The impact of different dimensions of intergroup contact in reducing prejudice

The impact of different The impact of different dimensions of intergroup contact dimensions of intergroup contact

in reducing prejudicein reducing prejudice

Rhiannon TurnerRhiannon TurnerUniversity of LeedsUniversity of Leeds

9 March 2009, CRONEM Seminar Series9 March 2009, CRONEM Seminar Series

University of SurreyUniversity of Surrey

Background to the researchBackground to the research Prejudice continues to thrive in the UKPrejudice continues to thrive in the UK

• Ethnic prejudiceEthnic prejudice In 2007-2008, police recorded over 35,000 incidences of In 2007-2008, police recorded over 35,000 incidences of

racially aggravated harassment, common assault and racially aggravated harassment, common assault and wounding in England and Wales (Home Office statistics, wounding in England and Wales (Home Office statistics, 2008)2008)

• AgeismAgeism Age Concern (2006) found that people reported suffering Age Concern (2006) found that people reported suffering

from more age discrimination than any other form of from more age discrimination than any other form of discriminationdiscrimination

• HomophobiaHomophobia 2/3 gay respondents bullied at school on grounds of 2/3 gay respondents bullied at school on grounds of

sexuality, (YouGov poll, 2008)sexuality, (YouGov poll, 2008)

Background to the researchBackground to the research

In the UK….In the UK….• 4.6 million people (8% of UK population) 4.6 million people (8% of UK population)

belong to a minority ethnic groupbelong to a minority ethnic group• 3.6 million people (6% of UK population) 3.6 million people (6% of UK population)

are gay or lesbianare gay or lesbian• 11.6 million people (19% of UK 11.6 million people (19% of UK

population) are of pensionable age (60 population) are of pensionable age (60 for women, 65 for men)for women, 65 for men)

Background to the researchBackground to the research

Segregated communities Segregated communities • 47% ethnic minorities live in London47% ethnic minorities live in London• 13.5% in West Midlands13.5% in West Midlands• North East, Wales, and South West almost North East, Wales, and South West almost

exclusively Whiteexclusively White• Distribution has barely changed since the Distribution has barely changed since the

1960s1960s

Lack of meaningful contact between Lack of meaningful contact between different communitiesdifferent communities

Intergroup contact hypothesisIntergroup contact hypothesis

Contact between members of different Contact between members of different groups will lead to more harmonious groups will lead to more harmonious intergroup relations (Allport, 1954)intergroup relations (Allport, 1954)• Cooperation to achieve common goalsCooperation to achieve common goals• Equal statusEqual status• Institutional supportInstitutional support

Extensive evidence to dateExtensive evidence to date• Pettigrew & Tropp (2006) –meta-analysis of 515 Pettigrew & Tropp (2006) –meta-analysis of 515

studiesstudies

The current researchThe current research

3 key questions3 key questions• What What types types of contact reduce of contact reduce

prejudice?prejudice?• What What processesprocesses underlie these underlie these

relationships?relationships?• What What consequences consequences do they have for do they have for

intergroup relations?intergroup relations?

The current researchThe current research Face-to-face contactFace-to-face contact

• Cross-group friendshipCross-group friendship

Indirect forms of contactIndirect forms of contact

• Extended contactExtended contact

• Imagined contactImagined contact

Implications and ApplicationsImplications and Applications

Cross-group friendshipCross-group friendship Pettigrew (1997) found that friendships that cross Pettigrew (1997) found that friendships that cross

group boundaries reduced prejudice more than group boundaries reduced prejudice more than neighbour and co-worker contactneighbour and co-worker contact

• Interactions are close and positiveInteractions are close and positive

• Exchange of intimate informationExchange of intimate information

• Extensive and repeated contactExtensive and repeated contact

• Automatically meets key conditions of contact Automatically meets key conditions of contact hypothesis, e.g., common goals and cooperationhypothesis, e.g., common goals and cooperation

