scholarly journals Meta-Analysis of the 'Ironic' Effects of Intergroup Contact

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nils Karl Reimer ◽  
Nikhil Kumar Sengupta
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intergroup Contact ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Perceived Injustice ◽  
Post Colonial ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Ironic Effects

Growing evidence suggests that intergroup contact, psychology’s most-researched paradigm for reducing prejudice, has the ‘ironic’ effect of reducing support for social change in disadvantaged groups. We conducted a preregistered meta-analytic test of this effect across 98 studies with 140 samples of 213,085 disadvantaged-group members. As predicted, intergroup contact was, on average, associated with less perceived injustice (r = −.07), collective action (r = −.06), and support for reparative policies (r = −.07). However, these associations were small, variable, and consistent with alternative explanations. Across outcomes, 25–36% of studies found positive associations with intergroup contact. Moderator analyses explained about a third of the between-sample variance, showing that, on average, associations were negative only in studies of adults that measured intergroup contact directly and were strongest in studies that examined short-term migration or (post-)colonial intergroup relations. We also found evidence for an alternative explanation for the apparent ‘ironic’ effects of intergroup contact as, after controlling for the positive association of negative contact with support for social change, positive contact was no longer associated with any of the outcomes. We close by discussing strengths and limitations of the available evidence and by highlighting open questions about the relationship between intergroup contact and support for social change in disadvantaged groups.

scholarly journals Needs satisfaction in intergroup contact: A multi-national study of pathways toward social change

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tabea Hässler ◽  
Johannes Ullrich ◽  
Simone Sebben ◽  
Nurit Shnabel ◽  
Michelle Bernardino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Ethnic Minority ◽  
Survey Data ◽  
Intergroup Contact ◽  
National Study ◽  
Mutual Support ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
Needs Satisfaction ◽  
Gender Minorities ◽  
Group Members

What role does intergroup contact play in promoting support for social change toward greater equality? Drawing on the needs-based model of reconciliation, we theorized that when inequality between groups is perceived as illegitimate, disadvantaged groups members will experience a need for empowerment and advantaged groups members a need for acceptance. When intergroup contact satisfies each group’s needs, it should result in more mutual support for social change. Using four sets of survey data collected through the Zurich Intergroup Project in 23 countries, we tested several preregistered predictions derived from the above reasoning across a large variety of operationalizations. Two studies of disadvantaged groups (Ns=689 ethnic minority members in Study 1 and 3,382 sexual/gender minorities in Study 2) support the hypothesis that, after accounting for the effects of intergroup contact and perceived illegitimacy, satisfying the need for empowerment (but not acceptance) during contact is positively related with support for social change. Two studies with advantaged groups (Ns=2,937 ethnic majority members in Study 3 and 4,203 cis-heterosexual individuals in Study 4) showed that, after accounting for illegitimacy and intergroup contact, satisfying the need for acceptance (but also empowerment) is positively related with support for social change. Overall, these findings suggest that intergroup contact is compatible with efforts to promote social change when group-specific needs are met. Thus, to encourage support for social change among both disadvantaged and advantaged group members, it is essential that besides promoting mutual acceptance, intergroup contact interventions also give voice to and empower members of disadvantaged groups.

scholarly journals Whites for racial justice: How contact with Black Americans predicts support for collective action among White Americans

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 893-912 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hema Preya Selvanathan ◽  
Pirathat Techakesari ◽  
Linda R. Tropp ◽  
Fiona Kate Barlow
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Intergroup Contact ◽  
Black Americans ◽  
White Americans ◽  
Racial Justice ◽  
Group Efficacy ◽  
Total N ◽  
Group Members ◽  
White Guilt

Advantaged group members have an important role to play in creating social change, and intergroup contact has tremendous implications in shaping intergroup relations. However, little research has examined how intergroup contact predicts advantaged group members’ inclinations toward collective action to support the interests of disadvantaged groups. The present research investigates how contact with Black Americans shapes White Americans’ willingness to engage in collective action for racial justice and support for the Black Lives Matter movement. Three studies of White Americans (total N = 821) consistently reveal that positive contact with Black Americans predicts greater support for collective action through a sequential process of fostering greater feelings of empathy for Black Americans and anger over injustice. These findings hold even when taking into account other relevant psychological factors (i.e., White guilt and identification, negative contact, group efficacy, and moral convictions). The present research contributes to our understanding of how advantaged group members come to engage in social change efforts.

