Search

Es ist nur schwer vorstellbar, dass ein Mensch völlig isoliert von anderen Menschen lebt. Tatsächlich sind wir in unserem Alltag fast ständig von anderen umgeben; das reicht von Fremden bis zu Menschen, denen wir uns sehr nahe fühlen, mit denen wir befreundet sind oder mit denen wir eine Liebesbeziehung führen. Doch warum empfinden wir überhaupt das Bedürfnis, mit anderen zusammen zu sein, und warum kann es so schmerzvoll sein, von anderen zurückgewiesen zu werden? Warum fühlen wir uns von einigen Menschen angezogen, von anderen jedoch nicht? Was bestimmt darüber, dass einige Beziehungen von Glück erfüllt sind, während andere in eine Katastrophe zu führen scheinen? Mit solchen Fragen beschäftigt sich dieses Kapitel. Wir beginnen mit einer Erklärung des offenbar natürlichen Bedürfnisses von Menschen, mit anderen in Kontakt zu sein. Wir folgen dann der Entwicklung einer Beziehung und beginnen dabei mit einer Erörterung der Faktoren, die über die anfängliche zwischenmenschliche Anziehung bestimmen, und geben einen Überblick über die Prozesse, die eine erfolgreiche bzw. eine erfolglose Liebesbeziehung kennzeichnen. Wir schließen das Kapitel mit einigen allgemeinen Prozessen ab, die in unterschiedlichen Arten von Beziehungen auftreten können.

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.

Building on and extending prior research demonstrating the role of both quality and quantity of intergroup contact in reducing negative attitudes toward outgroup members (Allport, 1954; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006), the present study takes the novel approach of applying both contact theory and Intergroup Emotions Theory (IET; Mackie & Smith, 2002) to the study of prejudice reduction as a function of intergroup contact. We examined the mediating role of both intergroup emotions and trust in predicting both positive and negative behavioral tendencies toward the outgroup. In a study of intergroup contact between Catholics and Protestant students in Northern Ireland, outgroup contact (measured by the product of quality and quantity of contact) was directly associated with outgroup trust, outgroup emotions (increases in positive emotion and decreases in negative emotions), and outgroup behavioral tendencies (increases in positive behavioral tendencies and decreases in negative behavioral tendencies). Additionally, the relationship between contact and outgroup behavioral tendencies was mediated by general outgroup trust as well as by positive and negative outgroup emotions.

Two experiments examined the effect a leader has when supported by a numericalmajority or minority. In both experiments, participants read a team problem-solving scenario where a solution was supported by either a numerical majority or minority of the team. In some conditions, the team leader also supported the same solution as the majority or minority in other conditions the leader did not. When the leader was supported by the majority, its solution was rated as more favorable by participants than when supported by either the leader or majority on its own. When the leader was supported by the minority, its solution was rated as either less favorable or equally favorable than when supported by the leader or minority on its own. However, when the leader was supported by the minority participants rated an alternative (better) solution that was not discussed by the leader, as more favorable. These findings indicate that leadership endorsement results in greater compliance to a majority-endorsed position but to more elaboration, and better decision-making, to a minority-endorsed position. The policy implications of this research for the role of leaders in team decision-making are discussed.

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.

Research frequently demonstrates diverse communities exhibit lower intra-community cohesion. Recent studies suggest there is little evidence perceived ethnic threat plays a role in this relationship. This paper re-examines the roles of ethnic threat and prejudice in the diversity/cohesion relationship. First, we test threat/prejudice as conceptualised in the literature: as mediators of diversity’s effect. Second, we test a reformulation of the roles of threat/prejudice: as moderators of diversity’s effect. Applying multi-level models to cross-sectional and longitudinal data of White British individuals across England and Oldham (a unique English town case-study) we find neighbour-trust lower in diverse communities. However, perceived-threat/prejudice does not mediate this relationship. Instead, we find perceived-threat/prejudice moderate diversity’s impact on neighbour-trust. The result is diversity only reduces neighbour-trust among individuals who already viewed out-groups as threatening. Longitudinal analysis confirms the importance of out-group attitudes in the diversity/neighbour-trust relationship. In diverse communities, residents whose out-group attitudes improve, or worsen, become more, or less, trusting of their neighbours. However, in homogeneous communities, changes in out-group attitudes are not linked to changes in neighbour-trust. We therefore argue and demonstrate that perceived-threat emerges from other societal processes (such as socio-economic precariousness) and it is when individuals who already view out-groups as threatening experience diverse neighbourhoods that local cohesion declines.

