Quasi-experimentation - design and analysis issues for field settings - cook,td, campbell,dt

Recent advances in intergroup contact theory

This article reviews studies of intergroup anxiety and places them in the context of a theoretical model that specifies categories of antecedents and consequences of intergroup anxiety. It is proposed that intergroup anxiety is comprised of three interrelated components: an affective component, a cognitive component, and a physiological component. The potential causes of intergroup anxiety include personality traits (e.g., social dominance orientation, attributional complexity), attitudes and related cognitions (e.g., negative expectations, stereotypes), personal experience (e.g., negative contact), and situational factors (e.g., the presence of linguistic barriers, structured vs. unstructured interactions). The potential consequences include attitudes and other cognitions (e.g., stereotypes, negative expectations), affect (e.g., fear, anger), and behavior (e.g., avoidance, negative behaviors). Theory and research on the reduction of intergroup anxiety (e.g., intergroup contact, direct or indirect cross-g...

Intergroup Anxiety: Theory, Research, and Practice

This work identifies how cross-group friendships are conceptualized and measured in intergroup research, investigates which operationalizations yield the strongest effects on intergroup attitudes, explores potential moderators, and discusses the theoretical importance of the findings. Prior meta-analyses have provided initial evidence that cross-group friendships are especially powerful forms of intergroup contact. Although studies of cross-group friendship have grown considerably in recent years, varied assessments leave us without a clear understanding of how different operationalizations affect relationships between friendship and attitudes. With a greatly expanded database of relevant studies, the authors compared friendship-attitude associations across a wide range of specific conceptualizations. Time spent and self-disclosure with outgroup friends yielded significantly greater associations with attitudes than other friendship measures, suggesting that attitudes are most likely to improve when cross-group friendships involve behavioral engagement. Processes underlying cross-group friendships are discussed, as are implications for future research and application.

Cross-Group Friendships and Intergroup Attitudes A Meta-Analytic Review

This chapter has two main objectives: to review influential ideas and findings in the literature and to outline the organization and content of the volume. The first part of the chapter lays a conceptual and empirical foundation for other chapters in the volume. Specifically, the chapter defines and distinguishes the key concepts of prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination, highlighting how bias can occur at individual, institutional, and cultural levels. We also review different theoretical perspectives on these phenomena, including individual differences, social cognition, functional relations between groups, and identity concerns. We offer a broad overview of the field, charting how this area has developed over previous decades and identify emerging trends and future directions. The second part of the chapter focuses specifically on the coverage of the area in the present volume. It explains the organization of the book and presents a brief synopsis of the chapters in the volume. Throughout psychology’s history, researchers have evinced strong interest in understanding prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination (Brewer & Brown, 1998; Dovidio, 2001; Duckitt, 1992; Fiske, 1998), aswell as the phenomenon of intergroup bias more generally (Hewstone, Rubin, & Willis, 2002). Intergroup bias generally refers to the systematic tendency to evaluate one’s own membership group (the ingroup) or its members more favorably than a non-membership group (the outgroup) or its members. These topics have a long history in the disciplines of anthropology and sociology (e.g., Sumner, 1906). However, social psychologists, building on the solid foundations of Gordon Allport’s (1954) masterly volume, The Nature of Prejudice, have developed a systematic and more nuanced analysis of bias and its associated phenomena. Interest in prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination is currently shared by allied disciplines such as sociology and political science, and emerging disciplines such as neuroscience. The practical implications of this 4 OVERVIEW OF THE TOPIC large body of research are widely recognized in the law (Baldus, Woodworth, & Pulaski, 1990; Vidmar, 2003), medicine (Institute of Medicine, 2003), business (e.g., Brief, Dietz, Cohen, et al., 2000), the media, and education (e.g., Ben-Ari & Rich, 1997; Hagendoorn &

/pdf/prejudice-stereotyping-and-discrimination-theoretical-and-l3xwiz51h2.pdf

Prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination: Theoretical and empirical overview

A widely researched panacea for reducing intergroup prejudice is the contact hypothesis. However, few longitudinal studies can shed light on the direction of causal processes: from contact to prejudice reduction (contact effects) or from prejudice to contact reduction (prejudice effects). The authors conducted a longitudinal field survey in Germany, Belgium, and England with school students. The sample comprised members of both ethnic minorities (n = 512) and ethnic majorities (n = 1,143). Path analyses yielded both lagged contact effects and prejudice effects: Contact reduced prejudice, but prejudice also reduced contact. Furthermore, contact effects were negligible for minority members. These effects were obtained for 2 indicators of prejudice: negative intergroup emotions and desire for social distance. For both majority and minority members, contact effects on negative emotions were stronger when outgroup contacts were perceived as being typical of their group. Contact effects were also mediated by intergroup anxiety. This mediating mechanism was impaired for minority members because of a weakened effect of anxiety on desire for social distance. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries.

Immigration, cultural diversity and integration are among the most central challenges for modern societies. Integration is often impeded by negative emotions and prejudices held by the majority members towards immigrants in a common society. Based on the in group projection model (Mummendey & Wenzel, 1999), we examined the impact of perceived relative in group prototypicality on intergroup emotions and prejudice. Additionally, we examined whether this impact is causal and explored the issue of causality in more detail contrasting a linear causal model with bi-directional or reciprocal causality. Hypotheses were tested in a study with a two-wave panel of majority members (N=1085) in Germany. We examined the proposed relations between relative ingroup prototypicality, intergroup emotions and prejudice and determined the causal direction of these relationships. Results support the predictive power of relative in group prototypicality on intergroup emotions and prejudice. Moreover, most causal relations between our measures are reciprocally causal. We discuss the implications of these findings for the general conception of prejudice and intergroup emotions. Copyright (C) 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

We all live in Germany but ... Ingroup projection, group-based emotions and prejudice against immigrants

A longitudinal field survey tested the reciprocal effects of acculturation preferences and prejudice among ethnic minorities and majorities. Data were collected at two points in time from 512 members of ethnic minorities and 1143 majority members in Germany, Belgium and England. Path analyses yielded not only the lagged effects of prejudice on acculturation preferences but also the reverse for both majority and minority members. The mutual longitudinal effects between prejudice and desire for culture maintenance were negative, and the mutual effects between prejudice and desire for culture adoption were positive for majority members. The reverse was the case for minority participants. Moreover, the two acculturation dimensions interacted in their effect on prejudice for majority participants but not for minority participants. The effect of desire for culture adoption on prejudice was moderated by perceived intergroup similarity. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Annemie Maquil

Papers

Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries.

We all live in Germany but ... Ingroup projection, group-based emotions and prejudice against immigrants

The relationship between acculturation preferences and prejudice: Longitudinal evidence from majority and minority groups in three European countries

Strategies for prejudice reduction: The norms of nondiscrimination