Cross-group friendship: MediatorsCross-group friendship: Mediators

Self-disclosureSelf-disclosure

• Interpersonal relations literatureInterpersonal relations literature The voluntary provision of significant aspects of The voluntary provision of significant aspects of

oneself, or information that is of an intimate or oneself, or information that is of an intimate or personal nature, to another personpersonal nature, to another person

Prominent feature of theories of friendship Prominent feature of theories of friendship development (e.g., Altman & Taylor, 1973; Reis & development (e.g., Altman & Taylor, 1973; Reis & Shaver, 1988)Shaver, 1988)


Self-disclosureSelf-disclosure

Disclosure should be a particularly important Disclosure should be a particularly important component of cross-group friendshipscomponent of cross-group friendships

Crucial aspect of interpersonal friendships that Crucial aspect of interpersonal friendships that leads to interpersonal attractionleads to interpersonal attraction

Follows that in the context of a close intergroup Follows that in the context of a close intergroup relationship, it should lead to intergroup attraction relationship, it should lead to intergroup attraction – more positive outgroup attitudes– more positive outgroup attitudes


Intergroup anxietyIntergroup anxiety• Negative arousal generated at the Negative arousal generated at the

prospect of an intergroup encounter: Fear prospect of an intergroup encounter: Fear of incompetence, fear of rejection of incompetence, fear of rejection contact avoidancecontact avoidance

Arousal depletes cognitive resources to Arousal depletes cognitive resources to process information process information narrowed focus of narrowed focus of attention, increased stereotypingattention, increased stereotyping

Anxious body language is interpreted as dislike Anxious body language is interpreted as dislike / racism by outgroup member/ racism by outgroup member


Intergroup anxietyIntergroup anxiety• Arises when minimal previous contact Arises when minimal previous contact

and large intergroup status differences and large intergroup status differences (Stephan & Stephan, 1985)(Stephan & Stephan, 1985)

But…But…

• High quality intergroup contact High quality intergroup contact lower intergroup anxiety lower intergroup anxiety reduced reduced prejudice (e.g., Paolini et al., 2004)prejudice (e.g., Paolini et al., 2004)

Cross-group friendship: Cross-group friendship: ConsequencesConsequences

Explicit attitudesExplicit attitudes• Conscious, deliberative, and controllableConscious, deliberative, and controllable• Captured by self-report measuresCaptured by self-report measures

Implicit attitudesImplicit attitudes• Unintentionally activated by mere Unintentionally activated by mere

presence (actual or symbolic) of an presence (actual or symbolic) of an attitude objectattitude object

• Unconscious or difficult to controlUnconscious or difficult to control

Cross-group friendship 1: ResearchCross-group friendship 1: Research

• White primary school children aged 7-11 completed the IAT and measures regarding their experiences with Asian people, N = 60

• Predictor variable• Cross-group friendship: How many Asian friends do you have?

• Mediator variables• Intergroup anxiety: To what extent would you feel tense, worried,

relaxed, scared if you had to work with a group of Asian students• Self-disclosure: If you had a problem you were worried about, how

likely is it that you would tell someone Asian?

• Criterion variables• Explicit outgroup attitude: To what extent do you think the

following about Asians: positive – negative, nice – horrible• Implicit outgroup attitude: Implicit association test (Greenwald,

McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998), adapted for primary school children

Cross-group friendship 1: FindingsCross-group friendship 1: Findings

Data from: Turner, R. N., Hewstone, M., & Voci, A. (2007, Study 1). Reducing explicit and implicit prejudice via direct and extended contact: The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 369-388

Implicit outgroup attitude (IAT)

Intergroup anxiety

Self-disclosure

.29*

-.44***

.41***.56***

R2= .07

Cross-group friendship

-.26*

Explicit outgroup attitude

R2= .57

Cross-group friendship 2: BackgroundCross-group friendship 2: Background What type of disclosure works best?What type of disclosure works best?

