Literature DB >> 22941796

The contact caveat: negative contact predicts increased prejudice more than positive contact predicts reduced prejudice.

Fiona Kate Barlow1, Stefania Paolini, Anne Pedersen, Matthew J Hornsey, Helena R M Radke, Jake Harwood, Mark Rubin, Chris G Sibley.   

Abstract

Contact researchers have largely overlooked the potential for negative intergroup contact to increase prejudice. In Study 1, we tested the interaction between contact quantity and valence on prejudice toward Black Australians (n = 1,476), Muslim Australians (n = 173), and asylum seekers (n = 293). In all cases, the association between contact quantity and prejudice was moderated by its valence, with negative contact emerging as a stronger and more consistent predictor than positive contact. In Study 2, White Americans (n = 441) indicated how much positive and negative contact they had with Black Americans on separate measures. Although both quantity of positive and negative contact predicted racism and avoidance, negative contact was the stronger predictor. Furthermore, negative (but not positive) contact independently predicted suspicion about Barack Obama's birthplace. These results extend the contact hypothesis by issuing an important caveat: Negative contact may be more strongly associated with increased racism and discrimination than positive contact is with its reduction.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22941796     DOI: 10.1177/0146167212457953

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pers Soc Psychol Bull        ISSN: 0146-1672


  32 in total

1.  Contact in the Classroom: Developing a Program Model for Youth Mental Health Contact-Based Anti-stigma Education.

Authors:  Shu-Ping Chen; Michelle Koller; Terry Krupa; Heather Stuart
Journal:  Community Ment Health J       Date:  2015-10-01

2.  When good for business is not good enough: Effects of pro-diversity beliefs and instrumentality of diversity on intergroup attitudes.

Authors:  Mathias Kauff; Katharina Schmid; Oliver Christ
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Neighborhood Effects of Intergroup Contact on Change in Youth Intergroup Bias.

Authors:  Christine E Merrilees; Laura K Taylor; Rachel Baird; Marcie C Goeke-Morey; Peter Shirlow; E Mark Cummings
Journal:  J Youth Adolesc       Date:  2017-05-05

4.  Are diverse societies less cohesive? Testing contact and mediated contact theories.

Authors:  Sarah McKenna; Eunro Lee; Kathleen A Klik; Andrew Markus; Miles Hewstone; Katherine J Reynolds
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-03-29       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Gene × environment interaction on intergroup bias: the role of 5-HTTLPR and perceived outgroup threat.

Authors:  Bobby K Cheon; Robert W Livingston; Ying-Yi Hong; Joan Y Chiao
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 3.436

6.  Learning from Ingroup Experiences Changes Intergroup Impressions.

Authors:  Yuqing Zhou; Björn Lindström; Alexander Soutschek; Pyungwon Kang; Philippe N Tobler; Grit Hein
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2022-07-29       Impact factor: 6.709

7.  (Bad) Feelings about Meeting Them? Episodic and Chronic Intergroup Emotions Associated with Positive and Negative Intergroup Contact As Predictors of Intergroup Behavior.

Authors:  Mathias Kauff; Frank Asbrock; Ulrich Wagner; Thomas F Pettigrew; Miles Hewstone; Sarina J Schäfer; Oliver Christ
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-08-29

8.  Building Social Cohesion Through Intergroup Contact: Evaluation of a Large-Scale Intervention to Improve Intergroup Relations Among Adolescents.

Authors:  Nils Karl Reimer; Angelika Love; Ralf Wölfer; Miles Hewstone
Journal:  J Youth Adolesc       Date:  2021-02-18

9.  How can intergroup interaction be bad if intergroup contact is good? Exploring and reconciling an apparent paradox in the science of intergroup relations.

Authors:  Cara C MacInnis; Elizabeth Page-Gould
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2015-05

10.  When "In Your Face" Is Not Out of Place: The Effect of Timing of Disclosure of a Same-Sex Dating Partner under Conditions of Contact.

Authors:  Sharon K Dane; Barbara M Masser; Geoff MacDonald; Julie M Duck
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-08-26       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.