Search

Imagined intergroup contact (Crisp & Turner, 2009) is a new indirect contact strategy for promoting tolerance and more positive intergroup relations. Despite its relatively recent inception, there have now been over 70 studies showing that imagining a positive interaction with an outgroup member can reduce prejudice and encourage positive intergroup behavior. With this meta-analysis, we provide the first quantitative review of imagined contact effects on four key measures of intergroup bias: attitudes, emotions, intentions, and behavior. We also test for moderators arising from both group and study design characteristics. The analysis found that imagined contact resulted in significantly reduced intergroup bias across all four dependent variables (overall d+ = 0.35). The effect was significant for both published and unpublished studies, and emerged across a broad range of target outgroups and contexts. The effect was equally strong for explicit and implicit attitude measures, but was stronger on behavioral intentions than on attitudes, supporting the direct link between imagery and action proposedly underlying mental simulation effects. Most design characteristics had no significant impact, including valence of the imagined interaction, type of control condition, and time spent imagining contact. However, the more participants were instructed to elaborate on the context within which the imagined interaction took place, the stronger the effect. The imagined contact effect was also stronger for children than for adults, supporting the proposition that imagined contact is a potentially key component of educational strategies aiming to promote positive social change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intergroup contact improves intergroup relations. In some cases, however, actual contact is impractical and here imagining intergroup contact (Crisp & Turner, 2009) may represent a viable alternative. While initial findings have been promising, imag- ined contact research has yet to confirm whether it enables a critical process involved in successful intergroup contact: member-to-group generalization. We tested the hypothesis that imagined contact, and specific enhancements to the technique, are enabling in the form of generalized contact self-efficacy. In Experiment I participants who imagined a positively toned encounter with a single outgroup member subsequently felt more confident about future interactions with the outgroup in general. Furthermore, imagining contact was maximally effective at achieving generalization when group versus individuating information was salient (Experiment 2) and when the imagined interaction involved an outgrouper who was typical versus atypical (Experiment 3). These findings contribute to growing support for the notion that imagined contact represents a flexible, effective tool for improving intergroup relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent research has demonstrated that mentally simulating positive intergroup encounters can promote tolerance and more positive intergroup attitudes. We explored the attributional processes underlying these effects. In our study participants who imagined intergroup contact subsequently reported greater intentions to engage in future contact, a relationship that was mediated by participants’ attribution, to themselves, of a more positive attitudinal orientation towards outgroup contact. Consistent with this attributional account, the perspective taken when imagining the encounter qualified this effect. Participants who imagined the encounter from a third-person perspective reported heightened intentions to engage in future contact relative to control participants, while this was not the case when the encounter was imagined from a first-person perspective. These findings suggest that attributional processes are key to observing the benefits that accrue from imagining intergroup contact. We speculate that these attributions may distinguish the approach from extended and actual forms of contact and help researchers to further capitalize on the benefits of mental imagery for improving intergroup relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We tested the hypothesis that regulation of discrepancies between perceived actual and ideal differentiation between the ingroup and outgroup could help to explain the relationship between ingroup identification and intergroup bias when participants are recategorized into a superordinate group. Replicating previous findings, we found that following recategorization, identification was positively related to intergroup bias. No such differences emerged in a control condition. However, we also, in the recategorization condition only, observed a positive association between ingroup identification and the perceived discrepancy between actual and ideal degree of differentiation from the outgroup: at higher levels of identification, participants increasingly perceived the ingroup to be less differentiated from the outgroup than they would ideally like. This tendency mediated the relationship between identification and bias. We discuss the theoretical, methodological and practical implications of these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In three experiments we investigated the dynamics of impression formation when perceivers encounter unsurprising (e.g. male mechanic) versus surprising (e.g. female mechanic) social category conjunctions. In Experiment 1, participants took longer to form an impression of targets described using a surprising versus an unsurprising conjunction of categorizations. In Experiment 2, we investigated the stages during which impressions of category conjunctions are formed. While unsurprising category combinations were characterized with reference to 'constituent' stereotypic traits, surprising combinations were characterized initially by stereotypic traits but later by 'emergent' impressions. In Experiment 3, we investigated motivational states that drive the dynamics of category conjunction. We found that higher Personal Need for Structure (PNS) predicted the use of more emergent and fewer constituent attributes in the impressions formed of surprising combinations. Across all three experiments, more 'causal attributes' were used in descriptions of the surprising combination. We discuss the implications of these findings for developing a model of the dynamics and composition of social category conjunctions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The contact hypothesis states that, under the right conditions, contact between members of different groups leads to more positive intergroup relations. The authors track recent trends in contact theory to the emergence of extended, or indirect, forms of contact. These advances lead to an intriguing proposition: that simply imagining intergroup interactions can produce more positive perceptions of outgroups. The authors discuss empirical research supporting the imagined contact proposition and find it to be an approach that is at once deceptively simple and remarkably effective. Encouraging people to mentally simulate a positive intergroup encounter leads to improved outgroup attitudes and reduced stereotyping. It curtails intergroup anxiety and extends the attribution of perceivers' positive traits to others. The authors describe the advantages and disadvantages of imagined contact compared to conventional strategies, outline an agenda for future research, and discuss applications for policymakers and educators in their efforts to encourage more positive intergroup relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined the combined effects of subgroup and superordinate group identification on intergroup evaluations within common ingroup identity contexts. In Studies 1 and 2 we observed a positive correlation between subgroup identification and intergroup bias, and a negative correlation between superordinate identification and bias. In Study 3 we replicated these effects using alternative measures and observed a common path underlying these relationships: the perceived psychological distance between the self and outgroup. In Studies 4 and 5 we replicated this path model and found that the relationship between superordinate identification and intergroup bias was contingent upon making the superordinate identity salient, but this was not the case for subgroup identification. We discuss the findings in the context of theoretical and applied development of the Common Ingroup Identity Model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigated whether simply imagining contact with outgroup members can improve intergroup attitudes. In Experiment 1, young participants who imagined talking to an elderly person subsequently showed lower levels of intergroup bias than participants who imagined an outdoor scene. In Experiment 2, young participants who imagined talking to an elderly person subsequently showed lower levels of intergroup bias than participants who simply thought about elderly people, ruling out a priming explanation for our findings. In Experiment 3, heterosexual men who imagined talking to a homosexual man subsequently evaluated homosexual men more positively, perceived there to be greater variability among them, and experienced less intergroup anxiety compared to a control group. The effect of imagined contact on outgroup evaluations was mediated by reduced intergroup anxiety. These findings suggest that imagining intergroup contact could represent a viable alternative for reducing prejudice where actual contact between groups is impractical. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study we examined how social identity threat, contextualized as soccer fans' reactions to their team's success or failure, can lead to differentiated emotional expression as a function of ingroup identification. We predicted that negative responses to threat (a team losing a match) would be qualitatively differentiated for lower and higher ingroup identifiers in terms of both emotions and action tendencies. English male soccer fans were tested in three sessions (following matches resulting in two losses and one win). The findings supported the hypotheses: following match losses lower identifiers felt sad but not angry, whereas higher identifiers felt angry but not sad. These qualitatively different negative emotional reactions to match loss mediated reported action tendencies. We discuss how these findings support intergroup emotions theory and the predictive utility of social identification in discerning differentiated emotional and behavioral reactions to intergroup threat. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In three experiments, the authors tested the hypothesis that a common ingroup context would moderate evaluations of crossed category targets. In Experiment 1, the typical additive pattern of evaluation across artificial crossed category groups became a social inclusion pattern in a common ingroup context. In Experiment 2, the authors manipulated the importance of real crossed category targets. When the crossed groups were of low importance, the effects of imposing a common ingroup replicated those observed in Experiment 1. For important crossed groups, however, the additive pattern remained. In Experiment 3, the authors measured perceived importance of the crossed groups to social identity prior to introducing a common ingroup context. The effects of a common categorization on evaluations were again moderated by perceived importance. These findings are discussed in the context of integrating crossed categorization and common ingroup identity models of multiple categorization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reflects on social categorization. One's ability to deal with inconsistencies is significant in maintaining coherent representations of others. It is well established that dealing with inconsistent information in impression formation is cognitively effortful. Moreover, it is now unclear how such processes of impression formation interact when one is dealing with surprising category combinations. One possibility that researchers raise is that surprising combinations trigger a process of inconsistency resolution.