• Social penetration theorySocial penetration theory Close relationships develop as a result of a gradual Close relationships develop as a result of a gradual

escalation of the escalation of the breadthbreadth and and iintimacyntimacy of of information disclosedinformation disclosed

• In an intergroup contextIn an intergroup context Breadth and intimacy of disclosure during cross-Breadth and intimacy of disclosure during cross-

group friendships should both be associated with group friendships should both be associated with more positive intergroup relationsmore positive intergroup relations

BUT…quality / intimacy of contact is more BUT…quality / intimacy of contact is more effective at reducing prejudice than less intimate effective at reducing prejudice than less intimate forms of contact (Pettigrew, 1997)forms of contact (Pettigrew, 1997)

SoSo we expect intimacy of disclosure to be more we expect intimacy of disclosure to be more important than breadth…important than breadth…

Cross-group friendship 2: MethodCross-group friendship 2: Method

Cross-sectional questionnaire with 60 White undergraduate Cross-sectional questionnaire with 60 White undergraduate students (aged 18-22), regarding their attitudes towards and students (aged 18-22), regarding their attitudes towards and experiences with the Asian communityexperiences with the Asian community• Predictor Variable: Predictor Variable:

Cross-group friendship (2 items): Cross-group friendship (2 items): e.g., “How many Asian e.g., “How many Asian friends do you have?”friends do you have?”

• Mediator Variables:Mediator Variables: Intimacy of self-disclosure (4 items): eIntimacy of self-disclosure (4 items): e.g., How often do you .g., How often do you

talk to the Asian person you know best about personal / talk to the Asian person you know best about personal / relationship / family issues etcrelationship / family issues etc

Breadth of self-disclosure (4 items): e.g., Breadth of self-disclosure (4 items): e.g., Thinking of the Thinking of the nature of topics you discuss with the Asian person you know nature of topics you discuss with the Asian person you know best, are they very specific – (i.e. only one topic discussed) best, are they very specific – (i.e. only one topic discussed) – very broad (i.e., many and varied topics discussed) – very broad (i.e., many and varied topics discussed)

• Criterion Variables:Criterion Variables: Explicit outgroup attitude (5 items): Explicit outgroup attitude (5 items): e.g., My feelings e.g., My feelings

towards Asian people are negative-positive, bad-good etc” towards Asian people are negative-positive, bad-good etc”

Cross-group Friendship 2: FindingsCross-group Friendship 2: Findings

11 22 33 44

11 FriendshipFriendship ----

22 IntimacyIntimacy .62**.62** ----

33 BreadthBreadth .06.06 .14.14 ----

44 AttitudeAttitude .28*.28* .46**.46** .12.12 ----

N = 60, *p < .05, **p < .01


Cross-group

friendship

Outgroup Attitude

Intimacy of self-

disclosure

= .52, p = .033

= -.03, p = .926

= .36, p = .003

= .623, p = .001

Z = 2.75, p = .005

Cross-group friendship 3: Cross-group friendship 3: BackgroundBackground

Why should self-disclosure in Why should self-disclosure in cross-group friendships reduce cross-group friendships reduce intergroup prejudice?intergroup prejudice?

It generates It generates empathyempathy It is perceived to be of It is perceived to be of personal personal

importanceimportance It promotes reciprocal It promotes reciprocal trusttrust


EmpathyEmpathy is a vicarious emotional state triggered is a vicarious emotional state triggered by witnessing and understanding the thoughts and by witnessing and understanding the thoughts and feelings of anotherfeelings of another

• Self-disclosure increases intimacy and attraction Self-disclosure increases intimacy and attraction because it leads the discloser to believe that because it leads the discloser to believe that they are understood, accepted and appreciatedthey are understood, accepted and appreciated

• Empathy in an intergroup context has been Empathy in an intergroup context has been shown to generate more positive attitudes shown to generate more positive attitudes towards the outgroup (Batson et al., 1997)towards the outgroup (Batson et al., 1997)


Perceived-importancePerceived-importance Self-expansion model:Self-expansion model: People engage in friendship in order People engage in friendship in order

to increase the social resources, perspectives, and to increase the social resources, perspectives, and identities, to facilitate their achievement of personal goals identities, to facilitate their achievement of personal goals (Aron et al., 2001)(Aron et al., 2001)

Van Dick et al. (2004): Van Dick et al. (2004): Cross-groupCross-group friendships reduced friendships reduced prejudice because they were perceived as being prejudice because they were perceived as being personally important, personally important, valuable in helping to achieve valuable in helping to achieve certain goals, e.g., certain goals, e.g.,

• Development of new social skillsDevelopment of new social skills• New experiences, learning about different culturesNew experiences, learning about different cultures

According to the self-expansion model, much of this According to the self-expansion model, much of this personal development in a friendship is achieved through personal development in a friendship is achieved through self-disclosure.self-disclosure.


Trust:Trust: Expression of confidence in another person or group Expression of confidence in another person or group that one will not be put at risk or harmed by their actionsthat one will not be put at risk or harmed by their actions

The more we learn about someone (e.g., through disclosure), The more we learn about someone (e.g., through disclosure), the more certain we can be about how they will behave in the more certain we can be about how they will behave in critical, integrity-testing situationscritical, integrity-testing situations

EvidenceEvidence• Kerr, Stattin, and Trost (1999): Children’s self-disclosure Kerr, Stattin, and Trost (1999): Children’s self-disclosure

predicted parental trustpredicted parental trust

Relationship between self-disclosure and trust is likely to be Relationship between self-disclosure and trust is likely to be reciprocal reciprocal

People like and trust those who trust themPeople like and trust those who trust them

Cross-group friendship 3: MethodCross-group friendship 3: Method 148 White British undergraduate students , aged 17-26, Target 148 White British undergraduate students , aged 17-26, Target

Group: AsianGroup: Asian

Predictor Variable:Predictor Variable:• Cross-group friendship (2 items): Cross-group friendship (2 items): e.g., ‘How many Asian friends do you e.g., ‘How many Asian friends do you

have at University?’have at University?’

Mediator Variables:Mediator Variables:• Self-Disclosure (6 items): eSelf-Disclosure (6 items): e.g., How often do you talk about how you are .g., How often do you talk about how you are

feeling to someone Asian?’feeling to someone Asian?’ • Empathy (2 items): Empathy (2 items): e.g., “If I hear about the misfortunes of Asians, it e.g., “If I hear about the misfortunes of Asians, it

usually disturbs me a great deal”usually disturbs me a great deal”• Importance of contact (5 items): Importance of contact (5 items): e.g., “How valuable / rewarding our e.g., “How valuable / rewarding our

the interactions you have with Asian people?”the interactions you have with Asian people?”• Trust (4 items): Trust (4 items): e.g., “I can trust Asian people with personal information e.g., “I can trust Asian people with personal information

about myself”about myself”

Criterion Variables:Criterion Variables:• Outgroup attitude (4 items): Outgroup attitude (4 items): e.g., “To what extent do you feel warm-e.g., “To what extent do you feel warm-

cold, friendly-hostile, respect-contempt, admiration-disgust towards cold, friendly-hostile, respect-contempt, admiration-disgust towards AsiansAsians


Cross-groupfriendship

.63***

.28***

R2= .43

Self-disclosure

Intergroup trust

Empathy

.47***

x1

y7 y8

y1 y3

y4

Importanceof disclosure

y5 y6 y9 y10y2

.59***

.24**

.18(*)

.41***Explicit outgroup

attitude

χ2 (8) = 12.58, p = .13; RMSEA = .06, SRMR = .019, CFI = .99


But what about when cross-group But what about when cross-group friendship is not possible?friendship is not possible?

