Search

While the prejudice-reduction effect of intergroup contact has been extensively demonstrated, research identifying antecedents of positive contact and underlying mechanisms is limited. Two studies, in Italy (N = 239 Italian adolescents) and the UK (N = 299 White British adults), examined dispositional empathy and personality traits as predictors of contact quality, with effort towards contact and contact self-efficacy as underlying mechanisms. Study 1 revealed that empathic concern and extraversion was associated with higher contact quality with immigrants in Italy via greater contact effort. Study 2 replicated and extended these findings, showing that contact self-efficacy and then contact effort sequentially mediated the associations of empathic concern and personality (extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness) with contact quality with Asian British in the UK. Perspective-taking was not associated with contact quality. Our findings highlight the value of integrating dispositional/personality, social cognitive and intergroup approaches in the study of antecedents of contact quality and underlying mechanisms, with implications for the design of prejudice-interventions. • Dispositional empathic concern predicts intergroup contact quality. • Contact self-efficacy and effort mediate empathy/personality-contact relationship. • Integration of dispositional/personality, social cognitive and intergroup approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined the effectiveness of an imagery‐based strategy designed to reduce prejudice in preschoolers in Italy. Three studies involving different target groups (disabled children, Black children) were conducted within Italian preschools. Children (4–6 years) were asked to imagine and draw meeting an outgroup member (Studies 1 and 2) or to imagine writing a letter to an outgroup member (Study 3). Results revealed that preschoolers in the experimental condition, relative to a control group, reported less intergroup bias in the form of contact intentions and resource allocation as well as greater behavioral inclusiveness; effects were mediated by improved intergroup attitudes. Our findings are important in understanding ways that promote positive intergroup relations in ways that align with the interests of young children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The combination of multiple categorization (i.e., the use of multiple criteria to define others) and human identity—the superordinate group of human beings—has recently been highlighted as a method to reduce implicit (i.e., attribution of secondary emotions) and explicit (i.e., attribution of human rights) dehumanization toward Blacks. In two studies aimed to replicate such evidence the mediating role of secondary emotions in explaining the impact of multiple and human categorization in reducing dehumanization was assessed. The role of implicit cognition, such as attribution of secondary emotions in leading people to attribute human rights to minorities, is discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The consequences of the environmental decisions we make today will bear upon future generations of people. We argue that the framing of climate change is inherently intergroup in nature and suggest a reason for inaction on climate change is the perception of future generations as an outgroup. We test whether a technique adapted from the realm of intergroup relations may provide a novel approach to encouraging more sustainable environmental conduct. In Study 1 we found that participants who completed a simple social categorization technique designed to reduce (temporal) intergroup bias subsequently displayed a heightened preference for sustainable goods in a product choice task. Study 2 replicated these results with an alternative measure of pro-environmental intentions, and confirmed that the effect of the intervention on environmental outcomes was explained by changes in intergroup perception. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent studies have demonstrated that simply imagining a positive interaction with an outgroup member reduces prejudice, especially if the outgroup member is typical of the whole outgroup. In this research, we tested how a multicultural vs. colorblind mindset might impact the efficacy of imagined contact with a typical or atypical outgroup member. Specifically, we tested the interactive effects between ideologies (multiculturalism vs. colorblindness) and the typicality of the outgroup member (typical vs. atypical) in the imagined encounter. Results revealed that participants exposed to the multicultural ideology who imagined an encounter with an atypical outgroup member expressed fewer positive perceptions (warmth and competence) toward both primary and secondary outgroups compared with respondents exposed to the multicultural ideology who imagined an interaction with a typical outgroup member, and compared with respondents exposed to a colorblind ideology (irrespective of typicality of the outgroup member). The study highlights the importance of considering the interaction between cultural ideologies and typicality during intergroup contact when designing interventions aimed at promoting positive intergroup perceptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One way to promote equality is to encourage people to generate counterstereotypic role models. In two experiments, we demonstrate that such interventions have much broader benefits than previously thought—reducing a reliance on heuristic thinking and decreasing tendencies to dehumanize outgroups. In Experiment 1, participants who thought about a gender counterstereotype (e.g., a female mechanic) demonstrated a generalized decrease in dehumanization towards a range of unrelated target groups (including asylum seekers and the homeless). In Experiment 2 we replicated these findings using alternative targets and measures of dehumanization. Furthermore, we found the effect was mediated by a reduced reliance on heuristic thinking. The findings suggest educational initiatives that aim to challenge social stereotypes may not only have societal benefits (generalized tolerance), but also tangible benefits for individuals (enhanced cognitive flexibility). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We conducted two studies involving two different age groups (elementary school children and adults) aimed at integrating imagined contact and common ingroup identity models. In the first study, Italian elementary school children were asked to imagine interacting with an unknown immigrant peer as members of a common group. Results revealed that common ingroup imagined contact, relative to a control condition, improved outgroup helping intentions assessed 1 week and 2 weeks after the intervention. In the second study, common ingroup imagined contact led Italian university students to display higher intentions to have contact with immigrants compared to control conditions. In conclusion, results from both studies demonstrate that imagining an intergroup interaction as members of the same group strengthens the effects of imagined contact. These findings point to the importance of combining the common ingroup identity model and the imagined contact theory in order to increase the potentiality of prejudice reduction interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent research has provided consistent support for imagined intergroup contact (Crisp & Turner, 2012), a new indirect contact strategy for reducing prejudice. In the present review, we focus on the affective consequences of imagined contact. In particular, we review studies showing that imagined contact has powerful effects on reduced intergroup and performance anxiety, as well as increased trust and empathy toward outgroup members. Moreover, these effects extend to the affective part of intergroup attitudes tapped at both an explicit and at an implicit level. We also present evidence that some of these variables mediate the effects of imagined contact on reduced prejudice. Finally, we discuss the double nature, cognitive and affective, of imagined contact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present research investigated linguistic description as a moderator of biased evaluations of counterstereotypical individuals. Members of an online participant pool (N = 237) indicated their liking for stereotypical and counterstereotypical individuals who were described using adjectives or behaviors. There was a significant interaction between target typicality and linguistic description: People liked counterstereotypical individuals more than stereotypical individuals when target individuals were described using adjectives. In contrast, they showed no bias or a negative bias against counterstereotypical individuals who were described using behaviors. This interaction effect generalized across gender targets (men/women) and sexuality targets (gay/straight), and it was partially mediated by subjective processing fluency. Implications for the backlash effect and prejudice reduction are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: School-based psychological interventions which require students and pupils to think of counter-stereotypic individuals (e.g., a female mechanic, a Black President) have been shown to reduce stereotyping and prejudice. But while these interventions are increasingly popular, no one has tested whether tasks like this can have benefits beyond promoting tolerance, particularly with respect to the way individuals think and solve problems. We looked at one such intervention and asked whether this task could, in addition to decreasing propensities to stereotype others, contribute to more flexible and original performance. We expected that because exposure to people who disconfirm stereotypes compels students to think “out of the box”, they will subsequently not only rely less on stereotypes, but in more general thinking rely less on easily accessible knowledge structures and be more flexible and creative. As predicted, being encouraged to think counter-stereotypically not only decreased stereotyping, but also, on a divergent creativity task, lead to the generation of more creative ideas – but only for individuals who initially reported a lower personal need for structure (PNS). [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

To reduce prejudice psychologists design interventions requiring people to think of counter-stereotypes (i.e., people who defy stereotypic expectations—a strong woman, a Black President). Grounded in the idea that stereotypes constrain the ability to think flexibly, we propose that thinking of counter-stereotypes can have benefits that extend beyond the goal of prejudice reduction—in particular to tasks measuring cognitive flexibility and creative performance. Findings supported this conjecture. In Experiment 1 priming a gender counter-stereotype enhanced cognitive flexibility. This effect could not be attributed to changes in mood. In Experiment 2, using a gender-independent manipulation, priming various social counter-stereotypes brought a boost to creative performance. We discuss implications of these extended benefits of counter-stereotypic thinking for developing future prejudice-reduction interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Imagined intergroup contact (Crisp & Turner, 2009) is a new indirect contact strategy for promoting tolerance and more positive intergroup attitudes. We asked whether the positive effects of imagined contact are contingent upon characteristics that define the experience of intergroup relations. Specifically, we tested whether precontact intergroup anxiety makes imagining contact more cognitively effortful, and if it does, whether this detracts from its effectiveness. In two studies participants were asked to either imagine contact with an outgroup member or a control scene. We found that imagining contact counteracted the negative impact of intergroup anxiety on outgroup communicative behavior. Furthermore, performance on an ostensibly unrelated Stroop task revealed that this compensatory benefit requires cognitive resources proportional to the level of precontact anxiety. We conclude that the detrimental impacts of intergroup anxiety can be assuaged by imagining contact, but that doing so requires the allocation of attentional resources proportional to the positivity of preintervention contact experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Copyright of International Journal of Psychology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Abstract: Three studies investigated whether intergroup contact reduces prejudice, in part, via the extension of positive attributes that define the self to the outgroup. Study 1 found that positive intergroup contact predicted self-outgroup overlap, and this overlap mediated the contact–attitude relationship. This mediational path was specific to outgroup, but not ingroup, attitudes. In Study 2 we found that it was the attribution of specifically positive, as opposed to negative, traits that mediated the contact–attitude relationship in a model that also included intergroup anxiety. In Study 3 an elaborated model was supported, in which perceived self-other similarity mediated the effects of positive contact on the attribution of positive self-traits. We discuss the findings in the context of recent advances in Intergroup Contact Theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent research has demonstrated that imagining intergroup contact can be sufficient to reduce explicit prejudice directed towards out-groups. In this research, we examined the impact of contact-related mental imagery on implicit prejudice as measured by the implicit association test. We found that, relative to a control condition, young participants who imagined talking to an elderly stranger subsequently showed more positive implicit attitudes towards elderly people in general. In a second study, we demonstrated that, relative to a control