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]

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]

The article discusses about moderation of intergroup memory bias in context with social psychology. It is found that a bias-reducing effect of making cross-cutting social categorizations has two dimensions of social classification. This article also presents information about theoretical and conceptual ideas with respect to the processes involved in crossed categorization. It is stated that in increasingly multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, and multi-religious societies there are several existent ways in which people can have implicit psychological links between group membership and positive or negative attributes that is affected by crossed categorization. Psychologists J.C. Deschamps and W. Doise suggested that crossing two orthogonal dimensions of group membership possesses the potential to enhance intergroup relations. Moreover, it is informed that intergroup bias can take place at a preconscious level. Thus, implicit interlinks between affiliation and evaluation seem an important part of intergroup perception.

A study was conducted to explore whether partici pants in Northern Ireland attend to, and process information about, diVerent group members as a function of a single dimension of category membership (reli gion) or as a function of additional and/or al ternative bases for group membership. Utilizing a bogus 'newspaper story' paradigm, we expl ored whether participants would diVerential ly recall target attributes as a function of two dimensions of category membership. Findings from this recall measure suggested that information concerning i ngroup and outgroup members was processed as an interactive function of both reli gion and gender i ntergroup dimensions. Reli gion was only used to gui de processing of more specific information if the story character was also an outgroup member on the gender dimension. These findings suggest a complex pattern of intergroup representation in the processing of group-rel evant information in the Northern Irish context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous meta-analytic reviews of the literature on crossed categorization have uncovered a number of important findings; however, several questions remain unanswered and may best be tackled using a more traditional narrative approach. This review of the literature on crossed categorization divides studies into those that are relevant to (a) which pattern of evaluation prevails in multiple categorization contexts, (b) what processes best account for the effects, and (c) whether crossed categorization can reduce intergroup bias relative to simple categorization. Re-examination of existing theory and available evidence suggests a number of important new issues to consider in studying multiple categorization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A robust finding in social dilemmas research is that individual group members are more likely to act cooperatively if they are given the chance to discuss the dilemma with one another. The authors investigated whether imagining a group discussion may represent an effective means of increasing cooperative behavior in the absence of the opportunity for direct negotiation among decision makers. Five experiments, utilizing a range of task variants, tested this hypothesis. Participants engaged in a guided simulation of the progressive steps required to reach a cooperative consensus within a group discussion of a social dilemma. Results support the conclusion that imagined group discussion enables conscious processes that parallel those underlying the direct group discussion and is a strategy that can effectively elicit cooperative behavior. The applied potential of imagined group discussion techniques to encourage more socially responsible behavior is discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]