The single factor fallacy occurs when social scientists model their applied work largely around a single factor. The problem generally arises when either a highly relevant theory is ignored or when missing key variables distort the results. Examples of this fallacy are drawn from the expanding research literature on intergroup contact, where we discuss the implications of missing critical variables from the analysis (including segregation, effects of negative as well as positive contact, extended contact, and contact when the outgroup is in the majority). The policy issues involved include racially desegregated schools, minority protest, the impact of neighborhood diversity, and anti-immigration voting. Three suggestions for avoiding the fallacy are emphasized – the use of mediation-moderation analysis, longitudinal research and multilevel analysis. We end by outlining five simple principles, based on our own experience in the U.S. and the U.K., that may increase the impact of social scientists’ research on public policy.

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.

In general, we agree with almost everything mentioned in the commentary by Cross and Campbell (2017). We feel, however, that their line of argumentation is largely based on a misunderstanding that we will try to clarify in this reply.

Two correlational studies investigated the associations between different forms of intergroup contact, on the one hand, and Italians’ prejudice and humanity attributions toward immigrants in Italy, on the other. Study 1 examined the effects of direct contact, extended contact and parasocial contact through mass-media, assessing separately contact through TV news and newspapers and contact through entertainment programs. Study 2 analyzed the distinct effects of positive and negative episodes of the contact forms considered in Study 1. Across the studies, we tested the mediational role of intergroup anxiety, empathy, and trust. Overall, results showed the importance of taking into account different forms of contact and considering the emotional processes during contact experiences to understand intergroup attitudes.

Outgroup projection is the tendency to generalise among members of different outgroups as if their members were all alike. The present study analysed this almost unexplored phenomenon and tested whether intergroup threat enhances the tendency to generalise the members of a negatively-valued outgroup (i.e., Roma) onto another larger (partially) inclusive outgroup (i.e., Romanians). Evidence showed that Roma are generalised to Romanians to a higher extent under realistic and symbolic threat conditions. Outgroup projection is discussed in relation to the ingroup projection bias and the ingroup over-exclusion effect.

Two studies investigated the role of intergroup contact in predicting collective action tendencies along with three key predictors proposed by the social identity model of collective action (SIMCA; Van Zomeren, Postmes, and Spears, 2008). Study 1 (N= 488 Black South African students) tested whether social identity would positively, whereas intergroup contact would negatively predict collective action and support for policies benefiting the ingroup. Study 2 (N= 244 White South African students) predicted whether social identity would positively predict collective action benefiting the ingroup, and intergroup contact would positively predict support for policies to benefit the Black outgroup. Both studies yielded evidence in support of the predictive power of social identity and contact on collective action and policy support. Additionally, Study 1 confirmed that intergroup contact moderated the effects of social identity on relative deprivation, and relative deprivation on collective action. Overall findings support an integration of SIMCA and intergroup contact theory, and provide a fuller understanding of the social psychological processes leading to collective action.