scholarly journals Diversity in health care institutions reduces Israeli patients’ prejudice toward Arabs

2021 ◽  
Vol 118 (14) ◽  
pp. e2022634118
Author(s):  
Chagai M. Weiss
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intergroup Contact ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
Public Institutions ◽  
Prejudice Reduction ◽  
Majority Group ◽  
Group Members ◽  
The Impact ◽  
To Receive

Diversity in the lines of public institutions, such as hospitals, schools, and police forces, is thought to improve provision for minority group members. Nonetheless, whether and how diversity in public institutions shapes majority citizens’ prejudice toward minorities are unclear. Building on insights from the intergroup contact literature, I suggest that diversity in public institutions can facilitate positive intergroup contact between majority group members and minorities in elevated social positions. Such unique interactions, which exceed the equal status condition for effective intergroup contact, can serve to reduce prejudice and facilitate more inclusive attitudes among majority group members. To test this expectation, I focus on health care provision—a leading sector with regard to minority representation. Leveraging a natural experiment unfolding in 21 Israeli medical clinics where Jewish patients are haphazardly assigned to receive care from Jewish or Arab doctors and embedding prejudice-related questions in a routine evaluation survey, I demonstrate that brief contact with an Arab doctor reduces prejudice. Specifically, contact with an Arab doctor reduces Jewish patients’ exclusionary preferences toward Arabs by one-sixth of an SD and increases Jewish patients’ optimism about peace by a 10th of an SD. The modest magnitude of these effects is similar to the impact of well-powered interventions recently reviewed in a meta-analysis of prejudice reduction experiments. These findings emphasize how the demographic makeup of public institutions can reduce mass prejudice, even in a context of intractable conflict.

scholarly journals Intergroup Contact and Social Change: An Integrated Contact-Collective Action Model

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tabea Hässler ◽  
Özden Melis Uluğ ◽  
Mariska Kappmeier ◽  
Giovanni A. Travaglino
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Intergroup Contact ◽  
Sedative Effect ◽  
Social Intervention ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Action Model ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Positive Contact ◽  
The Many

Previous research has shown that positive intergroup contact among disadvantaged groupmembers may predict a so-called ‘sedative’ effect according to which positive contact isassociated with reduced support for social change. Conversely, positive contact is associatedwith increased support for social change toward equality among advantaged group members.This raises the important question of under which circumstances intergroup contact canencourage support for social change among both disadvantaged and advantaged groups. Inthis theoretical article, we tackle this question by introducing a new Integrated Contact-Collective Action Model (ICCAM). We first provide an up-to-date review of how intergroupcontact may promote or hinder social change for both disadvantaged and advantaged groups.We, then, use ICCAM to examine when the many forms of intergroup contact promote orhinder support for social change, proposing the existence of two different paths fordisadvantaged and advantaged group members. Finally, we discuss the implications of themodel for social intervention and make policy recommendations stemming from a review ofavailable evidence.

“Let Them Eat Harmony”

2010 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 76-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Dixon ◽  
Linda R. Tropp ◽  
Kevin Durrheim ◽  
Colin Tredoux
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Social Inequality ◽  
Prejudice Reduction ◽  
Disadvantaged Group ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
Group Members

Research on intergroup prejudice has generally adopted a model of social change that is based around the psychological rehabilitation of members of advantaged groups in order to foster intergroup harmony. Recent studies of prejudice-reduction interventions among members of disadvantaged groups, however, have complicated psychologists’ understanding of the consequences of inducing harmonious relations in historically unequal societies. Interventions encouraging disadvantaged-group members to like advantaged-group members may also prompt the disadvantaged to underestimate the injustice suffered by their group and to become less motivated to support action to challenge social inequality. Thus, psychologists’ tendency to equate intergroup harmony with “good relations” and conflict with “bad relations” is limited.

scholarly journals A large-scale test of the link between intergroup contact and support for social change

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tabea Hässler ◽  
Johannes Ullrich ◽  
Michelle Bernardino ◽  
Nurit Shnabel ◽  
Colette Van Laar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Intergroup Contact ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Disadvantaged Group ◽  
Important Variation ◽  
Gender Minorities ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Scale Test ◽  
And Gender

Guided by the early findings of social scientists, practitioners have long advocated for greater contact between groups toreduce prejudice and increase social cohesion. Recent work, however, suggests that intergroup contact can undermine support for social change towards greater equality, especially among disadvantaged group members. Using a large and heterogeneous dataset (12,997 individuals from 69 countries), we demonstrate that intergroup contact and support for social change towards greater equality are positively associated among members of advantaged groups (ethnic majorities and cis-heterosexuals) but negatively associated among disadvantaged groups (ethnic minorities and sexual and gender minorities). Specification curve analysis revealed important variation in the size—and at times, direction—of correlations, depending on how contact and support for social change were measured. This allowed us to identify one type of support for change—willingness to work in solidarity— that is positively associated with intergroup contact among both advantaged and disadvantaged group members.

scholarly journals Intergroup Contact and Social Change

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nils Karl Reimer ◽  
Julia C. Becker ◽  
Angelika Benz ◽  
Oliver Christ ◽  
Kristof Dhont ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Perceived Discrimination ◽  
Intergroup Contact ◽  
Group Identification ◽  
Transgender Students ◽  
Lgbt Activism ◽  
Bisexual And Transgender ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Positive Contact

Previous research has shown that (a) positive intergroup contact with an advantaged group can discourage collective action among disadvantaged-group members and (b) positive intergroup contact can encourage advantaged-group members to take action on behalf of disadvantaged outgroups. Two studies investigated the effects of negative as well as positive intergroup contact. Study 1 ( n = 482) found that negative but not positive contact with heterosexual people was associated with sexual-minority students’ engagement in collective action (via group identification and perceived discrimination). Among heterosexual students, positive and negative contacts were associated with, respectively, more and less LGB (lesbian, gay, bisexual) activism. Study 2 ( N = 1,469) found that only negative contact (via perceived discrimination) predicted LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) students’ collective action intentions longitudinally while only positive contact predicted heterosexual/cisgender students’ LGBT activism. Implications for the relationship between intergroup contact, collective action, and social change are discussed.

scholarly journals Equality Revisited: A Cultural Meta-Analysis of Intergroup Contact and Prejudice

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 887-895 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judit Kende ◽  
Karen Phalet ◽  
Wim Van den Noortgate ◽  
Aycan Kara ◽  
Ronald Fischer
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Psychology ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intergroup Contact ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Equal Status ◽  
Cultural Hierarchy ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Contact Situation ◽  
Intergroup Inequality ◽  
Hierarchical Cultures

Across cultures, intergroup contact—interpersonal interaction with out-group members—is associated with less prejudice. Contact research was criticized, however, for bypassing intergroup inequality in the wider society. We propose a cultural psychology approach grounding people’s contact experiences in culturally afforded ways of relating to out-groups. Extending Allport’s equal-status hypothesis to the culture level, we hypothesized that the contact–prejudice association would be stronger in egalitarian cultures and weaker in more hierarchical cultures. To test this hypothesis, we revisited Pettigrew and Tropp’s influential meta-analysis and augmented it with culture-level measures of equality and hierarchy values. Our meta-analysis of intergroup contact and prejudice in 660 samples across 36 cultures suggested that egalitarianism was related to stronger contact–prejudice associations. Cultural hierarchy values and social dominance orientation corresponded with weaker contact–prejudice associations. Cultures of equality made a difference over and above equal status in the contact situation.

scholarly journals Intergroup contact and social change: Implications of negative and positive contact for collective action in advantaged and disadvantaged groups

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nils Karl Reimer ◽  
Julia C. Becker ◽  
Angelika Benz ◽  
Oliver Christ ◽  
Kristof Dhont ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Perceived Discrimination ◽  
Intergroup Contact ◽  
Group Identification ◽  
Lgbt Students ◽  
Lgbt Activism ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Positive Contact ◽  
The Relationship

Previous research has shown that (1) positive intergroup contact with an advantaged group can discourage collective action among disadvantaged-group members and (2) positive intergroup contact can encourage advantaged-group members to take action on behalf of disadvantaged outgroups. Two studies investigated the effects of negative as well as positive intergroup contact. Study 1 (N = 482) found that negative but not positive contact with heterosexual people was associated with sexual-minority students’ engagement in collective action (via group identification and perceived discrimination). Among heterosexual students, positive and negative contact were associated with, respectively, more and less LGB activism. Study 2 (N = 1,469) found that only negative contact (via perceived discrimination) predicted LGBT students’ collective action intentions longitudinally while only positive contact predicted heterosexual/cisgender students’ LGBT activism. Implications for the relationship between intergroup contact, collective action, and social change are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document