Reliant on opportunity for contact Reliant on opportunity for contact (Phinney et al., 1997)(Phinney et al., 1997)

Many examples of intergroup contexts Many examples of intergroup contexts where no such opportunitieswhere no such opportunities• Northern Ireland: Segregated Catholic and Northern Ireland: Segregated Catholic and

Protestant communitiesProtestant communities• Bradford: Segregated Asian and White Bradford: Segregated Asian and White

communitiescommunities

Extended contactExtended contact Extended contactExtended contact

• Knowing ingroup members who have outgroup Knowing ingroup members who have outgroup friends can reduce outgroup prejudice (Wright et friends can reduce outgroup prejudice (Wright et al., 1997)al., 1997)

Benefits for intergroup relations…Benefits for intergroup relations…

• Not reliant on opportunity for contactNot reliant on opportunity for contact

• Lowers intergroup anxiety because contact is not Lowers intergroup anxiety because contact is not experienced first handexperienced first hand

Conducted in 2002, a Conducted in 2002, a year after clashes year after clashes between the National between the National Front and the Anti-Front and the Anti-Nazi League led to Nazi League led to riots in Bradford, riots in Bradford, largely involving largely involving Asian and White Asian and White youths.youths.

One of the worst riots One of the worst riots ever seen in the UK: ever seen in the UK: 36 arrested, 300 36 arrested, 300 injured, estimated injured, estimated £10 million damage£10 million damage

Extended contactExtended contact

Extended contactExtended contact• The Cantle Report:The Cantle Report: People in Bradford People in Bradford were living were living

“parallel lives” in which Asians and Whites “do not “parallel lives” in which Asians and Whites “do not seem to touch at any point, let alone overlap and seem to touch at any point, let alone overlap and produce any meaningful interchange” (Lord produce any meaningful interchange” (Lord Ouseley)Ouseley)

• In our study…In our study… Can extended contact reduce prejudice in this Can extended contact reduce prejudice in this

segregated and conflicted setting?segregated and conflicted setting? Comparison with cross-group friendshipComparison with cross-group friendship

• What role does opportunity for contact play?What role does opportunity for contact play?• What mediating mechanisms are involved?What mediating mechanisms are involved?

MethodMethod 49 Asian and 49 White British secondary school 49 Asian and 49 White British secondary school

students, aged 11-15 students, aged 11-15

• Predictor Variables:Predictor Variables: Opportunity for contact, Opportunity for contact, e.g., ‘What % of people in your e.g., ‘What % of people in your

neighbourhood from other community?’neighbourhood from other community?’ Cross-group friendship,Cross-group friendship, e.g., ‘How many friends do you have from e.g., ‘How many friends do you have from

the other community?’the other community?’ Extended contact, Extended contact, e.g., ‘How many people from your community e.g., ‘How many people from your community

do you know who have friends from the other community?’do you know who have friends from the other community?’

• Mediator Variables:Mediator Variables: Intergroup Anxiety, Intergroup Anxiety, e.g., ‘How nervous do you feel about mixing e.g., ‘How nervous do you feel about mixing

socially with Asians?’socially with Asians?’ Out-group Self-Disclosure, Out-group Self-Disclosure, e.g., How often do you talk about how e.g., How often do you talk about how

you are feeling to someone from the other community?’you are feeling to someone from the other community?’

• Criterion Variables:Criterion Variables: Explicit outgroup attitude (4 items)Explicit outgroup attitude (4 items) Implicit outgroup attitude (Greenwald et al., 1998; IAT)Implicit outgroup attitude (Greenwald et al., 1998; IAT)

FindingsFindings

Opportunity for contact

Cross-group friendship

Explicit Outgroup attitude

Extended contact

Implicit outgroup attitude (IAT)

.33**

.37***

.30**

-.18*

.28**

R2= .13

R2= .50

-.31**

.25*.34***

Intergroup anxiety

Self- disclosure


But what about when extended But what about when extended contact isn’t possible?contact isn’t possible?