The combined use of high resolution X-ray computed tomography with digital image correlation allows quantitative observations of the three-dimensional deformations that occur within a material when it is strained. In suitable microstructures, the displacement resolution is sub-voxel (a voxel is the three-dimensional equivalent of a pixel), and both elastic and plastic deformations can be studied. This paper reviews recent work in which three-dimensional in situ observations of deformation have provided unique insights that support both continuum and heterogeneous microstructure-dependent models of damage development in a range of materials. The examples presented include; crack propagation in a quasi-brittle porous material (polygranular graphite), sub-indentation radial and lateral cracking in a brittle polycrystalline ceramic (alumina); plastic deformation and damage development underneath indentations in a ductile metal (Al-SiC composite) and a ceramic matrix composite (SiC-SiCfibre). These examples show how material properties can be obtained by analysis of the displacement fields, how such measurements can be used to better define the applied loading on small test specimens and how crack opening magnitude and mode may be extracted also. Some new directions for research are outlined, including the combined use of diffraction and imaging techniques on synchrotron X-ray facilities to map both elastic and inelastic strains.

Unconditional respect for persons is an orientation that rests on the assumption that all people have intrinsic worth and deserve respect simply by their being human. This paper reports three cross-sectional studies concerning unconditional respect in intergroup relations in three very different contexts. In all three studies, unconditional respect was positively related to positive action tendencies, and negatively related to negative action tendencies, toward other groups. Regression analyses showed that respect was a significant predictor of negative action tendencies even when attitude to the other group, social dominance orientation, empathy, and the quality and quantity of intergroup contact were statistically controlled. Moderation analyses showed that respect was particularly important under conditions of high threat. The implications of unconditional respect for intergroup relations are discussed. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.

We review 50-odd years of research on Allport's (1954)'contact hypothesis', to assess progress, problems, and prospects. We chart the progress that has been made in understanding two distinct forms of contact: direct and indirect. We highlight the progress made in understanding the effects of each type of contact, as well as both moderating and mediating factors, and emphasize the multiple impacts of direct contact, especially. We then consider some of the main critiques of inter-group contact, focusing on empirical issues and whether contact impedes social change, and provide a research agenda for the coming years. We conclude that this body of work no longer merits the modest title of 'hypothesis', but fully deserves acknowledgement as an integrated and influential theory.

Although intergroup contact is one of the most prominent interventions to reduce prejudice, the generalization of contact effects is still a contentious issue. This research further examined the rarely studied secondary transfer effect (STE; Pettigrew, 2009), by which contact with a primary outgroup reduces prejudice toward secondary groups that are not directly involved in the contact. Across 3 cross-sectional studies conducted in Cyprus (N = 1,653), Northern Ireland (N = 1,973), and Texas (N = 275) and 1 longitudinal study conducted in Northern Ireland (N = 411), the present research sought to systematically rule out alternative accounts of the STE and to investigate 2 potential mediating mechanisms (ingroup reappraisal and attitude generalization). Results indicated that, consistent with the STE, contact with a primary outgroup predicts attitudes toward secondary outgroups, over and above contact with the secondary outgroup, socially desirable responding, and prior attitudes. Mediation analyses found strong evidence for attitude generalization but only limited evidence for ingroup reappraisal as an underlying process. Two out of 3 tests of a reverse model, where contact with the secondary outgroup predicts attitudes toward the primary outgroup, provide further evidence for an indirect effect through attitude generalization. Theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed, and directions for future research are identified. © 2010 American Psychological Association. 99 2 282 302 Cited By :79; Export Date: 20 July 2017

Demographic trends reveal that modern societies have become increasingly diverse. Within the social sciences, these changes have been reflected in concerns about the implications of social diversity. Although early research noted that diversity may have negative consequences for societies and individuals, more recent scholarship has indicated that diversity is not always translated into negative outcomes. These inconsistent findings initiated a scholarly debate concerning the impact of many different forms of diversity for a host of social outcomes. It is now clear that the boundary conditions of these effects are yet to be fully understood. This Special Issue offers a collection of research advances identifying mediating and moderating variables addressing when and why diversity impacts intergroup relational outcomes. By focusing on different levels of diversity (i.e., in the society and in groups), this research also sheds light on the effectiveness of ideologies and policies for managing diversity. info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion