Intergroup Contact Flashcards
(7 cards)
What is the history behind the idea of contact within social psychology?
Contact theory by<b>Allport (1954) -</b>Bringing groups together under conditions of cooperation, equal status and friendship can improve attitudes and lead to harmony. Prejudice happens as ignorant of each other. Important bc theory is the basis of contact research. <div><br></br></div><div>Supported by<b> Pettigrew and Tropp (2006)</b> - Contact allows knowledge and positive interactions.</div><div><br></br></div><div><b>Levine & Hogg (2010) </b>- Contact results in anxiety. Afraid of being prejudice. Anxiety causes individuals to avoid contact, further developing inter-group attitudes. Positive contact can reduce anxiety.</div><div><br></br></div><div>Friendship - <b>Stangor et al. (1996)</b> - American exchange students who had more contact with host country had positive attitudes.</div>
How is contact impacted by cognitive processes resulting in stereotypes remaining unchanged?
Cognitive processes result in stereotype disconfirming information explained away.<div><br></br></div><div><b>Johnston and Hewstone (1992)</b> - Easier if stereotype-disconfirming information is contained in one individual. When more dispersed/random, contact is more effective.</div><div>Concentrated disconfirming info led to more subtyping (cognitive process).</div>
Subtyping = Individuals who don’t fit the stereotype are seen as exceptional.
How is contact impacted by the psychological factor of informal segregation?
Contact is hard to arrange. Natural tendency for informal segregation.<div><br></br></div><div><b>Sherif(1966)</b> argued that simple contact did not improve intergroup relations. As members could avoid contact in certain ways, it was an opportunity for them to attack each other. Recommended goal interdependence - process of bringing together, requiring engagement.</div><div><br></br></div><div><b>Clack et al. (2005)</b>- Looked at patterns of racial/ethnic self-segregation in English multi-ethnic cafeteria. Contact must take into account the everyday mundane contexts. Over 50% would have to relocate to create distribution of no segregation.</div><div><br></br></div><div>Solving this issue difficult. Humans have a natural tendency to only contact in-group members.</div><div><br></br></div>
How is contact impacted by the psychological factor of place related identities?
Contact occurs in place/space that has a psychological significance. Not just containers for interaction.<div><br></br></div><div><b>Dixon and Durrheim (2003)</b> - Beach segregation. Desegregation is transforming places to spaces of fear. Whites left when blacks reached a certain density. Contact associated with a sense of loss. White south Africans associated beach with relaxing. However, desegregation turning into a place of fear. Sense of loss.</div><div>Beach appeared diverse, but whites leaving once blacks reached a certain density.</div><div><br></br></div><div>Groups may have contact in places, however still segregated and contact facilitating negative attitudes and feelings.</div>
How is contact impacted by the psychological factor of the salience of group memberships in contact encounters?
<u><b>Decategorisation</b></u><div>Recommended by <b>Brewer and Miller (1984). </b>Proposes focusing on individuals as individuals rather than group members. Way to solve conflict. But generalisation needs category salience.</div><div><br></br></div><div><b>Voci & Hewstone (2003)</b> - Prejudice attitudes to immigrants in Italy. Contact associated with reduced anxiety and positive out-group attitudes when group salience was high.</div><div><br></br></div><div><u><b>Recategorisation</b></u></div><div>The process of ‘us’ and ‘them’ becoming we (<b>Gaertner et al., 1989</b>). Intergroup bias and conflict can be reduced by transforming group representations to a more inclusive superordinate group through emphasising communalities, contact facilitating a sense of commonality.</div><div><br></br></div><div>However, it could undermine sub-ordinate group identities. Shown by <b>Hornsey & Hogg (2000)</b> - humantities and science students. Commonality emphasising condition produced higher levels of inter-group bias than one looking at separate group identities.<br></br></div><div><br></br></div><div><u><b>Dual Identities</b></u></div><div>2 identities at the same time. One superordinate and one subordinate.</div><div><b>Glasford and Davidio (2011)</b> - Effective as minority members motivated to contact majority to enhance greater intergroup harmony, but majority must welcome the subordinate.</div>
Explain the minority perspectives on contact
Important bc have an impact on policy support and social change.<div><br></br></div><div><b>Dixon et al. (2007)</b> - Survey on Black South Africans. More positive interaction with whites associated with less black support for social policies changing inequality.</div><div><br></br></div><div><b>Saguy et al. (2009)</b> - 2 studies. Minorities fail to recognise inequality. Distributing credits.
Commonality Contact - Expected high power groups to be fairer, but were biased.
Those in positive contact condition had positive inter-group attitudes and paid less attention to inequalities. Low power group expected more fairness after positive contact due to more positive attitudes. Unrealistic expectations.</div><div>Mixed contact can bring groups together and get rid of social inequalities, but does not always lead to intergroup equality.</div>
What are the different types of contact?
Imagined contact - Imagine having a conversation/contact. Can increase positive attitudes.
Extended Contact - Knowledge that other in-group members have out-group friends. Awareness that out-group person has good relationships with in-group members. This can reduce prejudice.
Direct Contact - Directly in contact
Indirect Contact - E.g. friends who are outgroup and have other friends.