Extended contact can be useful where Extended contact can be useful where face-to-face contact is not possibleface-to-face contact is not possible

ButBut there may be contexts where there may be contexts where there is highly pervasive, long term there is highly pervasive, long term segregationsegregation

In such cases, could simply In such cases, could simply imagining imagining intergroup contact be sufficient to intergroup contact be sufficient to reduce prejudice?reduce prejudice?

Imagining social contextsImagining social contexts

Garcia, Weaver, Moskowitz, and Garcia, Weaver, Moskowitz, and Darley (2002): Darley (2002): ImaginingImagining the the presence of others leads to a presence of others leads to a bystander apathy effectbystander apathy effect

Why?Why?• Social context priming: Increases Social context priming: Increases

accessibility of abstract concepts and accessibility of abstract concepts and feelings associated with the social feelings associated with the social contextcontext

Imagined intergroup contactImagined intergroup contact

Automatic processes Automatic processes • Activates concepts associated with successful Activates concepts associated with successful

interactions with outgroup membersinteractions with outgroup members Feeling more comfortableFeeling more comfortable Less apprehensionLess apprehension

Deliberative processesDeliberative processes• What would they learn?What would they learn?• How would they feel during interaction?How would they feel during interaction?• How would this influence perceptions of How would this influence perceptions of

outgroup?outgroup?

Imagined intergroup contactImagined intergroup contact Imagination conditionImagination condition

• ““We would like you to take a minute to imagine We would like you to take a minute to imagine yourself meeting [an outgroup] stranger for the yourself meeting [an outgroup] stranger for the first time. Imagine that the interaction is first time. Imagine that the interaction is positive, relaxed and comfortable.”positive, relaxed and comfortable.”

Control conditionControl condition• ““We would like you to take a minute to imagine We would like you to take a minute to imagine

an outdoor scene. Try to imagine aspects of the an outdoor scene. Try to imagine aspects of the scene about you (e.g., is it a beach, a forest, are scene about you (e.g., is it a beach, a forest, are there trees, hills, what’s on the horizon).” there trees, hills, what’s on the horizon).”

• But for recent studies, participants simply But for recent studies, participants simply imagine meeting ‘a stranger’ (group imagine meeting ‘a stranger’ (group membership not specified)membership not specified)

Imagined contact 1: ResultsImagined contact 1: Results

Data from: Turner, R. N., Crisp, R. J., & Lambert, E. (2007; Experiment 1). Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 427-441.

Task x Target interaction

F (1, 26) = 4.50 p = .044

When young people imagine contact with the elderly….

4

5

6

7

8

Control Imagined Contact

Task

Ev

alu

ati

on

Ingroup Outgroup

HowHow does imagined contact work? does imagined contact work?

Face-to-face contact reduces Face-to-face contact reduces prejudice via prejudice via • reduced anxiety (Turner et al., 2007b)reduced anxiety (Turner et al., 2007b)

Does imagined contact work via Does imagined contact work via similar process?similar process?


2

3

4


Ev

alu

ati

on

of

ga

y m

en

Data from: Turner, R. N., Crisp, R. J., & Lambert, E. (2007, Experiment 3). Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 427-441.

t (25) = -3.71 p = .001

When straight men imagine contact with gay men….

2

3

4


Inte

rgro

up

an

xie

ty

t (25) = -2.10, p = .046


Data from: Turner, R. N., Crisp, R. J., & Lambert, E. (2007; Experiment 3). Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 427-441.

When straight men imagine contact with gay men….

Outgroup Evaluation

Intergroup Anxiety

= -.388, p = .046

= -.006, p = .975

= -.641, p = .003

= .596, p = .001

Control vs.