condition, non-Muslim participants who imagined talking to a Muslim stranger subsequently showed more positive implicit attitudes towards Muslims in general. We discuss the implications of these findings for furthering the application of indirect contact strategies aimed at improving intergroup relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intergroup Contact Theory maintains that the most effective way to reduce prejudice and discrimination is through contact between groups. However, where actual contact is impractical, or unlikely, imagined intergroup contact (Crisp & Turner, 2009) may represent a viable alternative. This study tested imagined contact in a context defined by extremely low levels of contact, the inter-ethnically divided island of Cyprus. Turkish Cypriot participants who repeatedly imagined positive contact with Greek Cypriots subsequently reported greater intentions to engage in future contact. This article discusses the benefits of applying this new technique to contexts that, like Cyprus, historically have very low levels of actual contact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Much work has supported the idea that recategorization of ingroups and outgroups into a superordinate category can have beneficial effects for intergroup relations. Recently, however, increases in bias following recategorization have been observed in some contexts. It is argued that such unwanted consequences of recategorization will only be apparent for perceivers who are highly committed to their ingroup subgroups. In Experiments 1 to 3, the authors observed, on both explicit and implicit measures, that an increase in bias following recategorization occurred only for high subgroup identifiers. In Experiment 4, it was found that maintaining the salience of subgroups within a recategorized superordinate group averted this increase in bias for high identifiers and led overall to the lowest levels of bias. These findings are discussed in the context of recent work on the Common Ingroup Identity Model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two experiments tested the notion that considering multiple criteria for social categorization can reduce intergroup bias. In both experiments, participants were required to consider alternative ways in which people could be classified, other than an initially salient intergroup dichotomy. In Experiment 1, the authors found that generating alternative social classifications that were unrelated to an initial target dichotomy reduced intergroup bias compared to a control condition. In Experiment 2, this effect was replicated and the authors found that unrelated, but not related, categorizations were necessary to reduce bias. This article adds support to the view that increasing categorical complexity is a useful tool in bias reduction. These findings are discussed in the context of a developing model of multiple categorization effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent work developing interventions designed to reduce intergroup bias has sometimes yielded disparate findings. We tested whether the varying effectiveness of such interventions may have a motivational basis. In two experiments we examined whether differential ingroup identification moderated the effectiveness of a differentiation-reducing intervention strategy. In Experiment 1, thinking of characteristics shared between the ingroup and outgroup reduced ingroup favoritism to a greater extent for lower identifiers than for higher identifiers. In Experiment 2 we replicated this finding with different target groups and evaluative measures while controlling for information load. We discuss the implications of this work for developing social psychological models of bias-reduction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT. The authors examined whether a fundamental bias in the way people process information has implications for efforts to improve intergroup relations. The authors exposed participants to information about their own social category and a different social category that was either positive or negative in connotation. To examine what effect this information would have on participants' attitudes toward their own group and the other group, the authors measured both explicit and implicit evaluations before and after expo-sure. The findings suggest that, at a preconscious level, exposure to negative information affects participants' attitudes toward their own group, but that positive information has a negligible impact on attitudes toward other groups. The authors found an opposite pattern for explicit (conscious) evaluations. These asymmetries are consistent with cognitive and motivational theory on intergroup relations and may have important implications for efforts to reduce prejudice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Explores the effects of crossed categorization on intergroup prejudices. Role of category differentiation in the perception of crossed-category structures; Basic conditions wherein evaluative discriminations occur; Ways of alleviating intergroup bias.

As part of their Many Labs project Klein et al. (2014) replicated the effects of an imagined contact study carried out by Husnu and Crisp (2010). In their report the authors argue the data provides weak support for replicability. However, the effect observed was both significant and comparable to that obtained from a recent meta-analysis for the relevant outgroup. This suggests that the Many Labs project may provide stronger support for the existence of imagined contact effects than currently thought. We discuss the value in interpreting replications within the context of the existing literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors comments on the article "Treating prejudice with imagery: Easier said than done?" by M. M. MacDonald , M. B. Donnellan, R. Lang, and K. Nikolajuk. They said that McDonald et al., were not able to replicate the results that they attained using a variant of imagined contact. They argue that MacDonald et al.'s results go substantially beyond what their design, data, or context can support.

Abstract: This research investigated whether people are biased against migrants partly because they find migrants more difficult to cognitively process than nonmigrants. In Study 1, 181 undergraduate students evaluated migrant and nonmigrant members of two minimal groups and reported the difficulty that they experienced in thinking about each type of target. Participants rated migrants less positively than nonmigrants, and difficulty ratings partially mediated this effect. Study 2 (N =191) replicated these findings and demonstrated similar findings for individuals who had been excluded from minimal groups. This evidence implies that migrant bias can be explained partly in terms of the difficulty that people have in processing information about migrants, and that it is related to migrants’ exclusion from their original group. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]