jews), intergroup contact positively predicted, while ingroup identification negatively predicted, endorsement of disadvantaged Israeli Palestinian citizens' social change motivations via perspective-taking, anxiety, and trust. Across three studies, results show that intergroup contact led the advantaged groups to attitudinally support social change motivations of the disadvantaged outgroups through increased trust, perspective-taking, and reduced anxiety, whereas ingroup identification weakened their intention to support social change motivations via perspective-taking and intergroup anxiety in Study 2, and via intergroup trust, perspective-taking, and intergroup anxiety in Study 3. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research examined how a predictable change in the social structure over time (from segregated to integrated) can affect the way intergroup contact and subjective categorization of ingroup and outgroup members (intergroup, superordinate, dual identity) impact on intergroup bias. A three-stage longitudinal study was conducted with six-month intervals ( N s = 708, 435, 418) involving high school students in Germany. Time 1 ( T 1) was characterized by structural segregation and Times 2 and 3 ( T 2, T 3) by structural integration. Longitudinal analysis between T 1 and T 2 showed that intergroup categorization (but not superordinate categorization or dual identity) improved intergroup relations. Between T 2 and T 3, dual identity reduced intergroup bias and marginally increased interpersonal closeness whereas superordinate categorization increased bias and reduced interpersonal closeness. There were no effects of intergroup categorization between T 2 and T 3. Overall, positive effects of contact increased over time, reaching significance from T 2 to T 3, supporting a consolidation hypothesis and intergroup contact theory more widely. These findings are also consistent with a congruence hypothesis that the impact of intergroup contact is partly determined by the match between how people categorize ingroup and outgroup members and the social structure that frames intergroup relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When people are aware that an ingroup member has an outgroup friend, they tend to improve their intergroup attitudes, which is known as the extended contact hypothesis. Thus far, no research has tested how the perceived degree of normativity of the intergroup interaction affects the evaluation of the ingroup member through which extended contact is experienced. Results of three studies showed that when contact was normative (i.e., positive contact with a liked outgroup, or negative contact with a disliked outgroup), the ingroup member was evaluated positively, while when the contact was counternormative (i.e., negative contact with a liked outgroup or positive contact with a disliked outgroup) the ingroup member was evaluated negatively. This effect was mediated by perceived threat posed by the ingroup member who experiences the intergroup contact and perceived similarity of the participant with the ingroup member (Experiments 2–3). In summary, the perceived normativity of the extended contact affects the perception of the ingroup member who experiences the contact, turning him/her into a “white” or a “black” sheep in the eyes of the ingroup. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Direct intergroup contact can be described as the “royal road” to reducing prejudice and intergroup conflict. Although direct contact with an outgroup member may be limited, a promising alternative route is that of extended (indirect) contact. According to extended contact theory, awareness that ingroup members have outgroup friends can improve people''s relations with the outgroup. A key issue that has not been addressed is how the amount of direct and extended contact interact to affect intergroup relations. Three field-based studies demonstrated that when direct contact is low, higher levels of extended contact predict lower prejudice and higher voluntary engagement with outgroup culture, both cross-sectionally (Studies 1 and 2) and longitudinally (Study 3). However, when direct contact is high, extended contact does not affect intergroup relations. These findings show that only when there is limited opportunity for direct contact, awareness of larger numbers of ingroup-outgroup friendships can be very effective for improving intergroup relations. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Crossed-categorisation and extended contact are two different bases for improving intergroup relations. Crossed-categorisation refers to the crossing of two dichotomous social dimensions, resulting in four groups (double ingroup, double outgroup, and two mixed groups). The extended contact hypothesis proposes that knowledge about ingroup-outgroup friendships can lead to more positive intergroup attitudes. The present research combined extended contact and crossed-categorisation to test whether black and white university students' view of the police, perceived racism of police, desired closeness to police, and willingness to join police were improved through extended contact with a black (or white) police officer via a black (or white) acquaintance (four possibilities). Doubleoutgroup extended contact for both white and black participants, and mixed-group extended contact for whites (showing a social exclusion pattern), were associated with worse public-police relations. In contrast, double-ingroup extended contact for whites, and mixed-group extended contact for blacks (showing a social inclusion pattern) were associated with improved relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A longitudinal study (N = 109) of interschool contact and attitudes was conducted to test Allport's (1954) Contact Hypothesis and Brown and Hewstone's (2005) addendum to it on the moderating role of typicality in the contact-attitude relationship. Three different measures of intergroup attitude were employed, including a new measure of infrahumanisation (Leyens et al., 2000). Support for the hypotheses was found on all three measures in the longitudinal analyses. Quantity of contact with a member of the outgroup was consistently associated with more favourable attitudes towards the outgroup as a whole. Importantly, contact was found to predict attitude but the reverse causal path was not significant. Also, on one measure there was an indication that the effects of contact quality were more beneficial when the contact persons were seen as typical of the outgroup than when they were not. It is concluded that, as originally hypothesised by Allport, contact with members of an outgroup can improve intergroup attitudes, but especially if those people can be seen as representative of their group. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the results of a test of the Common Ingroup Identity Model (CIIM) of S. L. Gaertner and J. F. Dovidio in an English-French intergroup framework. The intergroup bias-reducing impact of the impression of a common ingroup on explicit measures was evaluated. Results for explicit attitudes were quite similar with the results of previous studies of the CIIM, but the effects did not extrapolate to the implicit level. Instead, implicit attitudes appear to have a critical role in shaping the extent to which qualitative contact and inclusive levels of categorization can stimulate more advantageous intergroup relations on an explicit level, specifically by decreasing intergroup anxiety.