Imagined Contact

Z = 2.47, p = .013

Alternative ExplanationsAlternative Explanations

Priming and self-regulationPriming and self-regulation• Priming the category “elderly” or “gay” Priming the category “elderly” or “gay”

may have led to a conscious attempt to may have led to a conscious attempt to regulate behaviour and appear non-regulate behaviour and appear non-prejudiced prejudiced (Devine & Monteith, 1999). (Devine & Monteith, 1999).

Demand CharacteristicsDemand Characteristics• Participants may have guessed the Participants may have guessed the

rationale and attempted to confirm our rationale and attempted to confirm our hypotheseshypotheses

Priming?Priming?

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Priming Imagined Contact

Task

Evalu

atio

n

Ingroup Evaluation

Outgroup Evaluation

Task x Target interaction

F (1, 21) = 5.09, p = .035,

Turner, R. N., Crisp, R. J., & Lambert, E. (2007, Experiment 2). Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 427-441.

Demand Characteristics?Demand Characteristics?

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

Control Contact

Imagination Task

Late

ncy

in m

illiseco

nd

s

Young/Positive or Elderly/Negative

Young/Negative or Elderly/Positive

Data from: Turner, R. N., & Crisp, R. J. (in press; Study 1). Imagining contact can reduce implicit intergroup prejudice. British Journal of Social Psychology

Task x Trial interaction

F (1, 23) = 20.95 p = .0005

Another potential limitation?Another potential limitation?

Would imagined contact really reduce Would imagined contact really reduce prejudice towards more stigmatized prejudice towards more stigmatized groups?groups?

Yes!Yes!• British teenagers attitudes and behavioural British teenagers attitudes and behavioural

tendencies towards asylum seekers (Turner, tendencies towards asylum seekers (Turner, Christie, & Stanton, 2009)Christie, & Stanton, 2009)

• Non-Muslim students implicit attitudes (IAT) Non-Muslim students implicit attitudes (IAT) towards Muslims (Turner & Crisp, towards Muslims (Turner & Crisp, in press; in press; Study 2,Study 2, BJSP)BJSP)

Implications and applicationsImplications and applications

Intergroup contact (in its various Intergroup contact (in its various forms) is associated with a range of forms) is associated with a range of positive consequences for intergroup positive consequences for intergroup relationsrelations• More positive explicit and implicit More positive explicit and implicit

outgroup attitudesoutgroup attitudes• More positive behavioural tendenciesMore positive behavioural tendencies

Underlying processesUnderlying processes• Self disclosure, intergroup anxiety, Self disclosure, intergroup anxiety,

intergroup trust, empathyintergroup trust, empathy

Implications and applicationsImplications and applications

Intergroup contact is flexibleIntergroup contact is flexible

Direct, face-to-face contact (friendship)Direct, face-to-face contact (friendship)• Useful in multicultural contextsUseful in multicultural contexts• When it arises has a powerful effect compared to When it arises has a powerful effect compared to

indirect forms of contact (Paolini et al., 2008, PSPB)indirect forms of contact (Paolini et al., 2008, PSPB)• ButBut not useful in segregated settings not useful in segregated settings• Practically difficult to instigate (expensive, time Practically difficult to instigate (expensive, time

consuming, no guarantee friendships will develop)consuming, no guarantee friendships will develop)

Indirect contact (extended and imagined contact)Indirect contact (extended and imagined contact)• Useful in segregated settingsUseful in segregated settings• Practically easy to instigate (inexpensive, takes a few Practically easy to instigate (inexpensive, takes a few

minutes, can be used in classroom etc)minutes, can be used in classroom etc)• But effects But effects tend to be fairly weaktend to be fairly weak

Thanks to…Thanks to…

Miles Hewstone (University of Miles Hewstone (University of Oxford)Oxford)

Richard Crisp (University of Kent)Richard Crisp (University of Kent)

My project students at LeedsMy project students at Leeds• Sanchia BiswasSanchia Biswas• Zara ChristieZara Christie• Sophie StantonSophie Stanton

Documents

The impact of different dimensions of intergroup contact in reducing prejudice