The impact of different dimensions of intergroup contact in reducing prejudice
description
Transcript of 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)
Cross-group friendship: MediatorsCross-group friendship: Mediators
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
Cross-group friendship: MediatorsCross-group friendship: Mediators
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
Cross-group friendship: MediatorsCross-group friendship: Mediators
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 2: FindingsCross-group friendship 2: Findings
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
Cross-group friendship 3: Cross-group friendship 3: BackgroundBackground
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)
Cross-group friendship 3: Cross-group friendship 3: BackgroundBackground
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.
Cross-group friendship 3: Cross-group friendship 3: BackgroundBackground
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-group friendship 3: FindingsCross-group friendship 3: Findings
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
Data from: Turner, R. N., Hewstone, M., & Voci, A. (2007, Study 4). 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
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
Data from: Turner, R. N., Hewstone, M., & Voci, A. (2007, Study 2). 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
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?
Imagined contact 2: ResultsImagined contact 2: Results
2
3
4
Control Imagined Contact
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
Control Imagined Contact
Inte
rgro
up
an
xie
ty
t (25) = -2.10, p = .046
Imagined contact 2: ResultsImagined contact 2: Results
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